If the child is taken at the grandmother s house, and the child accidentally drowns and dies, what r

It depends on whether the drowning death of the child is the subjective intention of the grandmother? If it was just an accident, there would be no criminal liability.

But if there is subjective intent and the evidence is conclusive, then it will be charged**, and the sentence is not run, so whether it is a criminal case to determine an incident? We can't just look at the surface, we have to go back to his roots.

If a child is at his grandmother's house with a child and dies of accidental drowning, will he be sentenced for anything in a foreign country? Well, if a child is at his grandmother's house with a child and dies of accidental drowning, will there be anything in a foreign country that will also be sentenced? Well, if the child is at his grandmother's house, the child is at his grandmother's house, and he dies by accidental drowning, will there be anything in a foreign country that will also be sentenced?

Well, if the child stays at the grandmother's house, the child takes the child at the grandmother's house, and dies by accidental drowning, will there be anything in the foreign country that will be sentenced? Well, if the child is brought at grandma's house. So if the child mud child takes the child at his grandmother's house and dies of accidental drowning, will there be anything in the foreign country that will also be sentenced?

Well, if the child is brought at the grandmother's house, then if the child drowns. Grandma is responsible for not having a child at grandma's house with a child and accidentally drowning, will there be anything in a foreign country that will also be sentenced? Well, if the child is brought at the grandmother's house, then, if the child drowns, the grandmother is responsible, but will not be sentenced, because he has not committed criminal responsibility, so her daughter is also obliged to take care of the child, but she will not be sentenced.

Generally this is the case as long as you have no evidence to prove it'If the mother-in-law did not deliberately push the child into the river, or saw the child fall into the water, the grandmother did not rescue her, she was not responsible and would not be sentenced.

The child accidentally drowned at the grandmother's house, and the grandmother had no responsibility, because the child was long, and the grandmother did not want her grandson to have such an accident, and the grandmother was also in pain, and of course she would not be sentenced. When something like this happens, the grandmother blames herself, but when the child is older, the child will run around, and no one wants such a thing to happen. You can't blame your grandmother, you don't know how to bring a child to your grandmother, and you have to bear such a big responsibility.

will not be sentenced, and it is not that his grandmother deliberately killed him, but that she died of drowning caused by her poor care, and she has a certain responsibility. At this time, my grandmother will also be very sad, and as a child, don't blame her too much, so as not to hurt her heart.

The child accidentally drowned and died, and the grandmother had the responsibility not to take care of the vegetables, and the grandmother was also old, and the parents also had the responsibility of being inconsiderate. Since it was an accident, it will not be sentenced. Grandma is also very sad and will blame herself, so you should pay more attention at this time to prevent things from happening that shouldn't happen.

The child is brought at the grandmother's house, and the child accidentally drowns and dies, since it is an accident, the grandmother will not bear criminal responsibility, will not be sentenced, at most bear the poor guardianship, pay you some money, and comfort you.

If the child is brought to the grandmother's house, and the child accidentally drowns and dies, the grandmother has the responsibility of neglecting to take care of her, but this responsibility does not constitute a violation of the law, so she will not be sentenced.

This situation has been said to be an accidental drowning death. Grandma will not be sentenced, she can only be unfavorable. Drowning is not intentional. This does not constitute a crime and no criminal liability will be held responsible.

If the child dies of accidental drowning, his grandmother will not be sentenced, because it is not directly caused by her grandmother's subjective intention, but by accident, and this kind of thing has been heard everywhere, so it cannot be too harsh.

If I am still taking a child at my grandmother's house and accidentally drowns and dies, will my grandmother be liable to be sentenced? I think that the child took him to drown accidentally at his grandmother's house, and his grandmother was responsible, but although his grandmother was responsible, he was not willing to let the child drown to death, and he coaxed the child to take responsibility, but he would not sentence him.

The child is brought at the grandmother's house, and the child is drowning and drowning, it is not the grandmother's complete responsibility, and the grandmother is not willing to let the grandmother take the child, and the grandmother does not want the child to drown, and the grandmother is also very uncomfortable in her heart, she also happened to herself, and she did not intend it to happen to the child. Therefore, at Grandma's age, you will not feel good when you are sentenced.

