Anonymous
04/27/2016 18:17
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Kenneth J. Saltzman is one of the worst criminals out there, if you ask me. Complete scum.
Anonymous
04/26/2016 19:24
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have been following this situation for afar, but could people in the know answer a few questions for me. Because it just doesn't seem clear.
Did the dad provide the alcohol any of the kids, including the one that was driving? Or did they furnish their own and he just turned a blind eye?
Were the kids that were in the accident invited to the Saltzman's house, or did they just show up? And were they already drunk/drinking when they did so?
Salzmann did not provide the alcohol for this party (he supposedly has had in the past by I can not be certain on this - just from kids mentioning it)
One child had a fake ID and another used their older sibling or cousin (can't remember which but it was documented in police report.)
One 16yr old was bringing in two 30 pack and Salzman said "Is one for all of you and one is for me right? Haha"
He was aware there was bottles of vodka and multiple cases of beer.
The kids were invited by his daughter. She was leaving for a community service trip the next day.
They have had multiple drinking parties. The kids know their house is one of the party houses. Mom was out of town but has been there at previous parties.
They have never taken away the keys.
The party was getting late and some of the kids were getting obnoxious.
Salzmann told his daughter to tell all of the kids to go home.
The driver and his friends left.
Accident occurred.
When police arrived at Salzman's house after accident for questioning there were still kids out on the front lawn that did not leave yet and were intoxicated.
The departure part isn't quite accurate, but the rest seems to be.
Anonymous
04/26/2016 15:40
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Suing the driver is the necessary mechanism for those parents to collect against the driver's car insurance. And because it was an automobile accident, it is probably also mandated by the injured kid's health insurance to recover costs.
^^ This
Still shocking. Why would they put money before the feelings of another family who's child also escaped by the skin of his teeth?
Perhaps they don't have the luxury of being able to pay for all the bills incurred by their kid when he was injured in the accident. And even if they can, why should they? The driver was the one at fault.
Anonymous
04/26/2016 15:29
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:I have been following this situation for afar, but could people in the know answer a few questions for me. Because it just doesn't seem clear.
Did the dad provide the alcohol any of the kids, including the one that was driving? Or did they furnish their own and he just turned a blind eye?
Were the kids that were in the accident invited to the Saltzman's house, or did they just show up? And were they already drunk/drinking when they did so?
Salzmann did not provide the alcohol for this party (he supposedly has had in the past by I can not be certain on this - just from kids mentioning it)
One child had a fake ID and another used their older sibling or cousin (can't remember which but it was documented in police report.)
One 16yr old was bringing in two 30 pack and Salzman said "Is one for all of you and one is for me right? Haha"
He was aware there was bottles of vodka and multiple cases of beer.
The kids were invited by his daughter. She was leaving for a community service trip the next day.
They have had multiple drinking parties. The kids know their house is one of the party houses. Mom was out of town but has been there at previous parties.
They have never taken away the keys.
The party was getting late and some of the kids were getting obnoxious.
Salzmann told his daughter to tell all of the kids to go home.
The driver and his friends left.
Accident occurred.
When police arrived at Salzman's house after accident for questioning there were still kids out on the front lawn that did not leave yet and were intoxicated.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 21:16
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Suing the driver is the necessary mechanism for those parents to collect against the driver's car insurance. And because it was an automobile accident, it is probably also mandated by the injured kid's health insurance to recover costs.
^^ This
Still shocking. Why would they put money before the feelings of another family who's child also escaped by the skin of his teeth?
Because he was responsible in the eyes of the law.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 21:15
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
whose, not who's
Anonymous
04/25/2016 21:14
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Suing the driver is the necessary mechanism for those parents to collect against the driver's car insurance. And because it was an automobile accident, it is probably also mandated by the injured kid's health insurance to recover costs.
^^ This
Still shocking. Why would they put money before the feelings of another family who's child also escaped by the skin of his teeth?
Anonymous
04/25/2016 21:13
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No there were four kids in the car. Driver, two dead passengers, one surviving passenger.
The general American public really MUST stop calling teenagers "kids". They are no longer "kids".
In this situation, 3 of the 4 were 18 years old and adults! When you call them "kids", you are absolving them of responsibility and of knowing what is right and wrong, like a 5 year old.
As a research scientist, I profoundly disagree with you. All the research out there has shown that teenage brains are not yet fully mature in the higher executive functions of decision making, judging consequences and planning.
I completely agree they should be held accountable for their actions, but they are a category apart from mature adults and should not be judged by the same standards.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 21:04
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:No there were four kids in the car. Driver, two dead passengers, one surviving passenger.
The general American public really MUST stop calling teenagers "kids". They are no longer "kids".
In this situation, 3 of the 4 were 18 years old and adults! When you call them "kids", you are absolving them of responsibility and of knowing what is right and wrong, like a 5 year old.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 20:54
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
No it's not the parents of the kids that died. It's the one who walked away from the accident.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 18:35
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Suing the driver is the necessary mechanism for those parents to collect against the driver's car insurance. And because it was an automobile accident, it is probably also mandated by the injured kid's health insurance to recover costs.
^^ This
Anonymous
04/25/2016 18:15
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Reread the first post.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 17:35
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Plenty of fault and bad decisions to go around.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 17:35
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
Anonymous wrote:Of course they are. The driver killed their kid!
Suing the driver is the necessary mechanism for those parents to collect against the driver's car insurance. And because it was an automobile accident, it is probably also mandated by the injured kid's health insurance to recover costs.
Anonymous
04/25/2016 17:32
Subject: Wooton Accident- Civil Suit Filed
I have been following this situation for afar, but could people in the know answer a few questions for me. Because it just doesn't seem clear.
Did the dad provide the alcohol any of the kids, including the one that was driving? Or did they furnish their own and he just turned a blind eye?
Were the kids that were in the accident invited to the Saltzman's house, or did they just show up? And were they already drunk/drinking when they did so?
Did the dad provide the alcohol any of the kids, including the one that was driving? Or did they furnish their own and he just turned a blind eye?
Were the kids that were in the accident invited to the Saltzman's house, or did they just show up? And were they already drunk/drinking when they did so?