Alligator killed 2-year-old boy in Disney World

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Shannow, wading in ankle deep water as a 2year child on vacation should not result in death. Some of you people are sick.


Not quite sure what you are targetting me here for or with, but as to the last point you make, the feeling is quite mutual.

I have never said that the kid deserved to die...not once.

First point, a 2 year old going on vacation WITH THEIR PARENTS should not result in death...absolutely...

Now as to the wading in water...as parents, YOU are responsible for the safety of your offspring when on vacation. You have your family in unfamiliar surroundings, YOU have an obligation to be aware of where you are taking them, and what the hazards are.

There are plenty of places I'd let my kids wade...probably not in a spot where the sign says no swimming, but here in Oz we have signposted crocodile spots, signposted areas of box jellyfish, and people still ignore the signs and go "wading"...go wading in a rock pool, and there's blue ringed octopus, all sorts of stuff that as a parent I have to be aware of and protect MY kids.

When they are on holidays, I have to be aware of exactly which 2 feet deep body of water they are wading in.

As I've mentioned previously, there were no signs about the potential for drowning...in Florida, 70 kids died through drowning in 2013...and as I also mentioned, it can happen in a couple of inches of water.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/alligator-took-boy-floridian-disney-resort-orlando-florida/

Quote:
Sheriff Demings said there are “No Swimming” signs posted at the lagoon. The child was the only person in the water at the time of the attack.

“This is Florida and it’s not uncommon for alligators to be in bodies of water,” he said in the news conference.


And also mentions that the parents ENTERED the water when the kid was taken. Not as has been posited in the water holding hands.

Clearly, the parents had left their kid AT RISK, of any number of potential injuries and lethalities, when something extremely uncommon (16 fatal attacks since 1997 sound "common", or "expected"), and tragic happened...would a sign with an alligator have stopped them ?
 
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Disney World needs to pay this poor family.
I have lost count on how many times you have said this. Why do you have an obsession with stupid people taking money from businesses? So they can have another kid and feed it to an alligator to get more money?
 
Last edited:
The parents are in the "stupid" category. Now the kid and Disney are paying the price for it. Fort Worth had an incident a few years ago at a fountain that had clear posted signs to stay out, but some people in the "stupid " category jumped in anyway and got sucked into the inlet screen and drowned. You can post all the signs and labels you want, but you can't stop "stupid" people from being "stupid".
 
I hardly think anyone was stupid. The kid was two and waded into likely 1' of water. I don't think Disney nor parents had any clue of potential risk and an unfortunate event happened.

As far as lawsuit that is simply part of doing business.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I think my point is strong enough to win in court of law if it ever comes to that.

The bottom line is the kid was not technically "swimming", and further more and most importantly, there was zero signage warning of alligator danger. If Disney had one ounce of confidence that their signs were good enough to warn people about alligators and prevent some kid from getting snagged off the shoreline, then they wouldn't be putting up new signs and fencing the day after this incident occurred. They would also willingly go to trial if they had to, and argue everything was done right on their end. Wait and see how this is settled out of court, which just shows they know they were negligent.

Big failure, which will cost Disney millions and probably a tarnished reputation for a few years. Whereas the parents of the kid will never ever forget this indecent.


Now you're just trolling. Thats really not the bottom line. But this is the Internet, so.. I outlined how the definition includes "Moving in the water using limbs, etc." On a human, that's legs. Intent to swim, could have swam.. They were where they should not have been. But if you are that dug in to your ridiculousness, then
Trolling.gif
away.

Go ahead, reply to the post and tell me how I'm wrong because of the word "SWIMMING." That's the problem... Yeah. I'll be here.

Next up: Have them explain why they put the kid in that situation to a jury. Or a judge. There is NO WAY they aren't liable. Swimming, wading, water skiing. Somehow, they chose to go IN THE WATER and *chomp* see watermelon pic. Not sure that would have happened if they... Oh.. I don't know.. Didn't go in. Its just cray-cray.

Let's recap:

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Shannow, wading in ankle deep water as a 2year child on vacation should not result in death. Some of you people are sick.


Not quite sure what you are targetting me here for or with, but as to the last point you make, the feeling is quite mutual.

I have never said that the kid deserved to die...not once.

First point, a 2 year old going on vacation WITH THEIR PARENTS should not result in death...absolutely...

Now as to the wading in water...as parents, YOU are responsible for the safety of your offspring when on vacation. You have your family in unfamiliar surroundings, YOU have an obligation to be aware of where you are taking them, and what the hazards are.

There are plenty of places I'd let my kids wade...probably not in a spot where the sign says no swimming, but here in Oz we have signposted crocodile spots, signposted areas of box jellyfish, and people still ignore the signs and go "wading"...go wading in a rock pool, and there's blue ringed octopus, all sorts of stuff that as a parent I have to be aware of and protect MY kids.

