讀後心得

An 87-year-old man fell while riding an electric scooter to buy groceries, feeling unwell. Most passersby chose to observe rather than help, and some even questioned whether the elderly man was faking the incident for compensation. Although the family filed a lawsuit seeking 1.4 million yuan in damages from the bystanders, the court ultimately ruled that bystanders had no obligation to assist and rejected the lawsuit. This case has sparked social attention.

An 87-year-old man rode his electric scooter to go grocery shopping, but suddenly felt unwell during the trip and fell to the ground. According to reports, this elderly man was generally healthy and would ride his scooter daily for exercise. Since his children were busy with work, they felt uneasy about his safety, but the elderly man still wished to remain active, and his children could only respect his wishes. On this particular outing, he rode his scooter as usual but fell at some point due to feeling unwell.

After the incident, passersby slowed their pace upon seeing him, but many were reluctant to assist. Numerous people just watched from afar and hurriedly left. Although a boy wanted to help, he was stopped by those around him, who claimed, "This old man is just trying to scam us," while others considered the situation for a moment before choosing to leave.

The family was extremely grief-stricken by the man's death and could not accept the reality. They were also furious about the indifference shown by the bystanders. Therefore, they decided to sue the ten passersby who witnessed the incident through an investigation of the surveillance footage, demanding a compensation of 140,000 RMB from each individual, totaling 1.4 million RMB. They believed that the indifference shown by the bystanders was a significant reason for the elderly man's death and that they should bear corresponding responsibilities.

This case has attracted widespread attention. After a detailed investigation and hearing by the court, the family's lawsuit was ultimately dismissed, ruling that the ten bystanders did not need to bear any compensation responsibility. The judge pointed out that the bystanders did not directly harm the elderly man, nor did they have a legal obligation to assist. According to Article 184 of the Civil Code, ordinary citizens are not required to bear the duty to assist, thus the ten bystanders were not included in any legal obligation to aid.