Family of Plunge victim files suit against Knott's for negligence

I am not sure what Knott's Warning reads, but at SFMM the Warning states that riders with "uncommon body proportion" (FAT) may not be able to ride. My uncle is a skydive instructor and copied the WARNNG word for word (my wording may not be entirely correct) to take to the drop zone because different people have different bodies and weight is only one part of it. A person who is 6'6 250lbs is probably a well proportioned person. Someone who is 5'0 250lbs is obese. Additionally, many woman are even more-so unproportioned (Pear shaped, with large posteriors and small topside).So to give an actual WEGHT limit only creates more problems. Plain and simple: "Overweight/Disproportionate passengers WLL be refused to ride". This gives the person in question the opportunity to leave the queue if they dont want to be embarrassed at the loading station. Otherwise, they have been WARNED and should be expecting to be refused. Most people who are extremely overweight KNOW IT.

This is the first time have heard the victim's weight verified. If she didnt fit in quite right, shouldnt she be held liable for her own negligence? I DO feel sorry for the family, and mourn their loss. Nobody wants to have a tragic accident happen at a time and place of fun. But it was an UNUSUAL ACCIDENT, that was apparently NOT due to maintenance or malfunction (IMO). RIDE at your own RISK.

I still believe that the representing lawyer is doing so knowing that the case is NOT WINNABLE, but that the park will settle out of court anyway, to avoid negative publicity, and the lawyer gets PAID. What really pisses me off is how everybody wants to blame somebody else and lawyers are always right there to take a chunk of somebody else's money. If the family told the lawyer that he wouldnt get ANYTHING unless the case went to court and won, I guarantee you he would refuse to take the case.

If it were determined that there was a pre-existing problem that was patched but never fixed, resulting in the accident, then there is definately negligence and fault can be put on the park. But based on the facts that have been presented publicly, it seems to me (IMHO) that this was a FREAK accident that was mostly due to the riders Obesity.

If I was drinking and driving and got in an accident, could sue Budweiser for negligence? Arent they aware of the risks of impared judgement by using their product??? Or should that be something I take resposibility for?

...And that's all I have to say about that
-Forrest Gump
-----------------
My Other car is Giovanola!!! *** This post was edited by LoadedG on 10/11/2001. ***

I love how it says that Intamin knew the dangers of the ride...
What kind of moronic statement is that??
They knew something would happen.. and didn't care.
Not likely.
I still think its more the riders fault for not putting on the seatbelt.
But that argument would never get anywhere...

-------------
Montezooma's Revenge Count: 34
Ghostrides: 22

Chris Said:
"Figaro - Shall the overweight be smited with your death ray as well?

What planet are you from?  Have you ever heard of metabolism?  There are quite a few of us overwieght people out here who do "take care of" ourselves, but are just big.  No matter what we eat, and no matter what we do.  It's just the way it goes.  Get a grip, and stop generalizing."

No death rays here. Those were reserved for smokers in line queus and that was a joke. I know some people have slow metabolisms but there are things that can be done for that. Do you make excuses for people who are genetically predisposed to alcoholism? It's okay for them to go on drinking because its in their genes? Yeah some people can't seem to lose weight no matter what they do and that is really unfortunate, but that is not the case for all. Someone who is too heavy or large is going to have to accept that they cant ride some things just like they can't fit into 29 inch waist jeans. I have a friend who is 6'8" and can't really ride anything because of it. He does not get pissed off at the world because of it. He accepts that he cant do that and then he goes and merrily slam dunks a basketball. This does not come down to being generalizing or descrimination, its about safety.

I recently read the story of The Rattler at Fiesta Texas on the ride accident page. There is extensive documentation showing that Rattler was too extreme and unsafe after it was modified prior to opening, just to break a record. I wonder if similar documentation exists in Knott's offices. *** This post was edited by Intamin Fan on 10/12/2001. ***

The sue happy public usually gets me very upset, and I still don't think that there is enough information to make a real judgment here - but from what we do know, the whole case is really unfortunate from all angles.

