What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
83 Comments
- desistere, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51Here's a link to the radio show commentary during the competition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks-MBtZXpjY
Some of the terrible lines in hindsight:
"Can't you get like water poisoning and like die?"
"NO!"
"Maybe we should have researched this"
"I want to say that those people could get water intoxication and die."
"Yes, we're aware of that. They signed releases so we're not responsible. So it's okay."
"How come you guys didn't do it"
"Cause we don't want to die"
"Is anybody dying in there"
"We've got a guy that's just about to die"
"Make sure you get the release. Get the insurance on that." - mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+34"The radio station also didn't tell her that if she went to sleep in a furnace, she'd probably wake up crispy dead."
The idea that you die from drinking too much water isn't exactly self evident or well known. I'm a biologist, and even I didn't believe water intoxication was real until I had looked it up. I imagine most people think that the worst thing that can occur from drinking too much water is the same thing that happens if you eat too much (i.e. vomiting.) It's surprising the body doesn't have a mechanism to prevent it from potentially being fatal. - N1NJ4hippie, on 10/12/2007, -8/+35"She knew what the contest involved when she entered it, and had the option to stop or discontinue her participation in the contest at any time."
"Finally, and most importantly in our decision not to file involuntary manslaughter charges, there were no observable indications or symptoms that Jennifer Strange was experiencing a serious medical emergency"
So if she didn't have any observable indications or symptoms then more than likely she didn't feel anything wrong with herself and that is why she didn't discontinue her participation. - b3mus3d, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24sofaking - I'm digging you down. Not because I'm a fanboy. Because somebody tragically and unnecessarily died and all you can do is ***** whine about the gaming section of digg,
- bovester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22And it's more ***** up that the article doesn't even mention that. It makes the radio station look like they had didn't even know it could happen.
- N1NJ4hippie, on 10/12/2007, -7/+28First off morrislevy you are a dick.
Yes it is a shame to society when those responsible for this contest new full well the effects this stunt could have. A nurse called to tell them that someone could die from drinking to much water, they heard of the story about the college hazing where someone died from drinking to much water, and the worst thing they did was make jokes saying, "Hey has anybody died yet?" This is truly disgusting.
But morrislevy go on back to laughing at the death of a mother of two. It is really funny. - joper90, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19didn't a nurse phone up and say this was life threatening and a stupid idea... at which point they laughed and cut her off?
- Egoist, on 10/12/2007, -11/+27"How is there not basis for a criminal charge? The radio station didn't tell them that they could die from water intoxication."
Perhaps because the prosecutor believes in personal responsibility? - undergrace, on 10/12/2007, -9/+25Although the criminal charges were dropped, the *civil* lawsuit still stands... they're being sued for 1) Wrongful Death:Negligence 2) Survivor's Action: Negligence 3) Wrongful Death:Intentional/Reckless Conduct & 4) Survivor's Action:Intentional/Reckless Conduct. Hopefully the Strange family can get some justice with atleast one of those!
http://www.kcra.com/news/10842107/detail.html
http://www.kcra.com/download/2007/0125/10843736.pdf - merdiesel, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Although i think its ridiculous that no one is being held accountable for the incident, that piece of ***** radio station and anyone involved in putting together that contest will have to live with that ladies blood on their hands for the rest of their lives.
- s0nicfreak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Even if the possibility of water intoxication isn't common sense (although I think it's pretty sad that someone with kids wasn't aware of it, and the fact that too much of ANY one thing can kill you), she should of at least known that holding your urine in for too long is dangerous... As sad as this situation is, at least she didn't discover these things when one of her kids was sick and she kept telling it to drink water, or when one of her kids got a bladder/urinary tract/kidney infection because she wouldn't pull over during a long car ride.
Besides, a nurse called in and told them about the possibility for water intoxication, so even if the lady wasn't aware of it before the contest, she became aware of it during the contest. And even if that nurse hadn't called in... people should he held accountable for their own ignorance. - addictedidol, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13"Water Intoxication is something not well not whatsoever."
WTF? - aggies11, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"It's surprising the body doesn't have a mechanism to prevent it from potentially being fatal."
