Driver who killed teen sues for damage

eyl · Post by **eyl** » 2008-01-27 12:41pm

Looks like the woman DUI who laughed about her victim has a competitor in the "driving-related douchebaggery" category:

MADRID, Spain—A speeding motorist who killed a teenage cyclist is suing the boy's parents over damage to his luxury car, the government says.

Enaitz Iriondo, 17, died instantly in August 2004 when businessman Tomas Delgado's Audi A8 crashed into him at 100 mph near Haro in northern Spain, an Interior Ministry traffic report said. The speed limit was 55 mph.

Iriondo was not wearing reflective clothing or a helmet, the ministry report said. As the sun had set when he crossed the path of Delgado's car from a side road, a regional court found both parties at fault and closed the case, the report said.

Delgado, whose insurance company paid Iriondo's parents $48,500 in compensation for their son's life, filed a suit in late 2006 to recover $29,400 in damages to his car and car rental costs, the ministry traffic report said.

"It's the only way I have to claim my money back," Delgado was quoted as saying by the newspaper El Pais, which first reported the story on Friday. El Pais said a ruling was expected next week.

more

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2008-01-27 01:33pm

Keep us posted on the results of the court case. This douche bag should not be able to get anything other than losing his licence.

Netko · Post by **Netko** » 2008-01-27 01:50pm

Partial fault on the side of the pedestrian/cyclist/whatever can be truly nasty, especially when the driver on the other side is an asshole, like this one. The driver is insured, so his liability gets covered but then he can recover his damages from the other guy in the percent that the other guy's fault has been determined - and when the other guy is a pedestrian or cyclist and, hence, does not have any insurance for that situation, and the asshole driver drives a luxurious car often it turns out that he actually has to fork out his own money along with all his claim money from the driver's insurance. Its perfectly fair from one perspective (hey, he did contribute to the accident, right?), but the lack of insurance means the poor pedestrian/cyclist gets reamed.

I wonder in what percentage did they hold the cyclist responsible in this case. That he could have any responsibility when the driver is driving double the speed limit and thus clearly not fully in control of his vehicle compared to road conditions is mindboggling.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2008-01-27 01:58pm

LOL, it's obviously not enough that the cyclist paid with his life.

Gustav32Vasa · Post by **Gustav32Vasa** » 2008-01-27 02:00pm

Mr Burns?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2008-01-27 02:04pm

And I read the article again. The douche was driving over 45 mph over the speed limit, at 100 mph. If he had been going slower, he would've had a better chance of avoiding the kid, even with the sun in his face.

Post by **Kuja** » 2008-01-27 02:05pm

Shoe-in for Douchebag of the Week award.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2008-01-27 02:27pm

Shinova wrote:And I read the article again. The douche was driving over 45 mph over the speed limit, at 100 mph. If he had been going slower, he would've had a better chance of avoiding the kid, even with the sun in his face.

Or the kid would have seen him coming and waited to cross the road. As it was, the guy probably came on much faster than the kid thought he was going, or maybe he zipped around a curve and the kid never even knew what hit him. Both parties were at fault, but the driver was substantially more responsible--going nearly double the speed limit is unacceptable.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2008-01-27 02:42pm

Maybe this is my North American-centric experience talking, but isn't $48,500 -- the amount the dead kid's parents were paid in compensation -- a little light? I suppose the fact that the kid bore some responsibility for the accident might have lowered the award, but, as Governor Sanchez points out, the recklessness of the driver was contributed vastly more to both the accident and its lethality.

NoXion · Post by **NoXion** » 2008-01-27 03:48pm

What is it about car ownership that attracts total arseholes? This disgusting waste of carbon should be feeling nothing but remorse.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-01-27 04:18pm

NoXion wrote:What is it about car ownership that attracts total arseholes? This disgusting waste of carbon should be feeling nothing but remorse.

Seems to me he should be looking at a lifetime driving ban, at the very least.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2008-01-27 04:21pm

I'm missing something here. Why isn't this guy on trial for killing the cyclist? Surely doing tiwce the speedlimit and killing someone because of it should qualfy as some sort of crime that should land him with some time behind bars.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2008-01-27 08:10pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:I'm missing something here. Why isn't this guy on trial for killing the cyclist? Surely doing tiwce the speedlimit and killing someone because of it should qualfy as some sort of crime that should land him with some time behind bars.

