Another day, and we Kansas City area residents are fortunate enough to get another insightful Kansas City Star story on Schlitterbahn — this one on how the Caleb Schwab wrongful death lawsuit might play out in the legal system.
I should also quickly add that these investigative stories The Star is producing are just as maddening as they are insightful.
For example, The Star’s first investigative story showed how Schlitterbahn officials were essentially free to build the world’s tallest water slide, which they called Verruckt, with little or no regulatory oversight or restrictions.
They didn’t even bother to hire a professional water-slide builder. The family that owns the water attractions — one in KCK and four in Texas — decided, heck, they’d just do it themselves. We know our business…Why spend a bunch of money hirings some outsiders to tell us what we already know?
And so, as things often play out when arrogance and unregulated capitalism are the driving forces, disaster struck two weeks ago Sunday when 10-year-old Caleb was decapitated after the raft he was riding in apparently left the water channel, his body colliding with “safety” netting and perhaps metal rods supporting the netting.
Today’s story, written and reported by Scott Canon and Steve Vockrodt, appears under the headline “Legal landscape may mean we never know where Verruckt went wrong.”
Canon and Vockrodt report that while experts will probably be able to determine exactly what went wrong that day, we the public may never know.
“Taking yet-to-be-filed lawsuits all the way to trial would be costly,” the story says, “so the most likely outcome figures to be settlements. Such deals typically come with agreements to keep any findings secret.”
Here are a couple of other potentially maddening elements that Canon and Vockrodt explored.
First, in the Schwab family’s wrongful death lawsuit, Schlitterbahn might off by paying as little as $250,000, the maximum amount provided for in Kansas law. (Inexplicably, the reporters didn’t state what the comparable limit is in Missouri, and I was not able to find the answer on a Google search.)
Second, the Kansas City, Kansas, Police Department is investigating to determine if a crime occurred, but a department spokesman told The Star that if they find no crime was committed (the likely result), the department would release the first page of its incident report and maybe a press release, but nothing more.
…From experience, I can tell you that 20 years or so ago, The Star would have pulled out all the stops to get the full report, when it was completed. The paper would not have hesitated to file a lawsuit; it might not have been successful, but it would have pushed it to the hilt and spared no expense.
The Star’s penchant for filing lawsuits in the interests of the public’s right to know dropped off precipitously, however, after Capital Cities/ABC sold the paper to the Walt Disney Co. in 1996. Subsequent owners KnightRidder and the McClatchy Co., which bought the paper in 2006, were equally averse to spend money on lawsuits to uncover relevant, concealed facts.
In the Schwab case, there is sufficient public interest that we may see The Star file a lawsuit. I hope they do; the public deserves it.
…On the other hand, while public interest is high, I’m afraid public outrage is not…Otherwise, how to explain throngs of people returning to Schlitterbahn when it reopened three days after Caleb’s awful death? I can’t help but think that 20 or 30 years ago, before society started becoming desensitized to lying, cheating, corner cutting and outrage itself, very few people would have darkened the door of that facility ever again.
The fact is, as I’ve pointed out in some recent posts, the public doesn’t seem to get outraged about much any more. General Motors covers up an ignition-switch problem that killed 124 people and injured 275 and what happens? GM sales go up several percentage points…Donald Trump paints Arizona Sen. John McCain, a former military POW, as “a loser” because he got captured, and many people just shrug.
Maybe it’s just the newspaperman in me, but I wonder if society’s increasing imperviousness has something to do with the demise of newspapers as the public’s primary source of information and the proliferation of less reputable, less reliable sources of information.
On second thought, maybe it’s not just the newspaperman in me. Maybe I’m on to something. I think as a society we’re paying a big price for the veritable monopoly of corporate journalism and the rolling back of the daily paper as a trusted enterprise dedicated to rooting out the truth and defending the public interest.
To me, the overall attitude of people today seems to be reflected in a great country song by Pam Tillis called “Land of the Living.”
The refrain foes like this:
Just hurry back
To the land of the living
Things have changed
Since you’ve been gone
The world is turning
In the land of the living
Take a deep breath
Life goes on… Life goes on
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Good column, Jim! You’re onto something–public apathy. Except, I suppose, for sports. It must be part of the new “selfie” way of life.
Fitz, check the judgment caps again–I think in Missouri, it is $2.5 million.
I raised all these points the STAR is finally reporting–10 days ago!!! On my two blogs, http://www.jocopost.com and http://www.kcmopost.com and on http://www.tonyskansascity.com
I have been unable to verify the amount, Tracy. You might be right. I got the $350,000 figure (which I deleted moments ago) from a website, which, I later realized, was reporting non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases.
