Kentucky Kingdom sued by family for feet severing accident

Posted Friday, July 13, 2007 10:04 AM | Contributed by ClarkKentuckyKingdom

The parents of a 13-year-old Louisville girl whose feet were severed by a Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom ride sued the theme park today claiming it failed to maintain the equipment and ensure riders’ safety. Kaitlyn Lasitter, according to the lawsuit, has suffered permanent injury, severe emotional pain and her ability to earn money has been impaired. The lawsuit is seeking an unspecified amount of punitive and compensatory damages as well as a jury trial.

Read more from The Courier-Journal.

Related parks

Friday, July 13, 2007 10:12 AM
On that note: is there a specific agency in Kentucky responsible for the investigation, or is it the park?
Friday, July 13, 2007 11:05 AM
How come this news item took so long to pop up?

I posted the item in Active Topics when the "last" story in the news section was about Disneyland.

Now, my topic disappears and this one pops up.

What gives?

Friday, July 13, 2007 11:15 AM
Who didn't see this one coming from Day 1?
Friday, July 13, 2007 11:33 AM
ArmsUp, contribute the story to news next time.
Friday, July 13, 2007 11:34 AM
I deleted the topic so there wouldn't be duplicate discussion.
Friday, July 13, 2007 11:57 AM
Investigators have said it might be weeks before they find out what caused the malfunction, yet a lawsuit is already filed claiming negligence and failure to maintain the equipment?

Their lawsuit is warranted, but wouldn't it be a good idea to at least wait for the investigation to be complete?

Friday, July 13, 2007 12:08 PM
The Kentucky Department of Agriculture is the agency responsible for investigating the incident.

On a side note, tapes of the 911 calls related to the incident were released (today I think). In one of the calls, a witness states that the offending cable broke as the car was still rising, and caught the girl on the way back down.

Friday, July 13, 2007 1:31 PM
Well, this is a no-brainer. Probably the least-frivolous lawsuit out there.
Friday, July 13, 2007 2:09 PM
I think it is truly amazing that they were able to reattach one of her feet - that must be an amazingly complex surgery.

Every time I think of what happened to this girl, it makes me nauseous.

Friday, July 13, 2007 2:32 PM
Well of course it was more than likely the fault of the park for not properly inspecting & maintaining the equipment,which no doubt can probably be traced back to Shapiro's budget cuts.

It wouldn't suprise me one bit if the results of the investigation show that the cable had been worn & then simply snapped during the ride's operation due to that excessive wear & lack of money in the budget for replacement.

Friday, July 13, 2007 2:53 PM
truly a real quyestion.

If SFKK followed the law when it came to inspections of the ride and the state inspectors passed the ride would six flags still lose the lawsuit?

Friday, July 13, 2007 3:01 PM
Two real problems I have with this suit as it stands.

1. IT'S VERY EARLY! She has two years to file and the amount of damages are no where near known.

2. THE PARENTS FILED, NO this should be the girl filed or the parents filed on behalf of the girl.


Chuck, who also would put the state of kentucky department of tourism in the suit who built and operated the ride.

Friday, July 13, 2007 3:39 PM
I belive Ohio's Department of Agriculture handles the inspection of amusement park rides also. My question is, what does agriculture have to do with amusement park rides? I'd love to see the farm where they grow roller coasters. ;)*** This post was edited by Jason Hammond 7/13/2007 3:39:42 PM ***
Friday, July 13, 2007 4:22 PM
As far as the Dept of AG inspecting amusement rides this is a carryover from when they inspected only traveling equipment that was used at county and state fairs. In some cases theses events were under the jurisdiction of the state's dept. of ag., and were empowered by those states to inspect the rides. It was an relatively short jump for them to put permanent installations under their jurisdiction.
Friday, July 13, 2007 5:49 PM
While a slam dunk in terms of the girl and her family being entitled to money, probably a lot of it, I think some of you are making some pretty ridiculous claims based on a total lack of data.

I suspect it would be really difficult to prove that the park was negligent in their maintenance of a ride. Even then, someone has to define what exactly constitutes "reasonable" inspection. Cables can break, unfortunately, and I'm sure that they typically do so at the least convenient time.

And Chuck, what are you talking about? The girl can't retain a lawyer, she's 13! Of course her family is going to file the suit on her behalf.

Friday, July 13, 2007 6:12 PM
Ok this is what irritates me because of legal issues.

1. I have connections with an employee at SFKK with more importance than a ride operator, and he had much to say about this incident. The ride's cables are inspected yearly, and this year there was no indication of any future problems. Also, those cables have to be replaced every five years even if there are no problems with them. So really it was a freak accident than no one could have predicted, prevented by not having budget cuts, or have done anything else beforehand!!!

2. The problem with my explaination is that it legally won't work. I think SFKK is more likely to just pay up because it's just not worth a long, losing court battle.

This is pretty unfair to a park which took every safety precausion that is in the book to maintain a ride that had a freak accident that could not have even been thought of.

Friday, July 13, 2007 6:52 PM
You're friend is of more importance than a ride operator?

Hmmm.... People who check my lap bar, and who I have connection with the entire day, they're most important to me ;)

Maybe "higher up the Six Flags shute" is more like it.

Friday, July 13, 2007 8:57 PM
Information on the 911 calls made at the time of the accident:


Friday, July 13, 2007 9:22 PM
From the LEX18 article: "Randall and Monique Lasitter are asking a judge to order the park not to destroy the cable that investigators believe tore off the girl's feet."

Come on! Do they really think the park would do something like that? I suppose it's just some lawyer covering his bases, but I can't imagine even the worst Six Flags operation destroying evidence.


You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC