I don't see anything confusing with signs that say "No Swimming". Just me?

 

Been trying to figure that one out as well.

Also, from CNN,

 

"His father jumped in and tried to pry the gator's mouth open. His mother jumped in, too."

 

-This, to me, sounds like neither the boys father nor mother were with him at the time, hence having to "jump in." Could be reading into that a little to much though.

If parents were more than a foot or so away they would have never been able to grab the boy or alligator, it would have taken him too quickly. They had to be right next to him, IMO.

Is this swimming?

 

I don't think anyone would consider walking along a beach in ankle deep water swimming.

 

 

This is what I would consider Swimming if I had seen that sign

The main difference between your hypothetical road and Florida is that Florida is known for alligators. Is your road or area known for roads dropping off the face of mountains?

 

Sure, everybody around there knows that bridge has been out for years...and if someone was "dumb" enough not to know, then the sign should have told them.

The no swimming signs are telling guests it's not a safe place to be.

 

The article was very clear that it's going to be difficult to hold them liable. Not sure how you can read it and not come to that conclusion.

That article isn't a final ruling and is an opinion. Also spread throughout the article are words/phrases like "will depend", 'certainly does not provide blanket immunity", "probably", etc. I don't think this makes anything "very clear" but it does help to shed some light.

 

In my totally unqualified opinion I think Disney showing a movie and inviting families to the area will have a lot to do with it as well as where this kid actually was -- I've never saw anything clearly stating this.

Sure, everybody around there knows that bridge has been out for years...and if someone was "dumb" enough not to know, then the sign should have told them.

 

There's a difference between "everyone around there knowing" and a state being synonymous with gators.

 

And yes, the sign should be a dead give away.

From the Mom's Facebook pictures that child is definitely not swimming and if that's where the attack occurred a lawsuit will no doubt be brought upon Disney. I believe Disney will settle out-of-court as quick as they can.

 

To add to this, I think the bottom line is this is a tragedy. American Alligator attacks and even further deaths are extremely uncommon -- to the tune of under one death a year. Hopefully measures will be put into place to help prevent an incident occurring again.

That article isn't a final ruling and is an opinion. Also spread throughout the article are words/phrases like "will depend", 'certainly does not provide blanket immunity", "probably", etc. I don't think this makes anything "very clear" but it does help to shed some light.

 

In my totally unqualified opinion I think Disney showing a movie and inviting families to the area will have a lot to do with it as well as where this kid actually was -- I've never saw anything clearly stating this.

 

From the Mom's Facebook pictures that child is definitely not swimming and if that's where the attack occurred a lawsuit will no doubt be brought upon Disney. I believe Disney will settle out-of-court as quick as they can.

 

To add to this, I think the bottom line is this is a tragedy. American Alligator attacks and even further deaths are extremely uncommon -- to the tune of under one death a year. Hopefully measures will be put into place to help prevent an incident occurring again.

 

I read the article about liability. It was written from the perspective of a defense attorney. So, of course, he will think that Disney will not be liable. I work in the insurance industry and want to take a different look at the situation.

 

The insurance definition of negligence is the failure to act in the way a reasonable person would in the same situation. A civil court of law will determine what is reasonable warning for a hotel like this one. Should its warnings near water be like a golf course? Should it be more since children are involved? Should it be more since Disney shows beach scenes in their flyers and has the chairs ready for people to use very close to the water? I'm not an alligator expert (or a gorilla expert either). However, after reading Florida golf course stories, it seems that you not only shouldn't go into a lake with potential alligators to get your golf ball, you shouldn't go ANY WHERE NEAR the darn lake if your ball lands near one! In my mind, if you got alligators in your lake and your potential guests include very small children, you put a barrier around the lake and keep permanent separation (like a zoo). Not "pretty", I know, but the risk is not worth it. As @formerkywrestler says, Disney better settle before a civil court case. Otherwise, Disney risks not only losing and having to pay large "civil damages", but also risk being subject to "punitive damages" if a judge or jury wants to make an example out of Disney for historical case law.

I read the article about liability. It was written from the perspective of a defense attorney. So, of course, he will think that Disney will not be liable. I work in the insurance industry and want to take a different look at the situation.

 

The insurance definition of negligence is the failure to act in the way a reasonable person would in the same situation. A civil court of law will determine what is reasonable warning for a hotel like this one. Should its warnings near water be like a golf course? Should it be more since children are involved? Should it be more since Disney shows beach scenes in their flyers and has the chairs ready for people to use very close to the water? I'm not an alligator expert (or a gorilla expert either). However, after reading Florida golf course stories, it seems that you not only shouldn't go into a lake with potential alligators to get your golf ball, you shouldn't go ANY WHERE NEAR the darn lake if your ball lands near one! In my mind, if you got alligators in your lake and your potential guests include very small children, you put a barrier around the lake and keep permanent separation (like a zoo). Not "pretty", I know, but the risk is not worth it. As @formerkywrestler says, Disney better settle before a civil court case. Otherwise, Disney risks not only losing and having to pay large "civil damages", but also risk being subject to "punitive damages" if a judge or jury wants to make an example out of Disney for historical case law.