In reviewing the Missouri statute on wrongful death lawsuits, I found this:
537.090. Damages to be determined by jury–factors to be considered
In every action brought under section 537.080 (wrongful death actions), the trier of the facts may give to the party or parties entitled thereto such damages as the trier of the facts may deem fair and just for the death and loss thus occasioned, having regard to the pecuniary losses suffered by reason of the death, funeral expenses, and the reasonable value of the services, consortium, companionship, comfort, instruction, guidance, counsel, training, and support of which those on whose behalf suit may be brought have been deprived by reason of such death and without limiting such damages to those which would be sustained prior to attaining the age of majority by the deceased or by the person suffering any such loss.
Unless I’m missing something, that would tend to indicate there is no monetary cap in Missouri. No wonder lawyers don’t want to try such cases in Kansas — and several other states that have very low limits.
Jim:
You are right. I was appalled that the entire park didn’t shut down for the rest of the year after that horrendous accident. And that people would line up to get in practically right afterward. Unbelievable!
Laura, no different than the gawkers who come out of the woodwork to view any tragedy whether it be an accident, or a natural disaster. And the ghouls at Schlitterbahn know that and know that they’re also going to need every dime they can raise to stay in business.
Fitz,
If you go to the web site of any personal injury law firm, you will find that most of them have a Verdict and Settlements link. That might give you an idea of what states are more plaintiff-friendly than others.
Hey, I forgot about you; you’re as close to a lawyer as a physician’s assistant is to a physician…Do you know if I’m right that there is no cap on “non-economic” damages in wrongful death cases in Missouri?
I think you’re right, Fitz. The firm I work for has won verdicts in Missouri worth millions of dollars. The biggest one was $108 million in a wrongful death case that the parents of Misty Mansfeld was awarded. This woman died after her husband, a lee’s summit police officer, his brother and sister, refused on religious grounds to take her to a hospital after she gave birth to a stillborn child. $8 million was in actual damages and $100 million was in punitive.
In 1999 while writing a column for The Star I requested information on how Kansas state grant money was being spent by certain local non profits located in Missouri. Information sent to the Star for me regarding the requests was declined and returned to the sender despite the fact that The Star often received, and accepted, letters addressed to me. I found out why when I actually filed suit in court and the same firm that represented The Star in FOI actions was on the other side arguing that I should not receive information that was to be used in a column for The Star.
We lost in court, the decision being that a Kansas court was not the appropriate forum for a case involving Kansas tax dollars, a Kansas resident, but records parked in Missouri. I raised $20,000.00 and we appealed the case all the way to KSSC and lost despite the attorney’s opinion that it should be an open and shut case for us. Needless to say, he was also stunned at seeing who opposing counsel was.
Along the way I notified the Sunshine Coalition in Kansas as to what I was doing and hear nothing back. The only press coverage was one paragraph, I believe by Scott Rothschild at the JW. As far as I know, even to this day, all you have to do to keep from handing out information on public records in Kansas is to simply park them in a different state and then move them anytime someone requests them in that state.
Alas, I used a downtown lawyer trying to avoid the appearance of politics, a movement attorney would have anticipated the hypocrisy (and probably been a hell of a lot cheaper).
Fitz, there was a point I was trying to make here regarding FOI laws, but it got lost in the haze and just went off topic. Feel free to delete.
Like I said a couple of days ago, sometimes we just let the commenters go their merry ways.
You’re a good man Charlie Brown and a credit to your profession.
Sorry for jumping in here late. But I’m working on a story about a woman who sued a government agency in Missouri and the jury awarded her a large sum of money. Because the state is appealing, the two parties are required to try to negotiate a settlement. If no settlement is reached, and her case is not overturned in the appeal, she still will not get the total amount the jury awarded her. That’s because state law says 50 percent of punitive damages must be paid into the Tort Victims Compensation Fund for legal services for low-income people. The law has been challenged unsuccessfully.
http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/53700006751.html
http://watchdog.org/25362/missouri-missouri-tort-victims-compensation-fund-pays-out-2-45-million/
I think punitive damages are out of the question in the Schwab case, Karen…
The KC Star story on which I based this post says:
Moreover, as a result of a 1993 Kansas Supreme Court’s interpretation of wrongful death laws, plaintiffs cannot attempt to recover punitive damages.
…Are you freelancing now?
KCTV5 is airing an investigative report tonight at 10, with an engineer who worked for or was contracted by Schlitterbahn. He told them early on, this was a catapult, and designed to fail, so they ignored him.
I can’t wait to see the report.
The Schlitterbahn people especially second generation middle child “Xtreme Narcissist” Jeff Henry, reminds me of Donald Trump. He will say or do anything.
