16 yr old skydiver accident

[AJ7298 0]

I don't know what is harder to listen to...the news of the accident or the reporters trying to describe it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547215/Gods-hand-caught-Family-girl-16-survived-3500-foot-skydive-tangled-parachute-say-miracle-shes-alive.html

[labrys 0]

AJ7298

I don't know what is harder to listen to...the news of the accident or the reporters trying to describe it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547215/Gods-hand-caught-Family-girl-16-survived-3500-foot-skydive-tangled-parachute-say-miracle-shes-alive.html

Owned by Remi #?

[MikeBIBOM 0]

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Joshua-Teen-in-ICU-After-Skydiving-Accident-242321911.html

How about listening to the family describe it?

Keeping in mind this is static line training:

Quote

"I wanted to be behind her, you know, in case something happened, I could be behind her. But that couldn’t happen because of the weight of the plane and the people, so I had to be first. She had to be last,” said her father, Joe Wethington.

Makenzie's father, Joe, said one side of the chute didn’t completely open. Joe claims the instructor didn’t leave the plane to help his daughter, because another jumper decided not to make the jump.

"And then the guy, the instructor, flew with the plane. He never came out of the plane because of the coward that wouldn’t come out ahead of her, that didn’t go. I shouldn’t say that, but the guy ahead of her didn’t go. He had to ride the plane down with him," the father said.

Dad apparently was on his first jump too. Not sure what he expected the instructor to do when she was under canopy.

[NWFlyer 2]

Already being discussed in incidents.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[Absolut 0]

Very sad story, hope she'll heal quickly and fully, but what a weird description. Did I just seriously hear that you have to press a button to deploy your reserve?

[freakflyer9999 1]

Absolut

Very sad story, hope she'll heal quickly and fully, but what a weird description. Did I just seriously hear that you have to press a button to deploy your reserve?

I've been trying to order one of those buttons all day. Nobody seems to know where to get one.

[swoopfly 5]

heard that her father is seeking a lawyer. Was curious as to thoughts on this as she is 16. I guess her parents would have signed consent but is there any reason this might not hold up aswell as a waiver signed by an 18 year old?

[dwhenline 0]

I dont believe the parents can sign away the rights of a minor to sue. She may have to wait until she is 18 but sue she will
If this happened in England than probably less chance of success.

[Doug_Davis 0]

swoopfly

heard that her father is seeking a lawyer. Was curious as to thoughts on this as she is 16. I guess her parents would have signed consent but is there any reason this might not hold up aswell as a waiver signed by an 18 year old?

IANAL but waiver or not if reports are true that the AAD was not functional then I dont think a waiver will matter in light of:

Quote

All students are to be equipped with the following
equipment until they have obtained a USPA A license:

d. a functional automatic activation device that
meets the manufacturer’s recommended service
schedule [FB]

[wmw999 2,121]

But if the AAD would not have activated under the circumstances, then it would be unlikely to be a significant point.

Another poster, either in this thread or one of the others, did some tests with the brand of AAD used by that DZ, and under student-type wingloadings, they did not fire. Tests as in actual jumps with the AAD and simulated malfunctions of this type.

Pretty good information for anyone to have.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Andy9o8 0]

There already is a thread about this in the Incidents forum.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4592999;page=unread#unread

[Andy9o8 0]

swoopfly

heard that her father is seeking a lawyer. Was curious as to thoughts on this as she is 16. I guess her parents would have signed consent but is there any reason this might not hold up aswell as a waiver signed by an 18 year old?

It will not hold up. See my post #29 in the Incidents thread.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4592911#4592911

[NWFlyer 2]

Andy9o8

There already is a thread about this in the Incidents forum.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4592999;page=unread#unread

I tried that already.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[jumpsracer 5]

Staples has those buttons!

[Andy9o8 0]

NWFlyer

***There already is a thread about this in the Incidents forum.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4592999;page=unread#unread

I tried that already.

[3mpire 0]

Quote

IANAL

I bet you get lots of dates

[Doug_Davis 0]

3mpire

Quote

IANAL

I bet you get lots of dates

(in case you didnt really know its internet speak for I Am Not A Lawyer)

[3mpire 0]

Quote

(in case you didnt really know its internet speak for I Am Not A Lawyer)

no need to explain, boss

[70sGuy 0]

wmw999

But if the AAD would not have activated under the circumstances, then it would be unlikely to be a significant point.

Another poster, either in this thread or one of the others, did some tests with the brand of AAD used by that DZ, and under student-type wing loadings, they did not fire. Tests as in actual jumps with the AAD and simulated malfunctions of this type.

I think this is how it works:

The defendant's lawyer calls said jumper as an expert witness and he testifies that an AAD would not have fired.

The plaintiff's lawyer hires a skydiver to go out and make one fire- under some circumstance. Worst case, his witness gets to argue it out with the plaintiff's lawyer on cross, babbling about wing loadings and canopy design.

And remember, it is not even a "legal fact" in the sense of a court trial, that there was nothing wrong with that canopy other than a fired brake, and/or that canopy actually performed the same as some other test jump scenario.

If he can't find that expert witness then he hires another expert witness to spend 2 hours testifying why the defence expert is wrong, arguing about wing loadings and whatever other technical trivia might be dredged up.

None of it has to make much sense, it just has to obfuscate any opinions on the matter, no matter how good anyone here thinks that opinion is.

And juries are smart enough to understand that expert witnesses can be paid to say anything. They just don't know enough to make a qualitative judgement in something as foreign and uncertain as skydiving.

The whuffo jury goes into deliberation, clueless as to what all that meant. But they can (hopefully) read, and the USPA BSR is something they can wrap their heads around.

I think the idea here is that the Ultimate Truth does not matter. Juries (or judges if no jury) have no better handle on the Ultimate Truth than anyone else. Especially in this sport. In most issues, there would not even be a *unanimous* consensus here among all the "expert witnesses" in this forum, and these are the best in the industry, right? And they aren't even being paid for their opinion here, which can change things

The BSRs, though, are an Ultimate Truth, by definition, in terms of what they say about AADs, as well as the fact that an AAD was or was not used.

Moral of the story: it is best to keep all the "paperwork" in order?