Decapitation at SFoG

Yes, that is true but I know Jeff posted some examples of fencing at Cedar Point's Raptor that makes entering their low zones, well, impossible unless you have bolt cutters.

I don't think the family should win a lawsuit...if they file one. I do think there are ways to keep people out of areas you don't want them in.

People are instructed to not get out of their boats on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride. That should be enough. But, Disney also knows that kids will be kids and they will jump out of the boats. So, they install motion detectors, video cameras, etc to try to mitigate that.

It should be enough for them to have a sign that says, "Dont' get out of the boat." Apparently it isn't enough though.

So how would you feel if your teenage child was well aware of the fences, new that they were off bounds, understood the consequences of jumping a fence, but went over anyways to retrieve a hat and then was decapitiated by a roller coaster and everone said to you he deserved it for not obeying the rules. Hmmmmmm.........

Three years in Juvee, or have his head removed. I'm not trying to start fights but instead looking at it in hindsight.

*** Edited 7/2/2008 12:05:07 AM UTC by CoasterDiscern***

Heinz sight? Does that involve ketchup? Or did you mean hindsight?

CoasterDiscern:
Who's suggesting that he deserved it?

Furthermore, he obviously did not understand the consequences of his actions, unless he was suicidal.

Man, I called the lawyer stepping in 3 pages ago. I knew it was coming and the case will probably see it's day in court. The only thing is it will most likely be up to a jury to decide any type of damages paid to the family. Will they side with the majority on here, "The kid broke the rules, and no fault is with SF," or will they decide "SF still has some duty to the family and is expected to pay damages."

For example, djDaemon points out, "he obviously did not understand the consequences," this could be a legitimate argument for his family in that SF did not do enough to protect their son from consequences he was unaware of. Is two six foot fences adequate? It's up to the courts to decide now.

My feeling would be it is a toss up. I'm just amused at how quickly lawyers were brought in, even just to question for a news article, in a case many would assume closed. Just goes to show the culture of our day when we preach individualism, until something goes wrong that is and the blame game begins.

Personally? I suspect the lawyers weren't "brought in". I suspect a lawyer contacted the family looking for a nice percentage of a possible large payout.

---

bucknut08 said:
For example, djDaemon points out, "he obviously did not understand the consequences," this could be a legitimate argument...

---

No, it could be an absurd argument, but certainly not a legitimate one.

Should they post signs on top of 10+ story buildings warning of the consequences of jumping from them? *** Edited 7/1/2008 5:06:41 PM UTC by djDaemon***

I agree, it would be absurd to use that argument, this whole situation is just absurd. It's sad and I'm sorry for the family, but if they bring something against this already financially struggling company I, along with others I'm sure, will be angry. I'm just expecting they will, and I'm trying to play devils advocate for their side to see what everyone has to say if this were to happen.

Would you be angry, indifferent, or feel it's legitimate?

Considering this is a church-going family we're talking about here, and the fact that the fault lies entirely with the victim (at least so far as we can tell given what we know at this point), yeah, I'd be pretty damn peeved if they went after the park.

Well, I'd be about as peeved as I could be, considering this whole thing has nearly zero impact on me.

Is it just me, or are an unusual number of threads on Coasterbuzz depressing lately? :(

Well I know for myself, if the family does sue, and succeed, it puts a burden on a company in an industry we all have energy invested in. I mean, by no means will this case put SF "under," (although if it was to set a precedent who knows what type of cases could be brought on an amusement park) and even with all of the complaints about their parks, could you imagine if SF was to go under? That would be a huge blow to many enthusiasts. I guess I feel like it is an attack on one of my main hobbies.

It's cases like these that bring about useless and inhibitory rules and laws that hurt companies and thus their customers (us). One bad egg to spoil it for the rest.

But really, what could any resulting policies do to hinder a day at the park? I'm sure that the addition of another fence (or perhaps a moat filled with piranha), while not pleasant to look at, wouldn't bother me too much.

And wouldn't SF have some sort of insurance to cover a lawsuit such as this potential one?

So, so far we have had the idea for barbed wire fences, velociraptors (they can open DOORS, man...lol), electrified fences, a moat filled with pirahnas...why not do it all? LMAO

This is just ridiculous that we're even talking about Six Flags paying damages. The kid was at fault. That family gets more than the costs for a funeral, and I'm going to blow a gasket. Not really because it's what I've come to expect from the legal system in this country, but I will be irritated. This just isn't right. Why should we have to have six fences and barbed wire and all of that just so a not-so-aware person can try to break the rules anyway? And then we'll see lawsuits about kids trying to climb fences and cutting themselves on barbed wire and getting tetanus and losing a limb due to infection or something. Come on, now. Sure, we all look for someone to blame when we lose someone we love, but there has to be SOME kind of thought process that says, "I loved my child, but how is this the park's fault? Was there nothing I as a parent could have done to prevent this?" We ALL need to start taking responsibility for ourselves and our spawn.

Can you imagine someone suing the park because they got cut on the barbed wire while trying to climb over the fence to get their hat? I can.

---

I suspect a lawyer contacted the family looking for a nice percentage of a possible large payout.

---

I agree with this. Sounds like an ambulance chaser to me.

I agree, we all need to take personal responsibility. But, until the courts decide that personal responsibility is enough then companies of all types have to take every possible step to protect themselves.

I think this should not end up in court. If it does I think Six Flags should win. I think Six Flags could probably do more...and I expect they will regardless of a lawsuit.

You want to blame someone in all of this? Blame lawyers and insurance companies.

Having worked in the amusement park industry and in local government I can cite dozens, if not hundreds of situations when I saw a possible problem, brought it to someone's attention and it was ignore until an injury or complaint occurred. It shouldn't happen like that but more often than not it does.

Well if they do sue, Six Flags should defiantly counter sue, they have to clean up, face the possiblity of bad publicity, and possible train damage(Im not sure how a human hitting the train would do much damage, but its still a possiblity). If Six Flags does have pay, do you think that a guy dressed in a Batman suit should deliver the check?

"If Six Flags does have pay, do you think that a guy dressed in a Batman suit should deliver the check?"

That is sick, disrespectful, and damned hilarious. Thanks for the laugh. I feel unclean now.

I second that remark.

Heck, let's add the moat of piranahs and the fences of v-raptors and we just MIGHT have someting that would slow these idiots down.

Heck, let's add the 'ranahs to ALL bodies of water near coasters.

This kid was stupid, plain and simple. He defeated two safety fences that were well marked (I wonder if he was so stupid he could not read). Several accounts from witnesses say that he even tried to grab the legs of passing riders when he was hit. It simply was nature taking this dolt out of the gene-pool.

And as far as feeling sorry for the parents, well, part of me does, but another part tells me that they probably weren't the best parents in the world if the kid felt like he was entitled to climb two fences to return to the park. My guess is they were probably the typical helicopter parents nowadays that always tell their kid how special he/she is and how entitled he/she is to the world's splendors. I bet this kid felt he was special enough that he could climb two fences to return to the park, even though the signs specifically forbade it.