He lied to the Travel Channel, when they told him they would give him first feature on Season Three of Extreme Sports, IF he had something great. He said, and I quote from multiple verified sources, “I’m building the world’s tallest water slide.” Then went home and informed the family, which had not heard of it, and he said something like, “I know, Mom and Dad. I just came up with it on the spot! To get the free publicity!!! It’ll be YUUUUUUUUGE! We gotta build it now, so we can be on that show!”
That tracks with The Star’s first investigative story, to which I linked in paragraph 3…Thanks for the heads up on the KCTV5 story.
Yes! TV5 ran a teaser at 6, on their bigger story at 10. The engineer is local, Stan Demster. He has a LinkedIn page.
Don’t think much new was learned from that “investigative report.” I do wonder what conversations have taken place with the employee(s) who loaded that raft. Even I knew it was trouble to put the lightest passenger in the front, and not distribute the weight better. What were they thinking? Or, more chillingly, not thinking?
I agree with you, Gayle…I’d give that story a “C” as an investigative piece.
It goes to show you the degree of difference that remains between a Kansas City Star investigation and a local TV investigation. The local TV people just don’t have the resources or know-how — generally — to pull together a first-class piece of investigative journalism. What this does is augment and verify what The Star has already done. The Star is miles ahead and, really, has no competition.
With TV, the emphasis is on the quick hit; the videos of riots and jacknifed trucks; the chronicling of one street crime after another; and, of course, the serious-minded, attractive mouthpieces that are reading the stories on the Teleprompter.
People, don’t give up your Star subscriptions, either print or digital.
Fitz, you homeboy. TV5’s story was vastly superior to the STAR’s “speculation” quotes from four folks who just gave a free quote. Including the gal from North Dakota State University. Go Bisons! Whereas TV5 had an insider come forward. They broke the news that a licensed engineer, local, who has WORKED FOR DISNEY, Stan Demster, WROTE Schlitterbahn in advance and told Schlitterbahn it was structurally flawed. The written notice is huge. It may even trigger the Doctrine of Notice of Attractive Nuisance. And thus greatly increase financial liability. Lawyers need to look this up.
I used that law once in Shawnee, to get the City to remove day lilies in a traffic island that completely obscured drivers trying to make a left turn. The City Manager at the time, the great Gary Montague, said, “Notice it up. I need one paragraph in writing, to document a danger, then we are required by law to address it or face huge financial consequences when an accident occurs, because it is a know danger.” The day lilies were removed the following week.
In the Schlitterbahn case, this engineer TRIED to save lives. They ignored him. After he documented his notice, he also offered to tell them, at no charge, what was wrong. By thus ignoring a KNOWN DANGER TO CHILDREN, other laws come into play.
Now that your 60-second commercial for The Star is over :-) any comment on the employee responsibility at the top of the ride?
Thank you, thank you…We will be registering people to vote and taking subscriptions for The Star outside the Brookside Market from 2 to 5 p.m. Friday…
The people at the top of the ride? The loaders? Those kids — which I’m sure they are — are just following instructions, I would presume. No blame there, as far as I can tell. I assume they had a system in place; it was just a flawed system. Don’t you think?
Just following instructions? No blame there?? It seems redundant to say they did NOT follow instructions. Otherwise, how could you explain the seating? Nobody told them how important it was to follow this “system” they had “in place.” So you have kids shuckin’ and jivin’ instead of doing their job, and then you have a dead little boy.
Frankly, Fitz, your cavalier attitude on the subject takes me aback a bit.
I think you misunderstand, Gayle…I’m pretty sure I read in one of the early Star stories that they purposely loaded light to heavy, front to back. If that is correct, they were loading as instructed.
Hold off, please, on the “cavalier attitude” assertion.
If they purposely loaded light to heavy it’s a wonder there weren’t more accidents. To the point of my comment above, how could they think that was the safest distribution of weight? I’m just surprised that people aren’t jumping up and down about that.
Gayle, agreed. And I DID jump up and down, 48 hours after the decapitation occured. On my two blogs, http://www.jocopost.com and http://www.kcmopost.com, I explained the physics of it, even tho I never took physics in high school. And now, having seen TV5’s excellent breaking news story, I am raising the question about Notice of Attractive Nuisance.
Let’s keep on this. Too many thrill seekers are dismissing us and making ad hominem attacks. And one can certainly expect the careless narcissists at Schlitterbahn to be part of that. They want to get back to making money.
The STAR has no budget and thus will not investigate with a licensed engineer. Nor will they pay for FOIA requests. Too busy paying the Phillipinos to badger subscribers trying to cancel. They even quiz the caller, “Do you have the authority to do this? (sonny??) Isn’t there someone else at home who can pay to keep your subscription active??” Appalling.