Unfortunately the body does, it's called urination. The reason she died is because the contest expressly prevented the body's mechanism for dealing with the condition. :(
Initially I was ready to say that this was just an unfortunate accident on both parts. It wasn't reasonable to expect people to know about water intoxification. However the clips from the radio clearly show that the radio station was aware, and didn't take it seriously. That shows negligence. And the negligence wasn't even in good faith as some of the comments show them being pretty crass about it.
Aggies - ericdano, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15These morons should never be allowed on the air again. Period. Listening to them, there is really no excuse. Hopefully they will be found guilty in the civil trial.
- swollentiki, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10A fraternity getting kicked off a college campus is not the same thing as criminal charges. What you are referring to is either hazing or the college didn't want a bad image because of that frat. And a college has every right to revoke a frats charter as it sees fit.
I agree, there should be no criminal charges because the WOMAN HAD RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER OWN ACTIONS!!! Doesn't matter how cold hearted the DJ's where, the woman could have stopped drinking the water at any time, or not even enter the contest. No one held a gun to her head and made her drink all that water. As sad as it made be, there really wasn't anything criminal about this.
However, the family of the woman could sue the DJ's and radio station in civil court, but I think that's about it. - dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21@sp3rm
"The radio station also didn't tell her that if she went to sleep in a furnace, she'd probably wake up crispy dead. STRANGE that she didn't have the common sense to stop drinking water when her body told her NO NO NO."
The lady in question made a mistake, and paid for it with her life. What is being discussed now is not whether she was stupid (I don't believe she was, a lot of people aren't aware of the dangers of this). What is being discussed is the culpability of the radio station. If the station unknowingly offered people a glass of poison, and asked these people to take a drink *without* taking adequate care, I think it'd be pretty stupid to then argue that the victims "should have had enough sense to not drink from the glass". There was an implicit assumption of trust by the victim, regardless of how misplaced it was - and an implicit responsibility by the station to check first. The victim paid a price. How about the station? - slimnickyy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11There is no (criminal) wrong for something like this. However, this does not mean the family of the deceased cannot bring an action in tort, as they (DJs) likely did have a duty of care, and were likely to be negligent in their actions.
- blamar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Uhhhh... no? Water intoxication != drowning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication - ldkronos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@kfxrcer
"I'm stupid"
You got that right. - thatsmyaibo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15What the radio station did was hold an idiotic contest that put people at harm for a prize. But nobody forced her to do this and she signed a waiver that acknowledged the consequences. It's not right to call the woman stupid for doing this because I am sure the chances of water intoxication is very slight, but nobody can be held accountable for her own actions. This country needs to stop awarding money to people for every untied knot in the system. This is a bigger problem now than it has ever been.
- kylesellers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@swoosh_bnd
"How is there not basis for a criminal charge?"
Because negligence is not criminal--it is a CIVIL offense. A civil offense which is pretty much an open and shut case. Even gross negligence is not criminal, unless very specific qualifications are met. Sorry if that disappoints you, but that's the law. - slimnickyy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@dopplerdog
Criminal law shouldn't sanction others for another's mistake. That's not how it works, nor should it ever. Again, the family still has a course of action, but no one is going to jail. - BooChihuahua, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6kfxrcer 1 hour ago
"shut up they don't deserve *****. if you're to stupid to not know when to quit then its your own damn fault. I'm stupid and even i know not to drink that much water."
You're right about one thing. You are definitely stupid. Retarded even! - zilch321, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4How many different situations can we apply this same type of scenario to? How often now can we do something of our own free will that later causes us harm that we can now blame someone else for? Its human nature to hate to be wrong and our government has enabled us not only to get away with being wrong but to punish others for our mistakes.
- 3rnesto, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10If anything they should pay for her kids to go to college.
- graywolf323, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4where's the proof she heard the caller? from what I heard it sounds like the radio hosts heard the caller but the people doing the contests were somewhere else completely, who knows if they were listening to the radio show or even paying attention while drinking all that water
- Toupee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It was really 'Hold Your Wee for a Wii.' But yeah, it's still dumb.