I do want to comment on what LoaderdG had to say about the victim's weight not allowing her to fit correctly, and therefore "Shouldn't she be held liable for her own negligence".

I'm more than sure that no one at KBF would have allowed this to happen on purpose - but this is their business - they take your money at the front door, and there is a certain amount of responsibility that goes along with that. They are the ones who are supposed to be knowledgeable about their product, and the paying customer looks to them to tell them how to use their product safely (ride in this case).

I know nothing can ever be 100%, but that doesn't mean that they aren't still liable for their attraction - even if this is it's first death due to this specific situation - was the women really supposed know more about their attraction than they were? She should have been told not to ride because she didn't fit properly into the seat if that was the case - that's all there is to it.

And just so you know, I happen to be a big fan of this ride and have ridden it many times. It is intense, and if you are sitting in the back seat, you don't just get airtime - you get yanked hard against the restraints. I really hope it will survive it's intensity after this incident without some major restructure that calms the ride down.

LoadedG said"

"If I was drinking and driving and got in an accident, could sue Budweiser for negligence? Arent they aware of the risks of impared judgement by using their product??? Or should that be something I take resposibility for?"

That is not the correct analogy.  If you were at a bar and a bartender was serving you drink after drink, and then you went out and ran somebody over, the bartender would be liable and could be held criminally responsible.  They physically assisted you when they should know the warning signs of somebody getting drunk.

That is the same with persons with disabilities who try to ride at amusement parks.  At most parks, ride ops will not physically assist a person with a disability transfer from a wheelchair to a ride.  If they drop the person...lawsuit.  If the person drops themself, and they new their limitations, the park likely would not be found negligent b/c their stated policy is not to physically assist. 

Drinking and driving isn't even in the same ballpark for comparison. If you drive drunk you're an idiot because you know what alcohol will do to you, and it's probably why you drink it in the first place.

If you get on an amusement park ride, you assume you're going to live through it because the manufacturer and park have experts that make it safe. It's not your area of expertise.

I think we have to just accept the fact at this point that there is absolutely no way the park and Intamin could not be held responsible. That's unfortunate, but I've not seen a compelling argument otherwise.

-------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

Figaro - Who is pissed at the world?  I'm not.   I'm really not understanding what you are getting at.  I already said that I'm a big guy, and that's just the way it goes.  I've got twenty-nine years of experience dealing with it,  and I get on with life just fine. 
My point was that your generalization sucked, and I don't see how it had to do with safety at all.   You only referred to the incident once: 

This is a horrible accident that obviously needs further investigation. I feel badly for the woman’s family and I am not going to pass judgment on who’s fault it is. What it possibly shows is just one more reason to never let your weight get out of hand.

You state that the parks shouldn't have to worry about hurting someone's feelings.  How does this apply to the case?  I haven't read anything yet that implies that any ops felt pressured to spare the woman's feelings.  I've only read things that are quite the contrary:

Park officials said ride operators were confident both the lap bar and seat belt were locked in place.

Again, what is your point? 

You made an irrational rant that you expected to get called out on, and I took the bait. Shame on me. *** This post was edited by chris on 10/12/2001. ***

Jeff said:

"I think we have to just accep tthe fact at this point that there is absolutely no way the park and Intamin could not be held responsible. That's unfortunate, but I 've not seen a compelling argument otherwise."

Am I just being dense, or did that double negative throw me... in orther words you are saying that you believe the park and Intamin could be held responsible?

Not trying to be a smart arse here... its just early... I've been at work an hour and a half so far, but my brain does not normally kick in until around noon.

-------------
"I wasn't always this cynical, but then I started kindergarden..."

One: On Fat people.
Just because you are large, does NOT mean that you "dont exercize" are "lazy" or "dont take care of yourself". I know several football players who are HUGE, with blubber flopping around everywhere. But they are in MUCH better shape than many of the waifs walking around here. That's just their body type. Now if you want to say that because of their particular shape, there are certain theing they cant do, I would agree with you. But dont go around calling big people lazy. You didnt know the chick so you cant make that judgement (though I know lazy fat bastards too :)

Two on Drinking and driving
I dont know about suing Budweiser, but there is plently of documented case law where alcohol serving establishments (ie bars) have been held liable when one of their drunk partons drives off and kills someone.

