Jump to content

Person Dies at Schlitterbahn Kansas City


Recommended Posts

I've read about half of the indictment and it is a shame that something like this happened when it easily could have been avoidable.  I remember watching the Travel Channel show in question a couple months before the incident occurred and you could tell that Jeff Henry was almost like a mad scientist.  While inventiveness in and of itself is not a bad thing there are limits (and should be limits) to how far someone is willing to push the envelope.  Rides shouldn't be made just to get attention or get on a TV show, safety should be the key to any addition or attraction and if there are too many risks involved then changes should be made.  Jeff Pike, the designer of Mystic Timbers, at Coasterstock last year said coaster designing was like No Limits but with Limits.  There should be limits and companies owe it to the paying public, their employees, and themselves not to open something that is too dangerous to trust whether someone could live or die on it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rivertown Rider: I couldn't agree with your post more.

ASTM exists for a reason. The ASTM F24 committee exists and convenes regularly for a reason. The standards they produce are produced for a reason. Safety is paramount.

That Jeff Henry and Tyler Miles considered themselves above those standards shows an astounding arrogance and a sociopathic apathy for the value of human life. Where I am at with exploring the amusement industry and the people in it, I can't wrap my mind around how someone that reckless ever found themselves in the decision-making positions they found themselves in. The lack of accountability is staggering.

Coincidentally, they might get their wish of reshaping ASTM's standards: they've provided a case study of exactly what not to do. (I'm being serious--that's not me making light of this incident.)

Given that this is a public forum with a decently large audience, I think it needs to be said that for every Jeff Henry or Tyler Myles, there are a hundred people in this industry who are 100% at the other end of the spectrum when it comes to concern for safety. I've met industry folks who, in their younger years, were in proximity to safety-related incidents they had no control over. Decades later, they tear up telling the story of how it shaped their passion for keeping people safe. The people (for lack of a better word) behind Verruckt are not the norm.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm torn.  If you consider Beast completely safe then you've drank the Kool-Aid. It is not safe from fools, and one day a fool is going to spoil the fun for all of us. Or they'll change the ride entirely beforehand. One or the other is going to happen at Kings Island. Just wait. Park safety is also in the hands of the guests...like it or not. There is a reason the audio plays over and over, "keep hands and feet inside the ride"...because your limbs might be a goner on the helix. But isn't that part of the thrill?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bjcolglazier said:

I'm torn.  If you consider Beast completely safe then you've drank the Kool-Aid. It is not safe from fools, and one day a fool is going to spoil the fun for all of us. Or they'll change the ride entirely beforehand. One or the other is going to happen at Kings Island. Just wait. Park safety is also in the hands of the guests...like it or not. There is a reason the audio plays over and over, "keep hands and feet inside the ride"...because your limbs might be a goner on the helix. But isn't that part of the thrill?

The difference is that a rider will not be injured on The Beast unless they disobey posted safety instructions. Verruckt was capable of injuring, and did severely injure, riders who were following all safety instructions. I would reasonably expect that if you violate a posted safety instruction on any ride, you are putting yourself at risk of injury, hence why I keep my hands down on The Beast going into the helix. But if you obey all safety instructions, the reasonable expectation is that you are safe. Beast fulfills that expectation, Verruckt did not.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jcgoble3 said:

The difference is that a rider will not be injured on The Beast unless they disobey posted safety instructions. Verruckt was capable of injuring, and did severely injure, riders who were following all safety instructions. I would reasonably expect that if you violate a posted safety instruction on any ride, you are putting yourself at risk of injury, hence why I keep my hands down on The Beast going into the helix. But if you obey all safety instructions, the reasonable expectation is that you are safe. Beast fulfills that expectation, Verruckt did not.

The people on Son of Beast probably did obey all safety instructions didn't they? Someone had a swelled head and thought they could make changes to the ride without taking into consideration what it was doing to the integrity of other parts of the ride.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain Picard said:

The people on Son of Beast probably did obey all safety instructions didn't they? Someone had a swelled head and thought they could make changes to the ride without taking into consideration what it was doing to the integrity of other parts of the ride.

Many corners were cut on construction of Son of Beast. As a result, I'll bet that something on Son of Beast wasn't in compliance with proper standards. Paramount, or whatever company was in charge at that time (I can't keep that era straight) is to blame for that.

However, the post to which I was replying was attempting to compare a poorly designed and constructed ride that was inherently dangerous (Verruckt) to a well-designed ride where the only significant risk of injury is if riders don't obey the safety instructions (Beast), which is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Son of Beast is more comparable to the former than the latter because of the cut corners and rushed construction.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, Beast is a completely safe ride if you follow all posted rules including the expected health of the riders which is also posted. Son of Beast unfortunately had a somewhat similar timeline of events as this water slide and we see where Son of Beast is today because of that.

