I will start slack lining up mountains where mountain bikers bike on non
Linus, you are SO right! Thank you for your thoughts.
Get sued people.
He was riding his bike down a big grass hill weaving through trees. That was his
If you tie up a tightrope/slackline somewhere on public property, you have at
least a duty to stay nearby and warn off others who might be injured by your
stunt, rather than wandering away to indulge in other activities. Maybe the
cyclist is at fault for failing to obey campus rules concerning where to ride a
bicycle. It is not necessarily foreseeable that riding one's bike off the
path across a grassy area with trees should lead to death.All these
are facts that everyone is surmising, but which will need to be ascertained and
proven through the litigation process. The likelihood is that both sides share
come degree of fault, and that the University will propose a settlement far less
than the amount requested, and the family will accept it. The family is not
trying to ruin the lives of anyone, nor impose guilt on them. All involved
parties need to come before the court to present their evidence. I've seen
enough news stories that got the facts wrong that I'm in no rush to pass
judgment based on assumed, yet to be proven, facts.
ImpartialObserver, cjb.. It's pretty common practice to not ride your bike
on the grass. What is so hard about this concept for you guys to understand?
DanONo, the bike rider was most likely watching where he was going.
It wasn't reasonable that he would expect that someone would have put a non
visible wire where it could cut into him.
I would always tend to avoid a law suit of this type. I don't think that
money can ever compensate for such a loss. I think that money can lessen the
burden of incurred expenses - such as hospital; or unfortunately, burial
expenses. Beyond that, I think the money becomes a reminder that something
happened that was tragic.I am not aware of local codes, but it would
seem common sense that some sort of flags should have been attached to the line
-- something that made it more visible. When hauling loads that extend behind
my vehicle more than four feet, I am required to attach a flag, if nothing more,
than as a courtesy to those who are traveling behind me. I'm surprised
something like that was not done in this situation.
DanO- There is a big difference between specifically prohibiting bikes and
having a designated bike lane, so liability will depend on whether or not biking
was clearly prohibited. If it was clearly prohibited on Old Main Hill, then it
is unlikely that USU will be liable. If it wasn't clearly prohibited, then
there is a chance that they will be liable (no guarantee, but there is
definitely a chance). That is why each scenario focused on whether or not there
was signage and did not focus on the fact that he wasn't riding on the
designated bike path (which is on the south side of Old Main Hill).
I learned years ago when, as a bishop, I watched a family go after another
family in hopes of destroying them after they felt that they had been wronged.
The wronged family lost their friends because of the incessant talking badly
about the wrong-doers. They could not see how it was affecting the loving
Christ-like character they cherished until one day they woke up to what they had
done to themselves. After moving away, forgiving, and making a new start, they
came full circle and are well again. Forgiveness and moving ahead with firmness
in Christ will heal all wounds. Nothing will bring bad the loss of a loved one,
but Christ can bring peace, which is what they lack in this case. Chrst is the
ImpartialObserver, you missed the scenario where the cyclist wasn't riding
on the designated path shown in the document you referred to. It clearly shows
the bicycle path as being the paved walk running diagonally. According to the
USUPD Chief the student was riding down the grass through the trees.
@dtday2003"What good will suing the other students do? They
don't have any insurance that would cover their portion of $2 million. I
understand the grief of the family, but if they win then these 3 students'
financial lives are ruined."Actually, DT, your assumption about
insurance may be wrong. Most people don't realize it, but homeowners'
insurance may cover students temporarily living away from home for their acts
of liability. Of course, policy language may differ, but assuming these college
kids were not insured could be a big mistake for the attorney handling the claim
of the deceased biker.
I knew a family who lost a daughter in a tragic traffic accident. They sued and
won a large sum of money. Then they tragically lost the rest of their family to
the influence and consequence of having that money. There is no good that can
come from vengeance; from harm inflicted on others; from extravagance purchased
at such a price; from reducing the priceless memory of a lost loved to a worldly
"value."We collected a modest sum of life insurance when our
son was killed in an accident. We just couldn't bring ourselves to spend
that money, brought to us at such a price. Instead, we reserved it for the
support of several sibling missionaries in their missionary service.My advice is "let it go." You will eventually see the blessing of
doing so. You have a choice: your grieving process will result in peace or
guilt. Choose wisely.
