My favorite line from the article, "The attorney, who will represent both girls, says if they do pursue legal action they hope to settle out of court."
Translation: 'We're banking on the Stratosphere reps not wanting to go through the hassles of the courts and the possible negative PR. This way we're sure to make a few bucks off of it!'
Seriously, I wouldn't want to be stuck up there like that, but nobody was hurt and the safety systems worked properly. They have no case. Shoot, as a visitor of Las Vegas, I'm suing the girls! What IF she dropped her cell phone from that height? I COULD have been standing below and it MIGHT have struck and killed/injured me! ;)
rollergator said: True that no one was injured....but would you want to be the lawyer arguing that the girls *didn't* suffer from emotional distress? I wouldn't! ;)
HA! I don't know, I think willingly being strapped into a seat while spinning in circles dangling from 1,000 feet in the air is asking for emotional distress! ;)
Besides, some of my clients at work cause me emotional distress... I'm suing my boss. Rush hour traffic? Oh yeah, distress... I'm suing the city. Are UFOs and Ghosts Real pop-up adds? Jeff, you'll be hearing from my lawyers soon! ;)
Exactly what is it the family wants to keep from happening again? That a mechanism consisting of moving parts will never, ever, ever stop functioning perfectly? Or is it something more simple like ensuring that nothing bad ever happens to any of them for the rest of their lives?
And why do they keep taking the 11-year old there to "just stare at it?" Is this to make the kid a total froot loop before a potential appearance before a judge and jury?
UBRhino, I definitley agree. While I don't think it is necessarily lawsuit worthy, it seems that Interactive needs to go back through thier ride programming and have it slowly return to the platform (at a maintenance mode speed) in case of a shut down due to wind. I still haven't figured out why it left the factory programmed like this.
Adam *** Edited 4/27/2005 6:12:30 PM UTC by LONNOL***
UBRhino that was my question too, from the video you can obviously see that Insanity moves to a platformed area for the (un)loading process, so when the safety system kicks in why would it immediately stop the ride instead of returning it to the platform?
One of the reasons we HAVE product liability is to make sure that Interactive does indeed pay to fix what certainly does seem to be a flaw in the ride mechanism....if the ride shuts down from high wind, it should DEFINITELY park itself on the platform, no question!
However, the employees *laughing* at the stranded riders, that says that Stat should/will pay some share of the lawsuit, cause that would've added greatly to MY distress...
I posted this on the News thread, but it fits here too...
Not that this affects the case in any way...BUT..I live in Vegas...and the dirty little secret that the media is not touching (besides one radio station in town) is the fact that "the 11 year-old" involved in this case was riding rides on top of the Stratosphere at 12:15am-1:00 am ON A SCHOOL NIGHT!
She lives in Vegas and is enrolled in the Clark County School District. Again, this may have no affect on the case. Vegas does have a curfew law for 18 yo and younger, but I'm not sure how the 19-yo cousin may affect the law interpretation in terms of proper supervision...?
Anyhow, besides the obvious malfunctions with the Stratosphere operations, it is safe to say that we may also have a malfunction in the parental supervision category...
does kids have the right to sue? whats the 'legality' on this? I agree that the safety system should have been programmed to 'park' at the loading area instead of just stopping in the middle of the ride. I wouldn't sue if they comp (hotel, food and gambling money) for life.......