Insurance Company Pays $107K After Kansas Boy Topples Sculpture

July 11, 2018

  • July 11, 2018 at 2:13 pm
    FFA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 3

    I would think there is an assumption of risk if a 5 year old can topple it. Sounds like it may have been able to come down in a strong wind.

    • July 11, 2018 at 3:04 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 0

      FFA, the museum said the statue was clipped down, but the way the unsupervised kid was climbing on it, they apparently weren’t strong enough. The parents and their Homeowners company were completely at fault and should have paid since parents are responsible for actions of their kids. The mother was completely at fault for failing to supervise her kid.

  • July 11, 2018 at 2:38 pm
    Tom Bruckmeyer says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 0

    You kind of said the magic word—-“unsupervised” kid.

  • July 11, 2018 at 3:53 pm
    Bill says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 8
    Thumb down 0

    In a previous IJ article the mother said the child was well supervised and she was not negligent. In the security video, two children were clearly goofing around while two women sat on a nearby bench. I don’t know if either of those women was the mother, but one started to get up when one child intentionally wrapped his arms around the statue but immediately sat back down and let the child yank on the statue. The statue then started to topple and the child struggled with it due to its weight. I wouldn’t say the statue easily toppled over, it seemed to take some effort on the child’s part to get it moving. The statue appeared to be against a wall on one side of the room, not out in the middle of the floor where it would be in people’s way. It was on display like countless other statues in countless other buildings around the world.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*