I feel sorry for the family's loss... but that doesn't justify making
someone else's life miserable over an accident that was just as much their
fault as the others involved.
Before jumping to any conclusions, everyone should go to Google maps and take a
look at a street view of "Old Main Hill, Logan UT." Also, do a search
for "USU Bike Plan" on Google. You should be able to find a PDF that was
produced in 2011 that talks about a variety of biking-related issues. On page 7
you will see a campus bike map that shows bike paths and other biking
information. Pages 8-12 also provide relevant information. The key determinant
of who is at fault will depend the signage that is around Old Main Hill.Scenario 1: No signage that clearly stated that Old Main Hill was a no
biking zone (or a "dismount zone"). USU will likely/potentially be at
fault.Scenario 2: Old Main Hill had signage that clearly stated that
Old Main Hill was a "slow zone." USU will potentially be at fault.Scenario 3: Old Main Hill had signage that clearly stated that Old Main
Hill was a "dismount zone." USU will not (and should not) be at
fault.Determining what the "slack liners" should/should not
have done is hard. It really depends on what Old Main Hill was typically used
I find it noteworthy that the Slackline Assoc. Code of Conduct quoted by
Prodicus, nor the rest of the guidelines available online, make mention of any
recommended height for slacklines nor recommendations about bright colors to
increase visibility. If slacklines were florescent green or orange they would be
easier to see. The stock photo accompanying this article shows a slackline a few
inches off the ground. What is the purpose or advantage to installing one at
chest height? Wouldn't this subject those using the slackline to a higher
risk of injury when (not if) they fall? I realize that even if the slackline had
been only been a foot or so off the ground, it would still have probably thrown
Eric from the bike, perhaps causing different injuries, but it may have been
easier to see, especially if it were brightly colored. My heart goes out to the
Anderson, Bladen, Burger, and Bell families.
The way these things work, there will almost always be a negotiated settlement
between the parties. This may have not been a bike path, but it can be
determined if it was an area where bikes were commonly ridden. The trend is to
teach that no one is responsible for his/her actions.. that society or some
corporation is to blame.. but taking personal responsibility is what produces
considerate citizens and actually produces changes in behavior.
Slackliners only put the lines up in high-traffic areas where they can be seen.
If they had to do it off in a corner they wouldn't do it. When you put up
a hazard in a high-traffic area you have a responsibility to warn others. Would
a reasonable person walking or riding a bike assume that a rope/strap would be
stretched between two trees at chest height and not have any warning? No.
Should a reasonable person who stretches a rope/strap between two trees in a
high-traffic area assume that someone might walk, run or ride into it? Yes.
Accidents are preventable.
Why would a person be cycling at a high rate of speed where people are
congregated? fast enough to sever your windpipe?
Prodicus, how do we know he had control over his bike? In 2012, a cyclist going
down a hill killed a pedestrian in San Francisco. Facts are, as others had
pointed out, he was riding his bike where he shouldn't have been.
Slackliners should know a few basic things they can do to avoid endangering
people. Neglecting those is negligent. USU allowing slacklining in a public
space without basic precautions might also be negligent.Mostly these
rules go unwritten. But when slackliners form organizations they write them.UK Slackline Association:8. Slacklines should be attended at
all times. DO NOT leave any line unattended without the land owners permission
and take reasonable precautions to protect the slacklines from use from the
general public.9. The area in which you are slacklining and the equipment
you are using should be clearly visible to people. We would recommend the use of
wind dampeners/visual markers on slacklines, in particular when using longer
lines.Swiss Slackline Federation: b. Longlines and
jumplines should be clearly marked to ensure their visibility to every person in
the surrounding (the marks can also serve as wind-stoppers).c. In case
someone is walking on the line or if longlines are setup at low heights, they
must be attended at all time by a second slackliner. When no one is walking it,
if the longline is setup high enough it is not of danger for pedestrians and
TO: Red Corvette SACRAMENTO, CAThe bike rider was also negligent in that
he was riding at a high speed off the designated bike path. I'm sorry for
the loss to the family of the biker but the biker was at fault for riding his
bike in an area not designated or safe for biking... both were not thinking of
Everyone here seems to think it's perfectly OK to leave unattended death
traps around as long as the only things killed are cyclists, because cyclists
aren't people. The reaction is the same every time someone else's
irresponsible actions- usually a driver's - kill a cyclist. The prejudice
around here makes me sick.dtday2003, it's pretty absurd to say
that every time someone's negligent action kills somebody they should not
face any consequences because being "haunted by the death" absolves them
of any other responsibility.DanO, he could not have "just as
easily have hurt someone else." He was going fast but by all accounts not so
fast that he had no control over his bike. He would have been capable of
avoiding hitting any people or obstacles he was capable of seeing. But a
slackline at only a few inches from eye level presents a less than 1/16 inch
profile that is functionally invisible.
