dont wii for a wii

[NjD00]

because nobody force her to do it, the radio will not be in trouble. So this can't be no homicide case at all. Once nobody didnt force her, or set somebody up to do it then the law will have to rule the radio station cast as not guilty. Thiss contest was of free will and more than one person was in this contest. So legal is not wrong because this wasn't an attempt to kill someone because anybody in the state could have entered. So this is hopeless because only one person died all because she didn't want to stop. All of this because of a wii and people not knowing their limits. I think that fat people should be the only ones to enter food and drinking contests.

haha who ARE you people? who said anything about homicide?? Do you think the alternate argument is that the radio station murdered her or what? Of course it wasn't an attempt to kill someone.

And, you're right, good thing only one person died because if only one DIES, then its not really important.

 

[Kristi1696]

Seeing how nobody knew how much water it would take to kill somebody I still dont see the radio station being at fault. Nobody held a gun to her head making her drink water. She did this at her own will. The radio station was merely having a friendly contest to see who can drink the most water without pissing. Nobody in their right mind can say that this is the radio stations fault. The lady died at home. Not at the the scene of the contest. So dont say they should have had medical team present. Thats pointless to say. Nobody else died and clearly she didnt drink more than the actual winner. Tough luck for her is all I can say.

Not true. A medical professional would have known that much water could kill. Heck, one even phoned in to warn them, but they chose not to heed that warning!

You're right, nobody held a gun to her head and forced her to drink... But then again, nobody informed her that it could kill her, so why shouldn't she have? After all, they tell you to drink at least 8 glasses of water a day, right? For the record, I just asked my colleague (a PhD) if she had heard that drinking too much water could kill you...she hadn't.

Sorry guys, the radio station is liable. They were running the contest, it was their duty to make sure that the participants knew the risks and to watch for signs of trouble. They failed. Don't get me wrong, I feel badly for them that they made this mistake and blew off the warnings...but I don't feel as badly for them as I do this woman's family.

 

[Lethal]

Ha, you seem to be negligent of the way the law can work. You don't need to literally shoot someone in the head to be responsible for their death. I wonder how educated you are to be so narrow minded.

You are a fool kid. Nobody made her do it. You cant blame anybody but yourself. You sound like one of those people that blame everyone else for your screw ups lol. Dont you have some homework to do kid?

This is my last post about it. Im not even trying to argue with a kid anyways.

 

[Kristi1696]

You are a fool kid. Nobody made her do it. You cant blame anybody but yourself. You sound like one of those people that blame everyone else for your screw ups lol. Dont you have some homework to do kid?

This is my last post about it. Im not even trying to argue with a kid anyways.

Considering you obviously have never looked at the definition of negligence, I thought that I would bring it to you...

(From Wikipedia)
A person is negligent in law, on the basis of four components. First, he or she must have had a duty of care towards a plaintiff. Second, he or she must have breached that duty. Third, there must be a factual causal connection between the breach and the harm. Fourth, the harm must not be too remote a consequence of the breach, known as legal causation.


Let's see:
1). Duty of care (duty to inform): CHECK! (that's why they had them sign the generic waiver in the first place)
2). Breach of duty: CHECK! (they did not inform contestants of risk, nor did they provide or seek medical attention)
3). Factual causation: CHECK! (contest led directly to death)
4). Significant consequence: CHECK! (death seems pretty significant)


So there you go....N-E-G-L-I-G-E-N-T!!!

 

[ZinGy]

Funny story.

 

[hotpotato78]

haha who ARE you people? who said anything about homicide?? Do you think the alternate argument is that the radio station murdered her or what? Of course it wasn't an attempt to kill someone.

And, you're right, good thing only one person died because if only one DIES, then its not really important.

No i didnt say that. it doesn't matter if 4 people died because it would be the same. this would come right back to saying, Nobody force them to do it. You said something earlier about no one have to do the actually murder or something like that. thats wat i was replying on. ... I just was telling you that can not be use in this case.... So if this isn't a homicide or some type of murder, what is the radio station going into court for. I hate to know that she died, I liked her motive for the contest But I hate to see people lose their job for something they had no control over. When you go to the bar, the bar tender can not tell you ok thats enough, only the caring bar tenders would say kid go home, you had enough. But this woman knew what she was doing. So there's is nothing to talk about other than, its sad she died and people lost there jobs... But i'm sure it was all laughter when everyone was drinking the water. If you had enough then stop. Only dumb people continue when they had enough.....Sorry but who over feed them selves.

 

[rwhit_2007]

Seeing how nobody knew how much water it would take to kill somebody I still dont see the radio station being at fault. Nobody held a gun to her head making her drink water. She did this at her own will. The radio station was merely having a friendly contest to see who can drink the most water without pissing. Nobody in their right mind can say that this is the radio stations fault. The lady died at home. Not at the the scene of the contest. So dont say they should have had medical team present. Thats pointless to say. Nobody else died and clearly she didnt drink more than the actual winner. Tough luck for her is all I can say.