Three on THIS accident
All reports show that the restraints were still locked in place *after* she fell out. An inpection showed the ride was operating correctly. So everything worked *just* like it was supposed to...and this STILL happened. Sounds like a design flaw to me....
jeremy

-------------
"Nobody writes about the planes that land." Steve Salerno Washington Times 7-10-01

Yes, I'm saying (via a double-negative) that indeed the park and Intamin are responsible. Jeremy put it best, in that everything did what it was supposed to, and it happened anyway.

-------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

My point was that a lot of people are saying that if parks start telling people that they are too big to ride something they will then be opening themselves up to lawsuits of discrimination and the like. I think that the prospect of that is foolish, you should be able to tell someone "sorry you are to big or just not shaped right for this ride." But in this lawsuit happy, I am entitled to everything I want society people probably would sue. Do I think all overweight people are lazy? No. I do know that Americans tend to eat more junk, watch more tv, and spend more time on the couch than any other country in the world. Yeah there are overweight people all over the world but we tend to have more of them than any other country. I was not passing jugdment on anyone. I said this needs more investigation. I think that if it is found that weight was contributing fact in this then parks and manufacturers should be allowed to tell people they don't get to do certain things. Its too late to help that poor woman now but maybe somebody else's life can be saved if parks don't have to fear litigation for telling them they are too big.

Opening up lawsuits? I see people turned away from Raptor and Mantis all the time because of their size, and there are no suits. Should a blind person sue the BMV because they won't give them a driver's license?

-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

---

What were the 29 "accidents" at Knott's this year?

---

Here are a few that I know of...

• Jaguar! train is stalled on track because a jacket got caught in the wheel assembly

• Jaguar train is stalled on track because a hat got caught in the wheel assembly

• Boomerang stalls in the cobra roll element for the first time in its 11 year operating history

• Mid-age woman dies on Montezooma's Revenge after an aneurysm burst in her head

• An unwarned park employee is dragged a long ways when the Calico Railway train ran him over

• A mid-age woman is thrown from a Perilous Plunge boat as it dives down its 78°, 115 foot-high drop

• A few others (mostly minor incidents) that don't come to mind right now

---

I know you all miss me so much..dont worry here is my opinion..lol

have any of you thought about this in an adult business manner?

These parks carry a plethora of multi-layered and re-insurance policies to cover just an event.
One park carries a ____ Million per occurance policy! Do you think they do this for naught?

They state in their yearly prospectus to investors that accidents on thrill rides DO occur
and because of that they carry these policies. The amount of these policies amaze me ( let me just say the amount boggles my mind and would boggle yours too!). They, the parks, must feel as if serious damage can be done to carry the amount they carry!
( go to the SEC and read a prospectus for yourself ... with some logic and time you can find the amounts)

This is an expense of their business. They account for this ... so can some of you accept that if THEY know they will be sued because of events, that accidents indeed do occur? They accept this as business.. it is not personal or an attack on the industry. It is the cost of these rides... a cost I am sure her family never wanted to pay with her life!

No amount of money will bring their mother back ..so lets have a heart ok?
Other riders in the same car said the restraints were not checked by the operators before leaving the dock.... passengers stated she turned around to talk to them, which Intamin said was not possible if the restraints were used...

And the car returned to the station with the seatbelt and restraint in a locked position?

This sounds like it is going to fall on the shoulders of the ride ops...if they let her on the ride, and she wasnt checked.. then what else logically can you deduct?

It is very sad. But can any of you accept that this is a cost ( being sued) of their business and they are well aware of the risks ( in their industry) and prepare for just an event?

