national

Court finds Miyagi city negligent over schoolgirl's tsunami death

13 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

13 Comments
Login to comment

What is a "peer's parent" ?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

GOOD!

Mistakes are always forgivable, if one has the courage to admit them.

Bruce Lee

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The peer's parent should be sued. That person seems way more culpable than the school, since he/she was the one who took the girl away from a safe place and into the jaws of the tsunami. And why isn't this person named?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The peer's parent should be sued. ... And why isn't this person named?

Possibly that person is being sued separately, but more likely, that person was also killed by the tsunami.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The whole thing is sad, a natural event exasperated by rules not based in reality it's also sad that 6 years on its still a bone of contention.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The 9 year old girl went back to her home and was killed by the tsunami in her home. Is the school responsible to her death? In addition, the school was hit by 3.5 meter high tsunami. There is no telling whether she could have survived if the school kept her in the school building. Only hindsight is 20/20.

Civil Code Article 698 If a person engages in an act without obligation in order to allow another person to escape imminent danger to the another person's life, body, reputation or property, he/she shall not be liable to compensate for damages resulting from the same unless he/she has acted in bad faith or with gross negligence.

The school is responsible to the safety of the pupils in ordinary situations. But I do not think the school is responsible when the school staff themselves are in imminent danger to their lives. They did not swear to risk their lives when they got their school jobs. I think, protecting pupils in extraordinary life threatening situations is not included in the obligation of the school, and, by virtue of article 698, even if they fail to save pupils, they should be liable to compensation payment only if they acted in bad faith or with gross negligence.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

By the way, none of the 3 judges who handed down the judgement was in Tohoku area when the earthquake hit in 2011, due to rotation policy of the Supreme Court.

Chief judge Kokubo Masato was at Sapporo District Court.

Co judge Sakamoto Hiroshi was at Niigata District Court.

Co judge Matsukawa Mayumi was at Tokyo District Court.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I disagree to some extent. A tsunami can be considered an "Act of God" under the law, and not something that any person would be able to foresee the extent of. I was in Tokyo during the earthquake and there was great confusion. Perhaps the administrator thought it was necessary to take extreme measures and make exceptions under the circumstances.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I don't know if it was this school, but one school has a policy that after an earthquake, the kids are sent home. Granted, someone should have spoke up and said "there might be a tsunami", and took all of the kids to higher ground. "By the book" has it's pros and cons. Change the rules, but don't go revenge psyco because they followed the book.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If the child's parent was not there to pick the child up after the quake, I'd think it was a merciful act for a neighbor to take the child with them. I mean, no one really expected a tsunami of THAT level of destructive force and inland encroachment. It was unprecedented. To start blaming administrators who no doubt were thinking the neighbor was a solution to a problem (parent NOT there) seems vengeful and maybe $$-minded.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I'm not quite clear on this - so the child's classmate's parent took her to her (the child's) house and left her there? Or took her to her own house (ie the classmate's) house?

If the former, then that was a very stupid and unkind thing for the adult to do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tough one... I can think of other examples where the school and/or administration or city is far more culpable than this but that I don't think was charged. This is all hindsight in a situation that was sheer chaos on the ground at the time. The school let the child go home with another adult, and if anything it seems like it was that person's responsibility or no one's at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yet, if that woman had taken the girl to her house and they survived, while everyone at the school perished, we would hail the principal's decision and call both him and the woman heroes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites