[Pontiac]

Naturally the Plain Dealer has written this to touch the bleeding hearts of its readers. Leftist biased reporting which is the norm for this paper makes Ford out to be an evil capitalist company out to sell cheap unsafe cars to the public while maximizing Their “obscene” profits and avoid any responsibility for those injured in their unsafe vehicles.

The father in question is clearly negligent in this case allowing his toddler son to be unrestrained in the cargo area with the car in motion. Even 20 years ago it was well known to be unsafe if not illegal to have children unrestrained in a car.

Ford should not have made any settlement with this man to begin with.

[TheBattman]

The toddler was without a seat belt in the cargo area of the Bronco II driven by his father in April 1987. They were traveling north near the East 55th Street exit when two cars approached quickly from behind.

Anyone who knows me know there is no love lost between me and Ford- but that being said... In this case, exactly what liability could FORD have? The father had the child unrestrained in a non-passenger area... Not FORD's fault.

Further more - who/what caused the accident? It isn't even questioned if the FORD vehicle was at fault in causing the accident...

And now - two decades later????

[jim35]

"...biased reporting which is the norm for this paper makes Ford out to be an evil capitalist company out to sell cheap unsafe cars..."

Yes, and these are precisely the same tactics that lawyers use to get juries to award hugh sums to plaintiffs, when the case is clearly not negligence.
John Edwards is a pro at this; it's how he made his millions. Well, that and "channeling" children.

[volunbeer]

Further evidence of the death of personal responsibility.

Thanks to lawyers we will one day see a warning on a Big Mac wrapper that says.....

Warning: Too many Big Macs can lead to severe obesity, high blood pressure, and other health problems. Please consume wisely and in moderation.

[justche]

It was NOT illegal 20 years ago. 20 years ago we could still ride in the back of pick up trucks with no cover.
20 years ago, kids could ride in the front seat unrestrained, on parent's laps and seat belts weren't even mandatory.

Child safety seats have not been mandatory all that long. If there is a safety issue with a specific vehicle that makes it impossible to control or there's a known safety flaw that is ignored - who should be responsible for it?

I know it's fun to just assume that newspapers are pushing an agenda, but this has been an ongoing case - see more info here.

http://www.ewg.org/issues_content/vehiclesafety/20030417/pdf/DOJ_letter_20040417.pdf

[Malsua]

Anyone else recall those commercials by Lee Iacocca touting the awesome innovation of "Twin I-Beam Suspension". Who knew, 25 years later that because of that "innovation" trucks would be rolling over regularly? What is good is bad, what is right is wrong, everything goes opposite.

[Alouette]

The boy's skull was fractured and his brain bled after his head hit the pavement.

What does the automobile manufacturer have to do with the pavement?