If the child is at the grandmother's house and the child is at the grandmother's house, and the child dies by accidental drowning, the grandmother is responsible for the unfavorable supervision and will not be sentenced.

The grandmother is responsible for the dereliction of duty in the care of the child, but will not be sentenced unless there is evidence that the grandmother pushed the child into the water and committed the crime of intentional **.

If the child dies by accident diving with the child at the grandmother's house, the grandmother should not be blamed, and the sentence will not be imposed, because it died accidentally, and it was not the grandmother's intention, but the grandmother should not be blamed, and the grandmother should not be blamed for helping her take the child.

The accident caused by grandma's negligence was not a result that grandma wanted to see. The grandmother is obliged to watch the baby, and after the incident, although the grandmother is responsible, it is impossible to be sentenced.

The occurrence of this kind of accident caused a serious blow to both the child's parents and the grandmother herself, and everyone was very sad, and the grandmother, as the guardian, was responsible for the accident due to poor supervision, but it did not lead to a sentence, because she did not intentionally violate it.

The child is brought at the grandmother's house, and the child accidentally drowns and dies, the grandmother is responsible, but she will not be sentenced!

Hello, since it was an accidental death, my grandmother has no responsibility and will not be sentenced.

There will be no sentence, but morally it will be said that there is really too much to pay attention to with children.

There will be no sentence! If the grandmother's child dies of accidental drowning, the parents can claim compensation!

This should not be sentenced, because the child died accidentally, not that the grandmother deliberately caused the death.

As long as the grandmother does not have the intention and behavior of drowning the child, then the grandmother can only be negligent or not pay enough attention, and there is no legal responsibility.

If the child is taken at the grandmother's house, and the child accidentally drowns and dies, what responsibility does the grandmother have and will she be sentenced? I don't think it should be possible to sentence, at most, the grandmother's guardianship is not in place, causing the child to drown.

Accidental drowning death, this is also unexpected, no one wants it to happen, and it is his nephew, grandma is not responsible, of course there will be no sentence, but grandma will also feel guilty of self-blame.

In this case, you also said that it was an accident, and the drowning was not intentional**, so this situation does not constitute a criminal offense, so of course the relevant responsible persons will not be investigated for criminal responsibility.

If the child is at the grandmother's house with the child and dies of accidental drowning, the grandmother needs to be held responsible and will be sentenced, because it is not good to take care of the child, resulting in the phenomenon of the child drowning.

There will be no sentence! If it is intentional, it will be sentenced.

If it was really what you called "accidental drowning death", there would be no sentence, such tragedies have happened many times in our hometown!

Good afternoon, if the grandmother has a safety accident at the grandmother's house, she should be held liable for the child's personal injury. Where a party causes harm to others due to its fault, it shall bear civil liability. If the grandmother fails to take effective measures or takes improper measures when the child has a safety accident at the grandmother's house, causing the child to suffer damage, she shall bear civil liability.

Basis of the Law of the Law of the People's Republic of China: According to Article 166 of the Civil Law General Transport Rules, "those who have the responsibility to protect the personal and property safety of others shall take necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of accidents that endanger the personal and property safety of others."

In the event of a safety incident, Grandma Hand is solely responsible.

Summary. Hello. Legal Analysis:

The mother took the child out to play and drowned, whether the mother is responsible or not, can she sue: can be sued. Failure to fulfill the duty of caregiving.

According to Article 6 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China, an actor who infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to fault shall bear tort liability. Where it is presumed that the actor is at fault in accordance with the provisions of law, and the actor cannot prove that he is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.

If the mother takes the child out to play and drowns, is the mother responsible and can she sue.

Are you there. Hello. Legal Analysis:

The mother took the child out to play and drowned and died, did the mother have the responsibility for the mess, and can she sue: you can sue. Failure to fulfill the duty of caregiving.

According to Article 6 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China, the actor shall bear tort liability if he infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to his fault. Where it is presumed that the actor is at fault in accordance with the provisions of law, and the actor cannot prove that he is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.

Legal basis: Article 10 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China Where two or more persons commit acts that endanger the personal or property safety of others, and the conduct of one or more of them causes harm to others, and the specific infringer of the Wild Orange Nationality can be determined, the infringer shall bear the responsibility; Where the specific infringer cannot be determined, the perpetrator bears joint and several liability. Article 11: Where two or more persons separately commit tortious acts causing the same harm, and each person's tortious conduct is sufficient to cause all the harms, the perpetrators bear joint and several liability.