When they are on holidays, I have to be aware of exactly which 2 feet deep body of water they are wading in.

As I've mentioned previously, there were no signs about the potential for drowning...in Florida, 70 kids died through drowning in 2013...and as I also mentioned, it can happen in a couple of inches of water.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/alligator-took-boy-floridian-disney-resort-orlando-florida/

Quote:
Sheriff Demings said there are “No Swimming” signs posted at the lagoon. The child was the only person in the water at the time of the attack.

“This is Florida and it’s not uncommon for alligators to be in bodies of water,” he said in the news conference.


And also mentions that the parents ENTERED the water when the kid was taken. Not as has been posited in the water holding hands.

Clearly, the parents had left their kid AT RISK, of any number of potential injuries and lethalities, when something extremely uncommon (16 fatal attacks since 1997 sound "common", or "expected"), and tragic happened...would a sign with an alligator have stopped them ?


Originally Posted By: ZX11Rebel
The parents are in the "stupid" category. Now the kid and Disney are paying the price for it. Fort Worth had an incident a few years ago at a fountain that had clear posted signs to stay out, but some people in the "stupid " category jumped in anyway and got sucked into the inlet screen and drowned. You can post all the signs and labels you want, but you can't stop "stupid" people from being "stupid".
 
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Disney needs to pay millions. Enough is enough. Any lawyer with common sense would argue the same. You guys are arguing over nonsense.


Indeed. Fun!

$565Mil

..over negligent parenting.

35.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Gets back to my previous point on the Hierarchy of controls when risks are present.
Elimination
Substitution
Engineering
Administrative (signs (and the language(s) that they are written in are administrative, and therefore prone to fail)
Protective Equipment.

Building a fence is Engineering controls that work regardless of the ability of a toddler to read the sign that alligators may be lurking.

If (when) they are found liable, it won't be over ambiguity of the wording on the sign.

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Disney is parent company of ABC, ABC news has no reason to talk negatively about this accident in Disney World.

They said very clear "Lane was in ankle deep water right on the shore".

Ankle of a 2 years old boy is less than 2-3" above ground, and this is clearly not swimming by any definition.

The boy's family may or may not fill a lawsuit, but I can bet dinner for two that this case will never go to trial


Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR

You're keep pointing to the "No Swimming" sign, the 2 years old boy didn't swim in the lake he was wading with water at about knee deep.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
It was only ankle deep a few posts ago, now it's knee deep AND the parents may well have been in the water holding his hand. (ZeeoSix)

(may, might etc.)

Now you and ZeeOSix want the legal definition of swimming, including the various strokes and the Olympic rulebook incorporated into the sign that has to include brain eating bugs...

That's one BIG sign, and again, I'm sure that the toddler couldn't read a word of it.

And while we are hypothesizing that the parents were careful, with the kid in ankle/knee deep water, I'll add that a certain mentaility would reason "only for a few minutes", "hot day, and he needs to cool off", and "I'm keeping my eyes open", while they happily ignore THAT sign.

If you watch the linked video above the ABC News reporter said very clear at 50 second mark "Lane was in ankle deep water right on the shore"

Everybody knows that Disney is parent company of ABC and ABC News, ABC News has no reason to spread wrong information about this accident. Do you think ABC News try to gain something with wrong fact about the boy wading water before he was drag away by alligator ?

If other news agency posted this knee deep water wading I may suspected that they tried to harm Disney, but not ABC News.

Nobody here was there at the moment the kid was dragged away by alligator, no official police report with detail minute by minute what happen, we rely on news agencies and ABC News is as accurate as any, specially since they are owned by Disney, no reason for them to public wrong and negative facts about Disney.
 
Any of you want to take the bet($50 dinner for two) that this case will not go to trial, Disney will settle with the boy's family out of court ? I will donate the winning bet to a charity of your choice. If you win I will mail a check for your dinner.

Disney has no chance to be found not liable for the death of this boy in their property. Plus bad publicity is too much for Disney to not settle out of court.

Remember this is in America, some rather extreme cases such as a robber broke into a house at night try to rob the owner something, he got injured by the homeowner and caught by police later. He found guilty of robbery and spent some time in jail, but he sued the homeowner for his injuries and won. It was unbelievable, but it was true that owner of a property is liable for anyone in their property, at least it is in America.
 
Originally Posted By: Prune_Juice
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I think my point is strong enough to win in court of law if it ever comes to that.

The bottom line is the kid was not technically "swimming", and further more and most importantly, there was zero signage warning of alligator danger. If Disney had one ounce of confidence that their signs were good enough to warn people about alligators and prevent some kid from getting snagged off the shoreline, then they wouldn't be putting up new signs and fencing the day after this incident occurred. They would also willingly go to trial if they had to, and argue everything was done right on their end. Wait and see how this is settled out of court, which just shows they know they were negligent.