-------------
http://members.aol.com/rides911/accidents.htm
http://www.saferparks.org

It still amazes me that someone of that size could just be tossed from a water ride. Granted it is more extreme than most other water type rides but it still boggles my mind. When I ride flume rides and descend down the drop, I dont feel my body leave the seat at all and thats with no restraints whatsoever. Is PP's drop that steep and intense to cause this?
-----------------
=========================
"The Peoples Elbow" or "The Spinaroonie?. Cant decide which is the most electrifying move in sports entertainment!!! LOL

BB - well said and I fully agree. IF the ride ops can be found negligent. Unfortunately, espescially in THIS case, EVERYONE on board was a relative or co-worker there for the PRIVATE party. I am sure the lawyer will sway other riders to NOT RECALL the ride ops performing proper checks.

Additionally, I will agree that MOST ride ops do so many checks a day that it is such a routine that they just dont REALLY check sometimes. A quick tug on the lapbar as they go by and its time for DISPATCH. If the person really felt they were not secured, I am sure they would have had plenty of time to get someone's attention.

Back to my BUDWIESER annalogy... I chose this because it IS such an assinine analogy, to get my point accross in a VERY sarcastic manner.

Once again, My condolences go out to the family and I certainly dont wish any harm on park patrons. Safety procedures, especially those of the ride ops (some, not all) should be taken a bit more seriously.

The whole point of my original post was:

My Problem is with the AMBULANCE CHASING laywers that insist on having these victims file law suits with full knowledge that they (the lawyer) will get PAID from an out-of-court settlement EVERY TIME regardless of whether it was or was not the parks fault.

-----------------

Only 3% of those injured at an amusent park ever file suit.

It is not easy to pursue a claim againt these giant companies.. I know first hand! You have to be so determined and convinced of the evidence to face their team of lawyers! They wear you down with time, and with delays for more discovery...it is a nightmare of a process! I do not believe anyone sues these parks with a caviler attitude.

the parks do not settle if it was not their fault... why should they? I urge you to remember that the legal definition of responsibility changes when you are a business that offers thrill rides for sale...

the ride ops are acting within the jurisdiction of the company they work for, therefore by their inactions/actions the comapny is responsible for how their employees handled this situation... so if the ride ops made a choice to let her ride, which maybe in hindsight they know was a bad choice, then the comapny they work for is responsible.. so the park has liability for this death....it will be intersting to see what evidence emerges...

the world of "law" is a fickle funny place...

-------------
http://members.aol.com/rides911/accidents.htm
http://www.saferparks.org

I don't particularly buy the statement from Intamin that you can't turn around and talk to people. I did it just yesterday on the very similar seats on Millennium Force.

BB: While I would agree that having to insure against this type of thing is the price of doing business, you make it sound like the people who run the park are OK with this. If that's not what you're getting at, then I'm looking for anything you said to be something that challenges an earlier comment or something that wasn't already obvious.

From what I know from people who worked with Jack Falfas in his Cedar Point days, this whole thing could only be hurting him emotionally. It's certainly not something that he, or his staff, accept as a part of "doing business."

-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

Jeff,

people get all up in arms when a park is sued, not looking at it like they ( the parks)have thought of this happening and protect themselves for just this occurance..

I am not aware who this "Jack Falfas" is, so I cannot comment...but I do not think they "WANT" this to happen...it is simply a part of the business of running thrill rides....

And am I not allowed to comment even if it is obvious to you?
Because I do not think some of the younger posters here are aware of the business side of these parks and that many people are not aware of the 100's of millions of dollars these parks carry in insurance.

I am sure many people are not even aware of what "re-insurance" is....my information is not redundant..I think I am one of the few people who have not droned on about her weight

And my statement about Intamin came from an article you supplied while this case was comming forth in the media....I am careful with what sources I use when commenting here...and I made sure to use sources you have provided in case you decided to question me , as you just did LOL

I do not think people want this to happen Jeff.. but after reading the prospectus' of some compaines I am digusted in how they write off the risk of injuries to get more capitol raised by selling stock... and I do think after reading these documents that they ( the parks) are WAY more concerned with their profits then saving a life or two!

-------------
http://members.aol.com/rides911/accidents.htm
http://www.saferparks.org

I would've rather won Powerball (8/15/01)then be your 1 out of 23,000,000!! *** This post was edited by BB on 10/13/2001. ***