 

I think Disney will settle before it goes to court. But I assume a court case would be brought in FL. I am not sure you get 12 people to believe someone coming to FL doesn't realize they have gators in their lakes. May not make a difference in court but I think a jury of Floridians would side with Disney in that point.

Being my cynical self, would not be at all surprised if the parents were not paying attention to the child(drinking,partying,etc.), he got into the water and drowned and they are blaming alligators. How does a alligator take a child that age and he still remains,"intact". Very fishy, not buying it.

I had a similar thought but I think I read that there were multiple witnesses? Maybe?

^^^^

No way, the child would have bite marks that would show the gator had a hold of it. I'm sure the dad also has cuts and bites consistent witha gator or we would already know by the police and I bet my house Disney is making sure what happened is right because they are going to be out A LOT.

 

A gator drowns it prey and then leaves it under brush or limbs and then comes back to eat it. That's why the boy wasn't eaten yet.

I'm sure the gator would have came back.

 

IMO the only thing the parents are at fault is being naive enought to think they were safe at a very expensive Disney Resort with water like the lagoon around.

Even myself would like to think it would be OK to walk around or wade the lake like my kids wade in the ocean or creek.

It's a freaking sad tragedy and in the end both Dianey and the family are losers with the family having the biggest loss.

Being my cynical self, would not be at all surprised if the parents were not paying attention to the child(drinking,partying,etc.), he got into the water and drowned and they are blaming alligators. How does a alligator take a child that age and he still remains,"intact". Very fishy, not buying it.

 

There were witnesses who saw the gator take the boy under.

Don't be so cynical. It's bad for your health.

I've tried to stay out of this, but, I can't. As many of you know, I work at a resort. Granted, it's not a Disney operation, nor do we have beaches. But we do have plenty of activities/features at the resort. We have 3000 acres, and miles and miles of hiking/biking trails. The resort abuts the Hoosier National Forest. So, there is a ton of wildlife around the resort. While it's unusual that anything more dangerous than a deer comes out of the woods, it's not outside the realm of possibility.

 

As small as our operation is, we have an on-site risk management office, on-site legal counsel, and we have a compliance officer. We are constantly evaluating the resort and our risk in any number of areas. Activities and events and grounds and buildings...everything is constantly being evaluated and procedures put in place/measures taken to minimize risk, not only our risk, but risk to our guests.

 

Disney is hundreds of times bigger than our little resort. I am confident that they were not negligent. And I hate the vehemence by which everyone jumps to assume Disney should be held accountable. I think a lot of that is because it's a 2 year old child. We have full grown adults who fall off cruise ships and we don't have outraged people vehemently declaring the cruise line responsible. Heck, we don't even have threads about those.

 

Anyway....attractions, destinations and such are in a pickle. You (John Q Consumer) demand "authenticity", "experiences", etc. You want everything to be perfectly magical. You want to suspend reality and you expect your resort/hotel/attraction of choice delivers that. You don't want to see ugly fences. You want the language of signage to be friendly, and not too commanding. Yet, over and over I've seen guests get themselves into situations because they didn't use common sense.

 

I would fight this to the death, if I were Disney. There is only so much an establishment can do to control the environment. I'm not sure even what the real story is, with regard to the child being snatched. Only recently has the story changed and all of a sudden the child was NOT in the water...but they (the parents) told first responders initially that he was? I think there's a measure of CYA there, myself.

 

Anyway....Sometimes it's crappy, but life happens. I've been told when a 2 year old finds a loaded gun in the console of a vehicle and shoots themselves the parents are suffering so they shouldn't be arrested for negligence. I'll just use that and apply it here. As a person "in the biz", I'm defending the resort.

@rockmom thank you for that assessment.

 

At your resort you have hiking and biking trails...if a guest were chased by a bear, I think your resort may decide to close those trails until it was safe and you were as sure as possible the bear was out of the area. Would you put up "Trail Closed" signs or "Trail Closed due to Bear Activity" signs...one may keep guest off the trail and one definitely would keep guest off the trail.

 

My ONLY issue with Disney is that they had an alligator encounter just a few weeks ago in this same area but only had up tepid "No Swimming Signs." Guest may have thought that wading was OK, or the signs were up because no Life Guard was on Duty or any of a number of reasons. But putting an Alligator Warning on the beach would have clearly defined the warning and people probably would have stayed completely out of and away from the water.

 

Yes I know it's Florida and there are Alligators everywhere, but I think that once you check into a Disney resort, running into a wild Gator is the furthest thing from your mind.