Posted on 06/16/2018 2:53:51 PM PDT by Morgana
OVERLAND PARK, Kan. — Two parents may be stuck with a $132,000 bill after their child damaged a sculpture inside the Tomahawk Ridge Community Center in Overland Park, Kansas.
The child’s mother, Sarah Goodman, said the incident happened during a wedding reception last month.
Surveillance video shows the child hug the sculpture, then seconds later, it fell.
“We heard a bunch of commotion and I thought, 'Whose yelling at my son?'” Goodman explained. “This glass mosaic torso is laying on the ground and someone is following me around demanding my personal information.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wmar2news.com ...
Sorry lady, take it home now, it’s yours.
Agreed. Anything worth $132,000 should not have been in easy reach of a child or any other wedding reception guest. Talk about asking for trouble. But, yes, the parents should definitely be held responsible for Junior’s actions, accidental though they were.
I didn’t read the article (because...FReeper), but wouldn’t the venue have insurance on something so valuable?
From the video, it looks like the kid was trying to pull the sculpture off the pedestal. He succeeded, and realized too late that he couldn’t handle it.
Insurance should cover it; ither the sculptor’s owner, the center or the parent’s.
The kid was just fascinated by the breasts.
Okay, fine...I guiltily went back and read the article. Venue should beheld liable for not roping off the sculpture and forewarning the reception’s hosts if the insurance company won’t pay up. No way should the parents be held liable for the entire amount.
BS, the center should have realized kids would try to climb it.
BS. Would a person display a $132,000 diamond in a public room with no security what so ever? Why an “art” sculpture then?
I would be assume if they let the public have access this room where the statue was displayed, that they would take protective measures.
Most people would not be able to afford to pay for a statue that the taxpayers paid for. Their solution is to file bankruptcy to discharge the debt or assessment.
The community center didn't "baby-proof" this art display, it would seem.
Agreed. I’ve even been to small store-size museums and they make sure the public wont touch it.
The insurance company should have questioned who had access to the sculpture, general public in this example. So not only inadequate coverage on policy, but wrong insurance company imo.
The gallery should also have considered who had access to the sculpture to save themselves possible public relations problems.
Also, probably no signs saying that children must be under adult supervision at all times.
If the family wasn’t composed of honkies from Kanas..?
This wouldn’t have become a story and they never would have been billed.
They’re the Designated Enemy.
Those responsible for the display disregarded murphy’s law.
They should counter sue for injuring their child... Double the amount they “claim”.
I think whoever put up the display failed to take precautions. Any sculpture that is over 1,000 bucks should have some sort of protection against tipping etc...
What happens when there is a minor earthquake and the sculpture topples over onto someone or someone’s kid and seriously injures them????
[ I would think the community center has some culpability in this for displaying a $132,000 statue out in the open without a plexiglas cover, no restraints, no hold downs, no signs that say “Do Not Touch”, nothing apparently to indicate it was valuable and breakable.
I would be assume if they let the public have access this room where the statue was displayed, that they would take protective measures.
Most people would not be able to afford to pay for a statue that the taxpayers paid for. Their solution is to file bankruptcy to discharge the debt or assessment.
The community center didn’t “baby-proof” this art display, it would seem. ]
Reminds me of the “art” that was just a pile of garbage that got “cleaned up” by the janitor... ART should always be protected by either enclosures or some sort of lock down or roping offf.
It doesn’t help that some art museums have “kid friendly” displays where kids are EXPECTED to TOUCH and FEEL. So they condition kids to touch crap then they get pissed a kid touched something and broke it... well... DUH!!!
I blame museums trying to be “kid friendly” encouraging kids to touch and feel etc etc....
https://washington.org/visit-dc/kid-friendly-museums-hands-attractions
“Anything worth $132,000 should not have been in easy reach of a child”
True and I think they may decide contributory negligence played a part and offset some of the damages.
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.