The article says that the court ruled both parties at fault, and closed the case back in 2004. I'm not sure why the guy is just getting around to the ghoulish business of suing the victim's family now. This is just speculation, but maybe he was in jail until very recently.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2008-01-27 09:09pm

Poetic-justice answer:

Buy the most expensive pair of shoes you can find. Kick him in the balls once or twice. Sue him for damage to the shoes.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2008-01-27 09:25pm

regional court

I don't know anything about the courts of Spain. But when I read "regional court" I think a court out in the middle of nowhere, a hick as a judge. Maybe even a bribe, connections involved. I certainly would not call a court in a city a "regional" court.

How much is an Audi A8?

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2008-01-27 09:28pm

Starts at 95,000 CAD.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-27 10:16pm

SCRawl wrote:Maybe this is my North American-centric experience talking, but isn't $48,500 -- the amount the dead kid's parents were paid in compensation -- a little light? I suppose the fact that the kid bore some responsibility for the accident might have lowered the award, but, as Governor Sanchez points out, the recklessness of the driver was contributed vastly more to both the accident and its lethality.

In liability lawsuits, children aren't worth much. The rationale is that a well-paid adult is generating a certain amount of money per year, which you can convert into an equivalent lump sum for the purposes of assigning monetary value to his life. A child, on the other hand, is considered worthless to others because he has no job, so the payout for the death of a child is always estimated very low.

I know, it sounds sick. This is often disguised in the American legal system because most of the damage awards tend to be punitive anyway.

Post by **Edi** » 2008-01-28 04:37am

45 over the speed limit would get his license revoked here and automatically nullify all of his claims for damages, since the damages he wants to recover were incurred during the commission of a crime (reckless endangerment of traffic safety, speeding and causing death through negligence). I hope they have something similar in Spain that they could use to bitchslap this bastard with.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2008-01-28 07:04am

I don't know yet about damages, though I don't think it would include prison time.
Just speeding-wise, 70 km/h over limit would cost him 375 €, 4 points in the driving record and a driving ban for 3 months here, though it might get worse when the accident is taken into account.

Murazor · Post by **Murazor** » 2008-01-28 07:18am

brianeyci wrote:I don't know anything about the courts of Spain. But when I read "regional court" I think a court out in the middle of nowhere, a hick as a judge. Maybe even a bribe, connections involved. I certainly would not call a court in a city a "regional" court.
How much is an Audi A8?

I haven't followed the particulars of this trial, but when a "regional" court is mentioned, it is probably the territorial audiencia. From what I've read in the press over here, the fathers dropped the criminal case when the first instance courts decided that there was no criminal behaviour and picked the civil path, which resulted in the insurance company acknowledging that Delgado had been driving over the speed limit and paying them the compensation. Likewise, television has reported that the best that the parents can hope for at this point is for the courts to reject the suit and force the asshole to pay costs, which may or may not happen.

Of course, "asshole" is entirely too light a word for this guy, because Mr. Delgado has appeared in television interviews literally claiming to be the only harmed party in this (adding "maybe one of two" as an afterthought) showing absolutely no signs of repentance and acting like a fucking schoolyard bully. Oh. And he definitely doesn't need the money, so he is doing it out of spite.

Meest · Post by **Meest** » 2008-01-28 09:15am

Sure he drives an Audi A8, his car is literally worth more than the kid's life in this case. If he was so well off why would he be fighting for 29k in repairs that were covered? Sounds like he wants to burn off all the pitiful payout the family already got because his premium went up. There should be counter civil claims for assholery, there seriously needs to be something to fight against this crap. How should cases like this be handled though? Is there any provision where criminal negligence overrides civil claims? I think that certain cases should have restrictions if you performed a criminal act.

Murazor · Post by **Murazor** » 2008-01-28 09:24am

The last newscast informed that the parents are in talks with the public prosecutors to reopen the criminal case.

Apparently, they hired out of their own pocket three experts that have made a reconstruction of the crash using some previously overlooked info, including the possibility of the sob driver being a bit drunk at the moment of the accident (the police tested his alcohol level an hour after the accident and he was just short of the maximum legal level).

Good for them if they manage to nail the bastard, I say.

Thunderfire · Post by **Thunderfire** » 2008-01-28 09:54am

Dahak wrote:I don't know yet about damages, though I don't think it would include prison time.

Depends on the country. Involuntary manslaughter is a serious crime in many countries.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2008-01-28 10:47am

Thunderfire wrote:
Dahak wrote:I don't know yet about damages, though I don't think it would include prison time.
Depends on the country. Involuntary manslaughter is a serious crime in many countries.

I was talking about Germany. And I unless he was drunk (which he even may have been given the last post), had some other seriously negative impact, or previous convictions, I think he would just get a probation or just a huge fine (for involuntary manslaughter).

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2008-01-28 11:01am

This reminds me of the asshole D.C. judge and the pants lawsuit. Fucker...