Posted on 09/25/2006 9:17:53 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
MIAMI -- Bacardi said its 151-proof rum was not the cause of burns suffered by three women who sued the spirits company and alleged that their injuries were caused when a bottle used to pour shots turned into a "flame thrower."
Bacardi, in a motion to dismiss the women's' lawsuits, said their injuries were caused after a bartender poured rubbing alcohol on the bar of the "Secrets" adult club and ignited it as part of a promotion for flaming drinks in 2002.
Quoting from Miami-Dade County police and fire reports, the company said another drunken patron placed a paper menu in the fire and then "pulled it up in the air," causing the fire to spread and injure the women.
"Indeed, rubbing alcohol is the sole named source of the fire," Miami-based Bacardi USA Inc. said in the motion filed last week in federal court. "Bacardi had nothing to do with this misfortune."
Danielle Alleyne, Antonette Hernandez and Agata Macierzynska claimed in their lawsuits that Bacardi's 151-proof rum is inherently dangerous and defective because of vapors that are prone to ignite in a "flame thrower effect" and that a bottle cap used to guard against that possibility was too easy to remove.
The lawsuits contend that a flaming menu was stuck into a stream of 151 rum being poured into shot glasses, igniting the bottle and causing the injuries.
"This same defect in the bottle has been injuring people around the country for years and they have done nothing to make this bottle safe when they know of the dangers," Robert Dickman Jr., attorney for the women, said Monday. "Justice will have its day."
Bacardi, however, said the women are improperly seeking a financial "windfall" by suing the company after already receiving payouts from others blamed for their roles in the Aug. 8, 2002, incident.
"It was not Bacardi that staged a fire show at Secrets ... It was not Bacardi that poured rubbing alcohol on the bar and set it on fire," the company said in its motion.
Bacardi also said its 151 rum contains warning labels about its flammability -- one says "Do not use this product for flaming dishes or drinks" -- and features a "flame arrester" to prevent it from accidentally igniting.
The lawsuit and motions are pending before senior U.S. District Judge William Hoeveler, who has not issued a ruling on Bacardi's dismissal request.
Remember this one?
Sorry! We won't do it again.
oh lordy,,,lol
Have one on the house, ladies.
Someone help me out here. By burning off the alcohol, does the drink become less potent? (I'm simply curious--personally, I wouldn't pay money for a drink that wussifies itself).
|
does rubbing (isopropyl) alcohol even burn with a real visible flame, like Bacardi (75% ethanol) does?
If not, why would a bar even have a bottle of isopropyl on its premises?
(I know that methanol burns pretty much invisibly, and that ethanol is similar and that the other ingredients make rum burn so pretty.....but not certain about isopropyl which is wood alcohol)
Yep ... grab a cotton ball with pliers, soak in 'rubbing alcohol' and ignite. It makes a dandy field-expedient, improvised torch; has a nice blue and orange flame.
It also works well for the "set your hand on fire" trick.
lolz
Looks like you have been to the Kon Tikki. I have a mug just like it only it is about 20 years old.
So, the lawyers are saying that Bacardi needs to come up with a bottle cap that can't be removed?
Wouldn't this rather defeat the purpose of a bottle of rum?
Idiot lawsuit alert!
First, the rum didn't cause the fire, a match and a dumb idea, perpetrated by a dumb person, did!!! Second, to have a "flame thrower", there must be projection of flame a considerable distance. Since the drink is probably not pressurized, this was no "flame thrower". I doubt the woman or her lawyer have ever seen a flame thrower outside Hollywierd.
Let's see, drunk, dumb person, alcohol, and a match........ I can see Carlos Mencia saying "Dee Dee Dee" right now.
Light an empty 151 bottle after shaking it profusely. Instant flame thrower.
As I said, the open drink was not pressurized. Shaking the bottle pressurizes it.
OOOO-PAAAAAAAAAH!!!!
at least they hold the cheese overhead
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.