Nobody wants to tell grieving parents that their kid did something stupid, but
honestly, which is the worse assumption: that it's safe to set up a rope
between two trees on a grassy, tree-covered hill, or that it's safe to race
down that same hill on your bike? Obviously neither party anticipated the other,
but I hardly think that makes the surviving party liable for $2 million. I hope
they find a way to settle this one out of court.
Ambulance chasers in America believe that accidents are golden opportunities for
money. Just listen to the commercials played all day..."Have you been
injured in an accident?"Accidents happen. The kid was riding
his bike too fast in a tree filled area. He died. Nobody was at fault except
for him.If 2 million dollars is awarded for this case, then the
people of Utah end up paying this family for their kid's negligence. We
shouldn't even have to defend such a frivolous lawsuit. The lawyers who
filed this should be fined.I hope they put me on the jury.
I live in Logan. This was a tragedy for the community. I know none of the
parties involved but I DO know what it is like to lose a child. No one was
responsible but if they had been, it would have been easy for the anger I felt
to rain down on their head. It would have temporarily felt good but
it would not have been detrimental for me in the end.I'll say
as compassionately as I can that I don't think this is a wise course of
action. This will hamper, if not destroy the lives of three people who I truly
do not think could have possibly known the tragedy of what would happen. I
don't presume to know how these kids feel but my guess is they will be
haunted.He was not on a bike path.I do not see any more amount of
reckless behavior in the actions of setting up a line like that then riding your
bike off path on a steep hill at a speed that would sever a trachea on impact.
I mainly hope for personal peace and reconciliation comes to all
I think it's ridiculous. It was a freak incident. The students didn't
leave it tied up forever. They were still there and not done using it. I think
the students who put up the line are as responsible as the biker who did not and
could not stop in time. You don't walk above paved area. How would they
expect a bike to come between those trees? How would they know you couldn't
see the line in time even if it were over a path. All this will do is outlaw one
activity and perhaps require bikes only on paths? Heck, a lawyer might say
outlaw bikes on property all together. Perhaps the lines could be
altered to stand out more?
If the family is looking to enact some measure of justice upon the individuals
involved, I can personally attest that they have already undergone serious
emotional trauma. As a neighbor and personal friend to two of the three
individuals named, I can say that they simply need an opportunity to move on
with their lives, and that continuing to bring up this seriously traumatic
experience for all of them does serious harm. The feelings of guilt and horror
at the situation seriously messed up even just the day-to-day functionality of
these guys, and required some pretty major counseling.Yes, it was a
tragedy. And yes, we all want the family to feel at peace. But this method of
lashing out at the individuals involved and the University is only causing
further (and I think unnecessary) pain for all parties.
I am totally disheartened by the decision to take this action. I was so
impressed by the way you dealt with this tragedy. And by the follow up - to
knock our door and extend the hand of friendship in the wake of shared sorrows.
I would certainly hope that Utah State's insurance helped cover expenses.
That would be fair and expected, but to go to this excess is not right. And to
destroy three young men's lives, more so than the tragedy already has??
This just reopens the wounds that had appeared to be healed for you. Please
reconsider this action! I had looked up to you, and expect to do so again - but
this cannot be. You once asked, "Is it really possible that not forgiving is
worse than the sin itself?" I'm not sure what your opinion was at the
time, but in answering this question you will find answers. You deserve more
than 2 million dollars, peace is worth more - but the only way to obtain that
peace now and in the future is to abandon this action and rise above it.
The sad thing about this whole mess, is that there was an event the other week
or so to commemorate this young man who had lost his life, and now the family is
going to try and extort money from the boys who set up the rope, as well as the
University. The deceased was in violation of the school bicycle policy, by
taking the short cut down the hill, as a result his family is now trying to
claim that the school, and other students are fully responsible for his mistake.