I actually just recently took a seminar with a guy named Jeff Brown. Real cool guy, he's been in radio for decades doing all kinds of different jobs, and he was about to show us some examples of bad promotions... and then this came along, and it was really the only example he needed. - Galaeron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6You guys seriously cannot have an opinion until you heard the radio show when they were talking about doing the contest. Note this is not the same day of the contest. Listeners actually called in and told them that it was a bad idea to do the contest because people could die from drinking to much water without release. The radio station's response to these calls? "It's ok, they sign a waiver." I wish these bastard would burn in hell, not even a thought towards human life, just ratings. Not to mention the name of the game was completely incorrect. "Wee for a Wii" mean you actually have to piss to get the wii, where in the contest, the first to piss lost.
Not only are these guy uncaring bastards, but they are also idiots. You should be able to find the clips on the web somewhere. My local radio station had the clips. - sgglynn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"The radio station didn't tell them that they could die from water intoxication. "
Really? I guess those liability waivers they made each contestant sign was just a piece of paper saying "water is fun, water is fun...." I could be wrong though, it has happened before - SkippyDoorknob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dishwasher noodle yucky ransom peel.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10For all of you saying that it's common sense, and she shouldnt have done it:
A lot of people aren't aware that too much water can kill you. And even if it IS common sense, that doesn't mean the radio station didn't do anything wrong since the people "Shouldn't have done it".. The radio station did something that risked the lives of those people, and from the audio that Desistere posted, you can hear that they even said "We should've researched this".. Then they just keep joking about how someone's dying, and how they don't care because they signed release forms. Well, someone DID die, and they all got fired and won't be able to get jobs on Radio ever again.. Release form didn't protect you from THAT, did it? - emjaymj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Egoist
What an ignorant comment. I'm all for personal responsibility, but this does not just fall under the domain of personal responsibility. Water is perceived by many to be pretty much the safest thing in the world to consume. If somebody were to be ignorant of the harmful effects of swallowing cyanide but somebody in a position of trust not only implied it was safe, but offered you a reward for doing it, they would be liable. This is no different. - emjaymj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2On a related note, I bet if this woman had Downs Syndrome or was otherwise mentally impaired, the sentiment would be much different. But this just results in ignorance of that fact that drinking so much water is dangerous. What if she was just REALLY stupid? Where do you draw the line? You morons crying personal responsibility only understand the concept on the most basic of levels, which shows that half of you are probably dumb enough to have done the same thing in her shoes.
What if the radio station had instead held a contest to see who was brave enough to jump 50 feet into a lake, but neglected to research the fact that the water was only 6 inches deep at that spot? It is reasonable for the average person to assume that the radio station or any company sponsoring a contest has done their homework to ensure the safety of the participants. - levyjl1988, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1She would have had better chances playing that Stackerz arcade game... (see other digg story)
- ldkronos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@kylesellers:
"Because negligence is not criminal--it is a CIVIL offense."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence - taraba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ Aggies
"Unfortunately the body does, it's called urination. "
No, that doesn't prevent water intoxication.
@ sgglynn
I think radio stations make you sign waivers for pretty much anything. It costs a little bit of ink and paper on their end and gives them some sort of legal stance to say that they can't be sued for anything that happened.
Still, I can't believe that people are saying that it was her fault. It's not like they were playing Russian Roulette where there was an obvious chance of death. In the audio recording of the show you can hear the people telling her that she'll throw up before anything bad happens. So, they convinced her that her life wasn't in danger in their own contest. - tehperil, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7All the "personal responsibility" fanboys here seem to have happily ignored that the radio station had a responsibility too. Oh well. Let's hope the civil case puts the radio station out of business.
- bubbazanetti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So the form she signed said "Danger, there is a chance you could die of water intoxication if you drink too much...sign on the dotted line if you agree to take full responsibility for your death"?
Remember the whole shouting "fire" in a crowded theater rule? If you do a prank that ends up killing people, you can be held responsible for their deaths.
You go to Disneyland and ride the coasters...if you die because of a poor design of the coaster isn't the maker of the coaster, and the owner operator responsible? You take your kids to the amusement park with the belief that as long as you follow the rules...you will not get killed.
This person went into this contest with the same belief...she trusted that the people operating the contest would conduct it in a safe manner...it was not.