Big failure, which will cost Disney millions and probably a tarnished reputation for a few years. Whereas the parents of the kid will never ever forget this indecent.


Now you're just trolling. Thats really not the bottom line.


The bottom line is Disney was negligent, and I'm saying IF the case went to court (which it most likely won't due to private settlement), then it would easily be shown that Disney knew about alligators and that they did not take the proper action to at lease warn patrons that alligator were in the water. This family was from Nebraska, and it's possible that they didn't even know that alligators existed on Disney's property.

Seem people who live in or near Florida automatically assume everyone on Earth knows alligators are lurking the shoreline at a famous resort. Look at the photos of the resort where this happened. It would be like going out your resort to the beach 100 ft away and finding alligators along the shoreline, yet there was no warnings whatsoever warning anybody there that there could be danger right there. So call that 'trolling' if you want, but I think we all know who the real trollers are in this thread.
 
Originally Posted By: Prune_Juice
Next up: Have them explain why they put the kid in that situation to a jury. Or a judge. There is NO WAY they aren't liable. Swimming, wading, water skiing. Somehow, they chose to go IN THE WATER and *chomp* see watermelon pic. Not sure that would have happened if they... Oh.. I don't know.. Didn't go in. Its just cray-cray.


Let's put it this way. If Disney didn't want anyone sticking a toe into the water, then they should have had signs that said "STAY OUT OF THE WATER" ... not, "NO SWIMMING". There are a lot of people in the world who understand the official meaning of the work swimming, and wading angle deep a foot off shore is not swimming.

And for Disney to do the best they could, they should have had signs that said "STAY OF OF THE WATER - DANGEROUS ALLIGATORS PRESENT" ... guess what, they do NOW. Yet, they failed badly with their signage, and knowing there are alligators that the patrons can come into contact with by just walking out of the resort front door and walking a short distance to the shoreline means they need to be responsible for letting people know of the possible danger. Any court of law will think the same way.

So I can easily see why some parents let a 2 year old walk a foot or two into the water and wade up to his ankles or knees or whatever it was. The kid was not swimming so the parents thought nothing about letting a kid wade in 6 inches of water. And if there were signs warning of the alligator danger, there most certainly would not have let the kid anywhere near the water. If they did knowing of the alligator danger, then you can give them a Darwin Award, but I doubt that's the case here.
 
Disney is not going to pay a cent to the family....they will be awarded 0$ in damages. They ignored the signs telling them to stay out of the water, and they ignored them. The parents are directly responsible for the death of their son, THE PARENTS were guilty of GROSS NEGLIGENCE...
 
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Disney is not going to pay a cent to the family....they will be awarded 0$ in damages. They ignored the signs telling them to stay out of the water, and they ignored them. The parents are directly responsible for the death of their son, THE PARENTS were guilty of GROSS NEGLIGENCE...


Then you should take HTSS_TR's bet.

Why do you think the parents were never charged for negligence by the local law enforcement if it was so 'clear' they were.
 
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Disney is not going to pay a cent to the family....they will be awarded 0$ in damages. They ignored the signs telling them to stay out of the water, and they ignored them. The parents are directly responsible for the death of their son, THE PARENTS were guilty of GROSS NEGLIGENCE...


I'm going to guess that you aren't a parent, which is probably a good thing.
It would be amusing for you to speak your words to the faces of the parents involved or anyone else who was there to witness this horrible event. If you were smart, you'd stay on the ground the first time.
Contrary to what you've posted, Disney will cough up something in the mid seven figure range to make all of this go away.
No way on this earth that Disney will allow this to go to trial.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

Why do you think the parents were never charged for negligence by the local law enforcement if it was so 'clear' they were.


They haven't been charged.....YET....and even if the prosecutor did think it is the correct thing to do, the legal system can't come close to imposing any sentence that would match the death of the toddler...when it comes to the parents. The death of the son is probably considered the most extreme penalty one could expect.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27


I'm going to guess that you aren't a parent, which is probably a good thing.
It would be amusing for you to speak your words to the faces of the parents involved or anyone else who was there to witness this horrible event. If you were smart, you'd stay on the ground the first time.
Contrary to what you've posted, Disney will cough up something in the mid seven figure range to make all of this go away.
No way on this earth that Disney will allow this to go to trial.



I wouldn't be in this situation because I am a RESPONSIBLE
parent and take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILTY for my actions..
This situation would have NEVER happened to me....ever.

Disney won't pay one penny.....to the parents..if you missed it.

My guess is that a fund will be set up for injured children of some kind..That seems appropriate in this case.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top