I would be surprised if they don't end up getting guilty charges for all 20 counts.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^launching off the slide and then installing a horizontal steel bar overhead at the same place where the launches happened. It is almost shocking no one was decapitated or otherwise amputated /earlier./

As was mentioned earlier about The Beast helix, in comparison: I got my "Beast Bite" a couple years ago, because my upraised arms were jostled somewhat sideways just before entering the tunnel. While it hurt, and answered my question about whether the wall was as close as it appeared or was just an illusion caused by speed, it also was very evident to me that the vertical walls at that point are purposefully installed in such a way as to prevent people from much worse injury if they ignore the safety rules. Rather than catching my hands, the smooth walls quickly directed them away back toward the car.  Anyone who was aware the boats on Verruct were launching into the air should have also been aware of the folly of installing something overhead that would so easily catch onto body parts and potentially cause much worse injuries than a hard landing onto the slide.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More often than not, I tend to look at incidents like these with rose colored glasses.

This is not one of those times.  The information in the indictment is downright terrifying.

One thing that comes to mind is the old Aztec Adventure at The Beach.  That ride is nowhere near as tall or fast, but whenever I ride it, I have to hold on to the hand holds on the last drop, because I will come out of the tube.  I can only imagine a ride many times larger has a much worse issue.

The sad thing, is this guys ego got in the way.  He was informed dozens of times that it was unsafe, but kept going.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading the indictment I was a little surprised murder wasn't one of the charges, because it certainly appears there is enough evidence that things went far beyond mere negligence leading to the death.

I noticed in that article about the arrest that Jeffrey Henry himself /is/ being charged with murder in addition to the other charges. The indictment posted here was against the other owner and the park, but it looks like the prosecutors must believe Jeffrey Henry's actions went far enough to warrant the added murder charge. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, silver2005 said:

As under-engineered as SOB was, it didn't have any glaring safety problems as Verruckt had, like, you know, launching off the slide.  SOB's problems were things that had to occur over time. 

I would bet there are people that was injured on that SOB that don't even know it. The amount of riders over the years it operated that could have had an injury would be staggering. The kind of injury you would have got from SOB can take 10 years to fully manifest. I have talked to one of the Doctors working on these injuries and you would be surprised how easy it can happen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I'm well aware of those incidents as well as the forensics report from the 2006 accident.  I did a whole article on SOB as a staff member for another coaster fan site (that's since been deleted), including what you just posted.  

IIRC, those kinds of incidents didn't really start occurring until about 2-3 years in.  I can't site anything because every website I used for information for that article is gone. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just so horrifying...I honestly think that not only the family but anyone who witnessed this awful tragedy deserves mega payout for their grievances. I just can't imagine seeing something like that, it would haunt you non-stop. The fact that this guy's ego was what motivated him just makes me so sick to my stomach. :(

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Magenta Lizard said:

After reading the indictment I was a little surprised murder wasn't one of the charges, because it certainly appears there is enough evidence that things went far beyond mere negligence leading to the death.

I noticed in that article about the arrest that Jeffrey Henry himself /is/ being charged with murder in addition to the other charges. The indictment posted here was against the other owner and the park, but it looks like the prosecutors must believe Jeffrey Henry's actions went far enough to warrant the added murder charge. 

I would guess the reason of not going after murder charge is due to them not wanting to over-charge to make sure they get guilty pleas. Plus for it to be murder it would of had to be pre-meditated, I think he knew very well that his negligence could possibly lead to death but I doubt that his intended to kill anyone, just a poor business man that is going to pay dearly for his mistakes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, there is no way they get a conviction for murder. Involuntary manslaughter would be the stiffest thing they could get a conviction on. If they actually take them to court on murder charges, the DA is trying to lose the case. 

 

Edit: After reading more, it appears that Kansas has a "reckless" second degree murder that this would fall under. Basically doing something that kills somebody where intent was not to kill, but was done with indifference to the value of human life. I still think they'd be better off going after involuntary manslaughter, but I can see them trying them under this law. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, many jurisdictions have the concept of "lesser included crimes", which are crimes for which all of the elements are also part of a more serious offense. In that case, the defendant can be charged with and tried on the more serious offense, but the jury has the option to convict on a lesser charge instead if they find that all of the requirements for that offense are met, but something (like intent) is missing from the offense that the defendant was actually charged with. One of the most common cases of this is murder, for which lesser degrees of murder and manslaughter are lesser included offenses.

So even if the prosecution is unable to prove second-degree murder in this case, they may still get a conviction on manslaughter.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The designer of the Kansas waterslide that killed a 10-year-old boy was taken into custody Monday evening:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/04/03/designer-waterslide-decapitated-10-year-old-boy-taken-into-custody/481295002/

This is really one of those times I'd like to hear some of the Interpretation of events that we used to enjoy on here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...