Great point - why have a team of medical professions on site. All they would have done was recognized the symptoms and had her go to the hospital rather than home. The hospital would have put her on a saline drip and she would be alive today. But I see your point - why bother with that extra step - what a waste of time

 

[rwhit_2007]

No i didnt say that. it doesn't matter if 4 people died because it would be the same. this would come right back to saying, Nobody force them to do it. You said something earlier about no one have to do the actually murder or something like that. thats wat i was replying on. ... I just was telling you that can not be use in this case.... So if this isn't a homicide or some type of murder, what is the radio station going into court for. I hate to know that she died, I liked her motive for the contest But I hate to see people lose their job for something they had no control over. When you go to the bar, the bar tender can not tell you ok thats enough, only the caring bar tenders would say kid go home, you had enough. But this woman knew what she was doing. So there's is nothing to talk about other than, its sad she died and people lost there jobs... But i'm sure it was all laughter when everyone was drinking the water. If you had enough then stop. Only dumb people continue when they had enough.....Sorry but who over feed them selves.

Really - last I checked if they think you have had enough they can shut you off - and if they don't and you go out and kill someone, they can be liable.

 

[magnavol]

So if this isn't a homicide or some type of murder, what is the radio station going into court for.

The radio station was negligent in that they held a contest that directly led to the womans death. they failed to research the hazards of their contest and ignored warnings from people of the hazards. They failed to inform the contestants of these hazards even when they did hear of them.

The radio station and DJ's will not be charged with Murder, only negligently causing her death.

It is still up in the air whether any criminal charges will be levied, but the family WILL sue and win (or likely settle) a civil suit.

 

[hotpotato78]

Oh come on people!!!!!!!!!! how could you all be so naive. Like I said before our body tells us when we had to much or have not have enough. You dont need medical people to tell you when your full and she died home not by the radio station. Now enough of this medical nonsense. Anything could kill you so No one has to tell you that it will kill you. A pen is use for writing but I could kill some1 with a pen. water is for drinking or swimming in it etc, but you die in water. If you don't drink enough water your waste will be hard. So nobody have to tell you this because the human body is not invincible. So shut up but everyone shut up with this nobody knew that. If you didnt know, you didn't want to. Common sense could tell you, to much of anything could kill you in some way

 

[rwhit_2007]

When a radio show holds a contest where they know that by succeeding in the contest the contestant might die, and then has no medical staff on hand, there are going to be serious problems. This is a no brainer.

If they didn't know that death could result, then just as bad because they didn't do the research they should have.

 

[hotpotato78]

The radio station was negligent in that they held a contest that directly led to the womans death. they failed to research the hazards of their contest and ignored warnings from people of the hazards. They failed to inform the contestants of these hazards even when they did hear of them.

The radio station and DJ's will not be charged with Murder, only negligently causing her death.

It is still up in the air whether any criminal charges will be levied, but the family WILL sue and win (or likely settle) a civil suit.

I hear you what you saying because somebody earlier was making it seem like this would be murder and i was trying to let them know that can't be use... So bar tenders can be liable, i'll keep that in mind. I know its your money and you buy how much you want so i didn't think the bar tender could be liable if something was to happen.......... But how many times does someone have to punch you in the face before you duck or move? thats natural to duck hey. So if your not listening to your body it could lead to death. I just think that its the individual fault more than the radio station, because you would have to be senseless to say the radio station didnt say that would happen to me. look at our stomachs and look at 2 gallon bottle of water, and tell me how you think all of that is going to fit in us at one time, without something bad happening. thats all i'm saying.

 

[LyricistSoldier]

Considering you obviously have never looked at the definition of negligence, I thought that I would bring it to you...

(From Wikipedia)
A person is negligent in law, on the basis of four components. First, he or she must have had a duty of care towards a plaintiff. Second, he or she must have breached that duty. Third, there must be a factual causal connection between the breach and the harm. Fourth, the harm must not be too remote a consequence of the breach, known as legal causation.


Let's see:
1). Duty of care (duty to inform): CHECK! (that's why they had them sign the generic waiver in the first place)
2). Breach of duty: CHECK! (they did not inform contestants of risk, nor did they provide or seek medical attention)
3). Factual causation: CHECK! (contest led directly to death)
4). Significant consequence: CHECK! (death seems pretty significant)


So there you go....N-E-G-L-I-G-E-N-T!!!

ok smarty pants...
first off 4 is wrong it was stated you could die. COULD. your good at definitions. go look it up.

Second... negligence? no it isnt negligence if they didnt know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the participants would die. It was just stated they could die. What were they to do... stop the thing in the middle of the contest and say wait wait some random person that we cannot prove is of any medical knowledge said you could die from this? so dumb.

TAKE IT FOR WHAT IT IS ALREADY
a fluke accident it was water already

and how can a radio station be held accountable for the fact that it was her body makeup that led her die? how would they know that she would end up with that exact 1 in a hundred recepie for death? It was known she could have health issues because of it, just like u can if you get in a car? Sh*t happens. Live On. Dont ruin lives of families by suing a radio station to close it out in turn leaving people without jobs.

 

[Master Foot]

Those little bastards don't deserve ****. They were probably spoiled brats that didn't appreciate their mom anyway. :frown2:

 

[hotpotato78]

thank you LyricistSoldier! i know i was not tripping. Its sad she have to died but it was an accident. this will go know where if people was to sue. like i said before HOPELESS