Article 12: Where two or more persons separately commit tortious acts causing the same harm, and the extent of responsibility can be determined, they each bear corresponding responsibility; Where it is difficult to determine the size of the liability, the liability for compensation shall be borne equally.

On the evening of the 30th, the mother took the child to the countryside to play, and in the morning, after the child went out on the morning of October 1st, she found that the child had drowned.

I would like to ask how to prosecute.

I'll help you break it down.

For this case. It is possible to file a lawsuit in court.

Failure to fulfill the responsibilities of a guardian who cares for him.

Can a biological father sue a biological mother.

OK. For this case.

What about your appeal?

I sued for divorce.

Are you planning a divorce?

In this case, an application can be made to the court.

How to write an indictment.

OK. A lawyer can be appointed. You can also write it yourself.

Indictment. We're here to help you with that too.

Cherish the people in front of you, and you can't go back if you leave.

There are two responsibilities for the drowning of a child, one is that the guardian has not fulfilled his guardianship obligations; Second, the construction party did not set up warning signs and assumed fault responsibility. Therefore, it is not a mistake of principle for this court of responsibility to share in half, i.e., the parents and the responsible unit each bear half of the burden. If the artificially constructed structures such as roads, bridges, and tunnels cause harm due to defects in maintenance and management, the owner or manager shall be liable for compensation, except for those who can prove that they are not responsible.

Compensation for Personal Injuries Article 29 Compensation for death shall be calculated over a period of 20 years in accordance with the per capita disposable income of urban residents or the per capita net income of rural residents in the previous year at the location of the court where the lawsuit is filed. However, if the age is over 60 years old, the age shall be reduced by one year for each additional year; Those over the age of 75 are counted as five years.

Article 1198 of the Civil Code.

Where the operators or managers of hotels, shopping malls, banks, stations, airports, stadiums, entertainment venues, and other business venues or public places, or the organizers of mass events, fail to fulfill their obligations to ensure safety and cause harm to others, they shall bear tort liability.

Where damage to others is caused by the conduct of a third party, the third party shall bear tort liability; Where operators, managers, or organizers fail to fulfill their security obligations, they shall bear corresponding supplementary responsibilities. After the proprietor, manager or organizer bears supplementary liability, it may recover compensation from a third party.

I think that such an act of my parents constitutes the crime of intentional homicide, and according to the relevant laws of our country, it is very likely that I will be sentenced to more than 10 years in prison, life imprisonment or the death penalty.

The mother's actions were intentional homicide and she should bear corresponding legal responsibility. As for the father, it is necessary to look at his reaction at the time of the incident to make a specific judgment. <>

In this case, the mother and father were in the process of arguing and threw the child into the river in an emotional manner, resulting in the child's death. As an adult, no matter how emotionally she goes, she should be able to judge that the consequence of this loss must be a human life, but she still acts like this, which is tantamount to a **murder**. Even if the executioner is a mother, it cannot be concealed that she took the initiative to let the child end his life, according to which the mother will not escape the death penalty in the endEven if she is finally exempted from the death penalty because of her special association with her child, life imprisonment may not be avoided.

During the whole process, what is the state of mind when the husband stands beside his wife and sees the child falling into the water, and whether there is immediate rescue, we don't know for the time being, assuming that the other party has these behaviors, then the father does not have much responsibility, but if the father does not act, or even looks by, then the father will also be sued as **. Either way, I think the future father will not have a good life, on the one hand, from the guilt of the child, and on the other hand, the possible prison sentence. The former ruined the happiness of the second half of his life, and the latter deprived him of a certain amount of free time.

The author hopes that it is the former, so that at least the child has had father's love and experienced the true feelings of the world before he dies, but if it is the latter, this child is too miserable.

Seeing such a tragedy, the author expressed great sorrow, maternal love was originally the greatest love in the world, he could shelter the child from the wind and rain, but this mother became a butcher's knife around the child's neck, I don't know if the mother will regret her behavior after waking up, but I know that the child is thrown by the mother at the moment, or still believe in the mother, and may even feel that this is the mother is joking with himself, until the river floods his small body, the object of his desire to reach out for protection is still the mother.