Skip to comments.
Arsonist's parents must pay $715,000
Ann Arbor News ^
| 11-11-03
| Tom Tolen
Posted on 11/11/2003 4:10:20 PM PST by Dan from Michigan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
To: Dog Gone
The kids acts were intentional. The parents failure to act is negligence. Most homeowners policies cover negligence.
21
posted on
11/11/2003 5:00:37 PM PST
by
AEMILIUS PAULUS
(Further, the statement assumed)
To: SandyInSeattle
My daughter is 14 and we can't wait until she's 18.Hang in there, Sandy. I'm sure you're taking nothing for granted, and not caving to her claims of "You don't trust me!"
I like Dr. Laura's advice:
Let them know that nothing in your house belongs to them, including so-called "privacy," and that they are guests in your home until they are 18, at which time they are free to earn their own whatever.
22
posted on
11/11/2003 5:05:44 PM PST
by
b9
Comment #23 Removed by Moderator
To: cksharks
right on
24
posted on
11/11/2003 5:06:26 PM PST
by
camas
To: Dan from Michigan
Thank you. Not the kid I am thinking of.
25
posted on
11/11/2003 5:07:15 PM PST
by
Pan_Yans Wife
(You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
To: stands2reason
Bless you. Medications can work wonders.
26
posted on
11/11/2003 5:08:34 PM PST
by
Pan_Yans Wife
(You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
To: Dog Gone
Let's see ~ State Farm carries the policy on the school?!
That works for me.
Particularly if the kid is mentally ill.
27
posted on
11/11/2003 5:10:44 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: Dan from Michigan
Poll from tech live "surprise"
What's the biggest cause of deadly teen violence?
Videogames, movies, TV 4%
Availability of weapons 9%
Irresponsible parents 87%
http://www.techtv.com/news/index.html/
28
posted on
11/11/2003 5:11:31 PM PST
by
HuntsvilleTxVeteran
(CCCP = clinton, chiraq, chretien, and putin = stalin wannabes)
To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
That's probably the rationale, although the story leaves out the court's reasoning for parental liability. There must be a lot more to this story, because parents aren't normally obligated to prevent intentional wrongdoing by their kids.
There had to be some history here.
29
posted on
11/11/2003 5:12:52 PM PST
by
Dog Gone
To: Dan from Michigan
Reck, who has scheduled a review hearing for Feb. 12, suggested to the couple that they try to get the money from their insurance carrier.What insurance company issues policies that cover criminal acts? This kid was just convicted of arson, for crying out loud.
30
posted on
11/11/2003 5:13:08 PM PST
by
Imal
(Nothing is more terrifying to a liberal than a strong America.)
To: SandyInSeattle
I totally know where you are. We raised a sociopath. I'm not ready to accept that it's our fault. Fortunately, she became an adult without burning down anything. She did commit felonies however which resulted in her being jailed for six months on a misdemeaner as an adult... we kept her 2 year old which was a joy but a hard row for two old folks like us. And now we rarely see her so I'm still dealing with depression from that. sigh. It's a rollercoaster for sure. I feel for those parents and I think that there should be a separate hearing to determine whether they failed as parents. I met a lot of parents in the juvie program who were good, decent folks. They had no idea how this had happened.
31
posted on
11/11/2003 5:14:05 PM PST
by
Mercat
To: muawiyah
The story doesn't report that State Farm is the insurance company for the school.
32
posted on
11/11/2003 5:14:55 PM PST
by
Dog Gone
To: Dog Gone
The one I read does. What you do is make a google.com search for certin key words.
33
posted on
11/11/2003 5:25:49 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: Dog Gone
You are probably correct as to there being more to the story. Some states, while imposing liability on the parent, also impose a cap upon the dollar amount.
34
posted on
11/11/2003 5:26:24 PM PST
by
AEMILIUS PAULUS
(Further, the statement assumed)
To: Mercat
And just because they had one kid was a problem doesn't mean that their other children were problems.
Do the juvenile authorities ever take that into consideration, especially in states where parents can be charged with a crime if one of their children is a delinquent?
35
posted on
11/11/2003 5:28:07 PM PST
by
ladylib
To: gpl4eva
I don't know. It's possible since there is a lot of big money moving out here.
Most likely not, though.
36
posted on
11/11/2003 5:35:45 PM PST
by
Dan from Michigan
("Dead or alive, I got a .45, and I never miss" - AC/DC)
To: muawiyah
Perhaps you could post a link to those stories or excerpt the relevant portions that supplied you with that information. I'm pretty much going off the information presented on this thread.
37
posted on
11/11/2003 5:36:00 PM PST
by
Dog Gone
To: muawiyah
Unless the parents are rich, they won't be able to pay this. And I doubt very much that the parents homeowners insurance will pay, either. So the school is screwed.
To: Dan from Michigan
"I'd rather see the kid have to pay for it himself....we can start by having him shovel horse manure from the local stables every weekend and after hours till he's 18." Geez...I'll do that for $715,000!!
39
posted on
11/11/2003 5:54:43 PM PST
by
blam
To: SandyInSeattle
On Monday, my daughter will be 20; she still lives here with us and is still my baby-girl.
Every once in a while, I have to say that out loud just to convince myself that it is so.
It must be heart-breaking to have one's child cause terrible trouble for other people.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson