"Parents' lawsuit claims FaceTime caused daughter's death"

Forums › Off topic › "Parents' lawsuit claims FaceTime caused daughter's death"

kingdragonfly

11988 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12873

Subscriber

#208693 23-Feb-2017 07:37

I'm sure everyone already knows.

It's not mentioned in the article, but Texas is one of the last states which still allows motorists to use their cellphones while driving.

Also forgotten:what about people using a bus / train?

"A Texas family claims that because the driver of a car that crashed into theirs, killing their daughter, was on FaceTime, Apple should pay."

"The SUV hit them from behind. It was going 65 mph.

It went up, onto and over the Modisette family's Toyota Camry on Interstate 35, north of Dallas.

James Modisette, who was driving, was critically injured. His five-year-old daughter, Moriah, sitting behind him, died of her injuries.

These are some of the details of a lawsuit filed just before Christmas in Santa Clara, California. Why there? The defendant is Apple.

The Modisettes claim that the accident, which happened in December 2014, occurred because the other driver was using FaceTime on his iPhone 6 Plus. According to the Denton Record-Chronicle, the driver of the SUV, 22-year-old Garrett Edward Wilhelm, admitted to police that he was on the phone at the time of the crash.

How, though, could Apple be responsible? The Modisettes say that Apple failed to 'install and implement the safer, alternative design [...] to 'lock out' the ability of drivers to utilize the 'FaceTime' application on the Apple iPhone while driving a motor vehicle.'"

CNet - by Chris Matyszczyk

https://www.cnet.com/news/parents-sue-apple-claim-facetime-cause-of-daughters-death-in-crash/

1 | 2

12182 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8475

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1724844 23-Feb-2017 07:57

No this is not Apples fault but a knuckle head stupid driver

Linux

Item

1739 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 726

Subscriber

#1724845 23-Feb-2017 08:04

On the surface it seems ludicrous.

Why not also sue the car manufacturer for making the car, the local council for making the road on which cars can crash into each other, the negligent driver's parents for giving birth to the man in the first place and heck - why not McDonalds too for ensuring the man had sufficient sustenance during his lifetime to survive long enough to kill their daughter?

It might well be however that this has a deeper reasoning related to the thorny processes around liability and insurance payouts etc in the US - I understand this a mess and was the reason for the recent case in which a woman ended up suing her own 3 year old niece (I think) for causing her to trip and fall at home and break her leg.

Dunno - just speculating here. If indeed the parents believe that Apple should be genuinely culpable here then I suppose people can behave erratically under duress and grief and maybe we give them some slack?

...or they might just be morons.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1724846 23-Feb-2017 08:10

In some way I see their point. Car manufacturers are required to put in many safety features to protect passengers and drivers, they are also required to put in safety features to protect pedestrians. So why not other devices that can be used in cars? If they won this case it will (in the USA) open a hornets nest.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Jas777

840 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 111

#1724847 23-Feb-2017 08:12

Does that mean you could sue God for letting a family member die of a disease?

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1220

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1724848 23-Feb-2017 08:13

Because apple has a lot more money than the dumb a** driver

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1724850 23-Feb-2017 08:17

There needs to be more done about the use of phones while driving. We have a SUV so can see into cars easily, one of my sons drives a truck and has a better view. The number of drivers we see talking and holding phones or texting is alarming, many of which are not driving at all well while doing so. The message just is not getting through.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

Linux

12182 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8475

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1724851 23-Feb-2017 08:18

MikeB4:
In some way I see their point. Car manufacturers are required to put in many safety features to protect passengers and drivers, they are also required to put in safety features to protect pedestrians. So why not other devices that can be used in cars? If they won this case it will (in the USA) open a hornets nest.

So then the mobile carrier is to blame as well for providing coverage so FaceTime could actually work

I don't see your logic sorry

Linux

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1724852 23-Feb-2017 08:19

The American legal system at its finest.

The lawyer for the plaintiff, who I assume will be on a goodly percentage of the takings, in pursuit of happiness and the American dream, via cash. So he sues everyone he can think of, especially rich corporations, in the hope that they will settle out of court just to avoid the hassle.

Linux

12182 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8475

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1724856 23-Feb-2017 08:23

Read the post above this one and that is the reason why folks

Linux

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1724861 23-Feb-2017 08:31

MikeB4:

There needs to be more done about the use of phones while driving. We have a SUV so can see into cars easily, one of my sons drives a truck and has a better view. The number of drivers we see talking and holding phones or texting is alarming, many of which are not driving at all well while doing so. The message just is not getting through.

Agreed. The penalties are not harsh enough. That goes for speeding and other driving offences as well.

I see people on their phones every day on my evening crawl down the motorway. Anecdotally, usually tradies actually on their phones. Probably a lot more people texting etc. that I can't see.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1724862 23-Feb-2017 08:31

Linux:
MikeB4:
In some way I see their point. Car manufacturers are required to put in many safety features to protect passengers and drivers, they are also required to put in safety features to protect pedestrians. So why not other devices that can be used in cars? If they won this case it will (in the USA) open a hornets nest.

So then the mobile carrier is to blame as well for providing coverage so FaceTime could actually work

I don't see your logic sorry

Linux

I am not saying I agree with it I am saying if car manufacturers are required to put in protection for people out side the car and inside then why not phone, radio manufacturers etc.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1724894 23-Feb-2017 09:12

trig42:
MikeB4:

There needs to be more done about the use of phones while driving. We have a SUV so can see into cars easily, one of my sons drives a truck and has a better view. The number of drivers we see talking and holding phones or texting is alarming, many of which are not driving at all well while doing so. The message just is not getting through.

Agreed. The penalties are not harsh enough. That goes for speeding and other driving offences as well.

I see people on their phones every day on my evening crawl down the motorway. Anecdotally, usually tradies actually on their phones. Probably a lot more people texting etc. that I can't see.

I agree the penalties should be harsher, much harsher but then I think speeding fines should be too but queue the cries of its just revenue raising.

Show us the evidence it's dangerous, but I'm a better driver / texted than average driver /

A.

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1724897 23-Feb-2017 09:20

The lawyer is most likely an ambulance chaser who approached the family with the idea.

Behodar

11099 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6078

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1724918 23-Feb-2017 09:35

kingdragonfly: The Modisettes say that Apple failed to 'install and implement the safer, alternative design [...] to 'lock out' the ability of drivers to utilize the 'FaceTime' application on the Apple iPhone while driving a motor vehicle.'"

And how exactly is the phone supposed to magically know that you're driving?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537
Inactive user

#1724925 23-Feb-2017 09:40

MikeB4:

There needs to be more done about the use of phones while driving. We have a SUV so can see into cars easily, one of my sons drives a truck and has a better view. The number of drivers we see talking and holding phones or texting is alarming, many of which are not driving at all well while doing so. The message just is not getting through.

When you are next to these drivers give a good blast on the horn! especially your son, those trucks have better horns.

I know an ambo that will get in behind and turn the sirens on and blast the air horns.

1 | 2