http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071226/...oSbB01UqJdDxkF

So the jury found no fault on the part of the guy that crossed into the bus's lane? I don't get it... Personally don't care for Toby Keith anyway, but whatever...

 

er.....

I really didn't understand this article the first 3 times I read it... now that it makes more sense I'd say it's pretty stupid as well.

then again hitting anyone in the rear is generally an instant "you were following too close"

 

I don't mind Keiths music at all though his voice is a little annoying after 3 or 4 songs.

I think I got this though, lets see...

Keiths dad was driving and ran into the oncoming lane in which he hit the bus head on and died...right?

If so then that is ridiculous.

Now the other way I read it was the bus had rear ended Keiths father causing him to die because the bus had bad brakes.

Now if this is the case then I agree copletely with the settlement but think the company responsible for the maintenence on the bus should be hit for a much larger amount for gross negligence.

 

From what I've read, it seems the case is based upon the "bad brakes." If the bus had proper working brakes then Keith's dad wouldn't have died. I didn't see anywhere that said the bus rear ended him. Seem like another car hit him from the back and then he flew onto oncoming traffic where he was killed by the bus.

It should be then the car who rear-ended him that should get all the blame.

 

Yea that's what i gathered. He was driving one side, bumped by car behind him, he swerved into the other lane and hit the bus. But because the bus had bad brakes the bus company was sued for negligence.

I don't think that makes much sense due to the fact that what does the bus's breaks has to do with someone coming at you. I guess it's one of those "you gotta be there" things.

 

from what i read i get that he was crossing at a 4 way intersection and his side was green and he went and then bam hit by the bus with bad air brakes