Baby Crushed to Death at Airport

BuffetSlayer · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:05

Tefal said:
but how did she not notice it star moving away, if she didn't notice a slow as **** baggage carousel moving away with her baby would she have noticed someone picking it up and walking off?

Again, many assumptions have been made on this topic as to the type and speed of the conveyor.

The truth is none of us actually know. My best guess is that it was a separate conveyor, similar to those used in check in, which are usually manned. Added to that my guess is also that such conveyors should be isolated when not attended by airport personnel.

But that is just my guess, and we will have to wait for more accurate details to be released.

Edit - post 159 was made as I was typing. If those circumstances are nearer the truth, it seems a lot more of a genuine accident, and a lot less neglect as many have been suggesting it has been.

Tefal · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:06

Orch said:
Yeh, gets me in a right pickle in whetherspoons on a Friday night.

tbh in the weatherspoons around here doing that would probably make you a father in no time

LizardKing · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:06

The lack of empathy in this thread is rather unnerving.

Mason- · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:06

There are signs everywhere (usually) telling you not sit on them and basically they're not a massive treadmill I would never put anything on that and turn my back to it let alone a baby ffs, it's negligence imo.

Tefal · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:07

LizardKing said:
The lack of empathy in this thread is rather unnerving.

it's text on a screen it's not exactly hard to disconnect the story from the reality of the people then it just becomes a "what if" scenario in which people become involved int he details rather than the reality.

Orch · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:09

Tefal said:
tbh in the weatherspoons around here doing that would probably make you a father in no time

robgmun · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:09

realBabelfish said:
i hope you havent just murrayed yourself there mate.

Well it won't be because i've done something stupid

Haggisman · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:09

Lets say for example the woman had put the baby carrier down in the middle of a very quiet road, and it got hit by a car and killed.

Would that be just be a "mistake" as well?

antijoke · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:10

Haggisman said:
If you have kids you have the responsibility to protect them. Doing things "without thinking" is simply not an option as a parent.

Haggisman said:
Lets say for example the woman had put the baby carrier down in the middle of a very quiet road, and it got hit by a car and killed.

Would that be just be a "mistake" as well?

You're coming across as an idiot now.

Scougar · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:10

This is definitely one where people need to read the entire thread.

DanielMMS, thanks for the update. Sounds like even more of a tragedy

What's your source please?

robgmun · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:11

realBabelfish said:
i used to put the thing down then stand with my legs over it to stop this happening. i guess some people are sadly lacking in common sense. shame its the baby that has paid the price.

Thank you! This is what you do (I'll add the the carrier should always face the same way as you so that nothing can come up to it without you knowing)

Xordium said:
If he really can do that I bet he is one hell of a chess player.

Not sure if it has anything to do with it but actually i was in high school :cool:

Also my dad was a police detective when i was a kid so probably passed to me my "Safety, Safety, Safety" mantra

Haggisman · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:11

anticonscience said:

If that childish reaction is really your opinion of parental responsibility, then please do your potential kids a favour and don't have them.

anticonscience said:
You're coming across as an idiot now.

Care to explain how exactly?

Both are situations where the placement of baby is safe at the time of placement. Both are also places where anyone but an absolute idiot would realise could easily become very dangerous without warning.

Given post 159 - if what was posted there is true then it is nothing more than an accident, but if the baby was deliberately placed on the conveyor, it's the mum's fault, and I don't see how anyone can logically argue against that.

BuffetSlayer · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:13

robgmun said:
Thank you! This is what you do (I'll add the the carrier should always face the same way as you so that nothing can come up to it without you knowing)

But what about if something comes at you from behind?

spoffle · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:14

Haggisman said:
If that childish reaction is really your opinion of parental responsibility, then please do your potential kids a favour and don't have them.

Why is it childish? Explain properly please.

antijoke · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:14

Haggisman said:
If that childish reaction is really your opinion of parental responsibility, then please do your potential kids a favour and don't have them.

Potential kids?

I've got two aged 5 and 8 thank you very much.

Quite how you can draw your conclusion about my parental responsibility from a simple roll eyes picture is beyond me.

Quite a level headed individual aren't you.

Schlong&Stable · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:14

She should absolutely be prosecuted. It was gross negligence that led to the death of her child, not misfortune or bad luck. It doesn't matter if the conveyor was turned off at the time, she had no way of knowing when it was going to turn on. She must have turned her back or else she'd have reacted to save the child, which only compounds her responsibility. She put the child in harms way and turned her back on it: guilty a charged.

The update about her leaning over a moving conveyor belt is even WORSE! What parent would lean over a moving conveyor belt without at least putting a hand under their child so that if the sling broke they'd catch the child?

Much the same as the McAnns should have been prosecuted for leaving their own children unattended.

Craig1981 · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:15

DanielMMS said:
New details seem to be emerging. The child was not placed on a carousel. It seems the mother was carrying the child, perhaps in a sling. She was attempting to retrieve a pushchair that had become trapped in a non-moving conveyor belt. Somehow she tripped, the child fell onto the conveyor which started to move. The child then become trapped in a 10cm gap where one conveyor belt ended and another began. It doesn't take much imagination to consider what happened next.

Should the mother be prosecuted? No.

You got a source for this? Because this completely changes things.

spoffle · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:16

Thompson_NCL said:
She should absolutely be prosecuted. It was gross negligence that led to the death of her child, not misfortune or bad luck. It doesn't matter if the conveyor was turned off at the time, she had no way of knowing when it was going to turn on. She must have turned her back or else she'd have reacted to save the child, which only compounds her responsibility. She put the child in harms way and turned her back on it: guilty a charged.

Much the same as the McAnns should have been prosecuted for leaving their own children unattended.

Read post 159

Scougar · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:16

Daily Mail has more info. Needs to be verified though. Once again, just goes to show how bad journalism has become when reporting facts.

Xordium · 20 Sep 2013 at 12:16

Haggisman said:
Lets say for example the woman had put the baby carrier down in the middle of a very quiet road, and it got hit by a car and killed.

Would that be just be a "mistake" as well?

Err, do you maybe think the general public may just may have a better comprehension and familiarity with the amount of traffic on a road and the potential risks compared to their knowledge of conveyors belts.

I didn't know they worked on weight for activation. I would however have seen a potential height danger. I would have look at it an thought "hmm could fall from that" not what happened ...

Not that what appears to happen. But I guess the people in here who show such a remarkable inclination to jump the gun and demonstrate little empathy will ignore that.