Posted on 04/03/2018 5:46:51 PM PDT by Hojczyk
72-year-old John Schooley has been charged with second-degree murder in the tragic death of a child on the water slide he co-designed. Schooley was arrested at the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport on Monday, just after returning from China. In addition to murder, Schooley also faces charges of aggravated battery and aggravated endangerment of a child.
A Kansas grand jury has indicted all three men involved in the incident that resulted in the decapitation of Caleb Schwab, son of Kansas State Representative Scott Schwab. The boy’s raft lost control on the 17-foot slide, and he was killed as he hit an overhead loop at high speed.
Charged along with Schooley are co-owner Jeffrey Henry and the private construction company of the park, Henry & Sons Construction Co. Both have been charged with reckless second-degree murder as well as 17 other felonies related to other incidents on the “Varruckt” slide.
But it was Schooley himself who signed off on the ride, claiming it met all of the required American Society for Testing and Materials standards for use. Even then, he allegedly said that “if we actually knew how to do this, and it could be done that easily, it wouldn’t be that spectacular.”
“Not a single engineer was directly involved in Verruckt’s dynamic engineering or slide path design,” according to the indictments. Those same indictments also claim that Henry rushed production of the slide in order to impress executives involved with a Travel Channel television program.
Thus far, the Schwab family has reached a $20 million settlement with the Schlitterbahn water park and companies associated with the slide’s production.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
None of this hit the news till the lad died? How does one suppress that? Payola?
Nobody wants a razor blade hidden in a swing set, but when something looks gnarly dangerous... Maybe it is.
You stopped bolding too soon.
“What disturbs about this case is unqualified people designing it, and then deliberately hiding a record of 13+ injuries the first six months of operation and refusing to do anything about it. Makes you wonder about all these parks.”
Well .... they put up the cage to keep people from flying off the ride .... just neglected to think what would happen to one that would hit the cage frame at high speed ....
Dunno.
People have died on Disneyland roller coasters, and I don’t recall murder charges being filed.
I am sure no one arguing in this thread that second degree murder is not an appropriate charge is actually a lawyer. (I am a lawyer.)
Here is a link to a good discussion of the issue:
Well well well. The consequences of the intended safety measure could have been worse than not having it. People think cage equals safety. Maybe NO CAGE would get people to think twice or at least obey the ride rules.
How do we get around “reckless” people?
Also how did the lad chance to fly off the slide? Did something abnormal happen?
I feel for the lad’s family. RIP to the lad. But when a less than zero danger exists, what right do people have to choose it?
Google “second degree murder drunk driving” and you will find plenty of information.
And again the weasel words, the free floating qualitative words.
Here’s maybe where the defense could bring experts to vouch for psychological and consequent health benefit to those who didn’t die. It’s not like this is some neutral entity like an escalator.
“First, let’s kill all the lawyers.”—Shakespeare
Yes, second degree murder charges for drunk driving related deaths are routine. Search "Second degree murder drunk driving" and you will find plenty of information.
Yeah, civil wrongful death, sure. Maybe unintentional manslaughter, or reckless endangerment if there was actual recklessness, which I can’t tell from a quick read of the article.
From Kevin B’s link:
“When an individual commits an act of gross recklessness for which he must reasonably anticipate that death to another is likely to result, he exhibits that ‘wickedness of disposition; hardness of heart; cruelty; recklessness of consequences and a mind regardless of social duty’ which proved that there was at that time in him ‘that state or frame of mind termed malice’. “
Now, try to make the case that the designer of the slide, or the operator/owner for that matter, committed second degree murder.
None of them are legislators kids.
But again cars aren’t chiefly a means of recreation. They are chiefly public transport. If I undergo a recreational activity that looks the obvious danger, I might be the stereotypical redneck, but nobody is charged with my murder if I die.
And yet one would expect a bigger uproar there because this wasn’t a failure of obviously risky recreational facilities.
In all my years reading Freerepublic I don't think I've seen as much ignorance so confidently displayed by a poster in a thread as your postings in this thread. You really need to educate yourself before spouting off on subjects that you very obviously know nothing about.
“How many car crashes? Motorcycle wrecks? A fatal injury kills. This is bloody shirt waving” should have been quoted in my prior post.
Alas, with the improvement of engineering capabilities, one is expected to always use them to the maximum. It’s like doctors being charged with wrongful death for things that were tolerable shortcomings decades ago. And so it is; but when does the near-perfect become the enemy of the good? Did nobody gain, other than the operators, from this flawed amusement? What good is something daredevil when it becomes dareteddybear?
Okay, well good, I do think that is the appropriate charge.
““When an individual commits an act of gross recklessness for which he must reasonably anticipate that death to another is likely to result,”
ROTFLMAO!
The dude is on record saying hat the slide would kill someone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The murder charge is idiotic. Manslaughter makes sense.
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.