The radio station took responsibility once they held this contest...there was a trust by the contestants that what they were doing was safe/legal/etc.
Now if the contest was "do something stupid" and the contestants did their own stunts without any prior knowledge or accountability by the radio station...then MAYBE they wouldn't be responsible.
I hope those of you that don't understand that the radio station was wrong, don't have kids of their own and use survival of the fittest to determine which child lives. - xynder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They can still be sued for damages. Remember when O.J. was found not guilty in the criminal case? He was found guilty, still, in the proceeding civil case? Why?
Because, in a civil case, the burden of proof is _MUCH LESS_. All they need is a preponderance (a majority) of the evidence, rather than proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." Of course, a preponderance is already well established if you sue someone after they've been found guilty in criminal court, but it's still possible to establish it even if they haven't. - CompanyMan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Jennifer Strange was an adult who was voluntarily participating in the radio contest," Scully's office said elsewhere in the statement. "She knew what the contest involved when she entered it, and had the option to stop or discontinue her participation in the contest at any time."
Sad but true.
Although with the Radio Show commentary making jest and talk about die if you hold your water ,that should hold up in Civil Court. I would hope that the family gets some closure in all this. And at the very least Nintendo should give the kids or the radio station the kids a Wii !! After all the mother died for it to get for her kids. At the very least they deserve the dam console...........
Than again maybe they or the family never want to hear the name Nintendo Wii ever again. And just after Xmas too !!
This is truly a sad story - mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Unfortunately the body does, it's called urination. The reason she died is because the contest expressly prevented the body's mechanism for dealing with the condition."
Actually, you can still get water intoxication no matter how much urine you shed. It has to do with depletion of body electrolytes and alteration of body chemistry. - reed311, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The woman was an adult who willingly engaged in this activity for a material possession. She could have stopped at any minute or not participated at all. This would set a dangerous precedant were there to be charges filed against someone in this case. No reasonable person, outside of a doctor, would have assumed that she was going to die from what happened during that contest. It was, simply, a tragic event; but she is, ultimately, 100% responsible for her actions.
- aaronm67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Xarou
Having a fraternities charter taken away is punishment, yes, but it's not a criminal charge. The radio station is still being sued. There is a big difference between criminal manslaughter charges and having a charter taken away.
EDIT: oops, what i said was already said. - sparkmonkeyz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know what I would do if I was the judge on this case. This is all so crazy, seeing that I was actually listening when she died, because I am in the Sacramento area. I don't listen to them anymore, especially since they didn't even give an apology or anything on air, until it blew up into big news. It didn't hit digg or any major newspaper until about 2 weeks later, which was when they finally started to act like it was a big deal.
- reed311, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The woman did this for a luxury item. I don't know how you can have sympathy for someone who was risking their life to attain an optional material possession.
- metalhead87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's complete *****. The contest never should have been held...at least not the way it was. They didn't research a damn thing....they just assumed, "It's water....nothing bad can happen." The woman, as a lot of people, probably never even heard of water intoxication. If the station knew of it, why not just make the contest to drink a couple things of water, instead of the insane amounts they had them drink? Why hold a contest that is potentially that dangerous? There is no sense in it.
- Galaeron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You ***** idiot, the call wasn't even the same day as the contest, there is no telling when or if she heard the call. Also I don't know about you, but I never heard of dieing from drinking to much water before this happened.
You're right, she shouldn't have her hand held through life. It doesn't mean she should not have been presented with the information and it also doesn't mean the radio station shouldn't have listened to concerned callers. And don't even try to use "she signed the waiver" excuse. The waiver more than likely says "In the result of an accident, this radio station will not be held accountable" It doesn't say "WARNING: YOU CAN DIE FROM DRINKING TO MUCH WATER".
Also learn to use the reply function. - taraba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But are you sure she really knew what the contest involved? The radio station's people told her (you can hear it in the audio recording) that she will get sick and throw up and then be fine. They fed her wrong information on which she based her decisions.
- civperc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Bad situation all around. Radio station should have never held such a contest, but then again, the woman should have known better, in my opinion. I feel terrible for her kids and the father :-
- BlowPurp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You put on a contest which is potentially fatal, and because you didn't know, it isn't negligence?
-
Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is