No matter what type of accident, there will always be some lawyer who tells
grieving relatives that they might win millions of dollars (and of course, teh
lawyer will get about a third of that for his troubles).In my mind,
I cannot see that this is a case about justice, or punishing illegal conduct, or
preventing future illegal actions. I can only see greed exploiting sorrow.Accidents happen, and sometimes people do stupid, but not illegal
things, such as stringing slacklines, or riding bikes at unsafe speeds in
unauthorized areas. Not everything should result in lawsuits.
Like money is going to help......Greed won't solve your problems.
As a former Aggie, I can say that Old Main Hill is not set up to be biking at
that high of a speed in the first place. The paths on old main are WALKING
paths and are not set up for someone biking as such a high rate of speed.
USU's bicycle policy can be found online: "The use of bicycles,
skateboards, and in-line skates shall be allowed only as a means of
transportation on walkways and other vehicular travelways of USU. Anyone using a
bicycle, skateboard, or in-line skates on USU property shall give right of way
to any pedestrian and shall travel at a reasonable, safe, and prudent
speed."If the student who died was riding on the lawn and not a
"walkway" or "other vehicular travelway", and was not riding
"at a reasonable, safe, and prudent speed" this will be a tough case to
If the university is sued, ultimately the thousands of students who attend there
will be affected by the lost money. This was a terrible accident, and for
healing on all parts, forgiveness is required. $2 million dollars won't
fix the damage and won't change the past, nor will it heal the future. Now
the parents are extending the pain by trying to punish others. Also, if hitting
the rope immediately severed the trachea, the student must have been going
extremely fast in an area that had many people in it (i.e. setting up for an
outdoor movie, the rope walkers themselves).
I feel for the loss for the family of this biker. It was an unfortunate and
fluky event. However, i am disappointed that they are choosing to find someone
to blame and hoping to collect millions in the process. Unfortunately, this is
becoming the norm.
My understanding is that the rope was not across a bike path but rather between
two trees on Old Main Hill. The biker left the pavement to shortcut through the
trees and that is where the accident occurred. My heart goes out to the
families of all those involved. It would be great if the University shouldered
some of the financial responsibility to pay for the financial burden associated
with the funeral etc. However, I feel that the responsibility for safety while
riding a bicycle lies with the rider and the University should not be held
responsible to foresee all possible scenarios that could end in injury or death.
Was the rope across a bike path???
This is simple Civil Procedure. The students must be named, but won't have
to pay. The University will settle this out.
Motcrew, families end up paying the expenses for their deceased loved ones all
the time even when not at fault. How about the son who road his bike at high
speeds down a grassy hill in the middle of a potentially crowded park-like
setting? While it's very sad that he died, certainly he had some
responsibility for his own actions. He could have just as easily hurt someone
else. Do we always need someone else to tell us when something might not be safe
when common-sense should tell us that?
First thought is who is responsible if nobody has taken accountability.? Knowing
some background on aspects of life one would imagine an emergency room visit of
such detrimental damages to range at least $30,000 and up. Add in transportation
and funeral costs could at least $8,000 and up from there. If the school or
nobody else has taken care of these costs I would imagine next of kin getting
the bill. I for one do not think the family should have to fork out that money.
They weren't at fault. I heavily get the impression things were taken out
of context and the family holds not animosity toward the students at all. If the
property belongs to a school with regulations and no regulations have been made
in place for safety after such an easily preventable accident then I believe
accountability should be sought towards the school in the family's best
i agree with dtday2003besides how likely is it that the $2mil earned over
his lifetime would have been given to his parents. not likely!
What good will suing the other students do? They don't have any insurance
that would cover their portion of $2 million. I understand the grief of the
family, but if they win then these 3 students' financial lives are ruined.
I'm pretty sure they learned their lesson that day not to put up a
slackline where others might come in contact with it. I'm sure there is
not a day that goes by that this man's death doesn't haunt these
people. Adding financial stress on them does nothing to heal anyone. And if
the family ever receives their $2 million, will that heal them? We are too
quick to litigate and slow to forgive in this country. I hope the family can
find a way to forgive them.