On 2/20/2012 11:51, andrel wrote:
> Technically he/she may decide that it is negligence, in real life it wasn't.

Running in front of a train going fast enough to pulp you and fling body 
parts all over the station? *I* would consider that a pretty negligent act.

> Here in the Netherlands it is not uncommon that the railway company or any
> other large company decides to pay even if they can technically not be
> blamed. Partly out of decency, partly because not doing so is bad publicity
> and conversely this is cheap and good publicity.

That happens here too.

> Probably it is indicative of the moral state of the USA that Amtrak did not
> do the decent thing and can get away with it. ;)

It can also be a matter of whether Amtrak wants to set the precedent that if 
you run in front of a train, it's Amtrak's fault for not stopping. I can see 
Amtrak fighting the lawsuit claiming it's their fault even *if* they still 
pay the medical bills out of decency.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message