Patterico's Pontifications

1/17/2007

DJs Joked About Contestants Dying of Water Intoxication; Sheriff Investigates; Family Plans to Sue

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:11 pm



Homicide detectives in Sacramento are looking into that death I told you about last night, of the woman who drank too much water and died of water intoxication — part of a radio contest to win a $250 game console. Meanwhile, her family is planning to sue:

On Wednesday, attorneys for the Strange family said they planned to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the radio station on behalf of her husband and three children. Details of the suit were to be announced Thursday.

And in a macabre twist, according to this L.A. Times story, the DJs were warned of the dangers of the contest, and joked about it in that oh-so-funny way that some idiot radio DJs have — an oh-so-funny way that is likely to come back to haunt them:

During the show, a listener calls in to warn the DJs that the stunt is dangerous and says someone could die.

”Yeah, we’re aware of that,” one of them says.

Another DJ laughs: ”Yeah, they signed releases, so we’re not responsible. We’re OK.”

”And if they get to the point where they have to throw up, then they’re going to throw up, and they’re out of the contest before they die, so that’s good, right?” another one says.

There are radio DJs I have heard whom I can picture saying this. In my head, I can hear the words coming out of their mouth.

‘Hey Carter, is anybody dying in there?” a DJ asks during the show. ”We got a guy who’s just about to die,” the other responds, and all the DJs laugh.

”I like that we laugh about that,” another says.

”Make sure he signs the release. … Get the insurance on that, please.”

The spookiest part is that they joked about this to the woman who died:

Several hours into the contest, Strange was interviewed on the air and complained that her head hurt.

”They keep telling me that it’s the water. That it will tell my head to hurt and then it will make me puke,” she says.

”Who told you that? The intern?” a DJ asks.

”Yeah,” Strange responds. ”It hurts, but it makes you feel lightheaded.”

”This is what it feels like when you’re drowning,” one of the DJs says. ”There’s a lot of water inside you.”

I sense this will make for an interesting discussion. Comments are open.

30 Responses to “DJs Joked About Contestants Dying of Water Intoxication; Sheriff Investigates; Family Plans to Sue”

  1. Sorry for being off-topic: This nearly makes me cry – the conviction and imprisonment of these US Border Agents: Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean.

    These two border agents responded to something and shot a drug runner in the butt escaping back into Mexico. Drug runners often carry powerful automatic weapons, and these situations are dicey and unpredictable. The US government went into Mexico, found this drug runner, then offered him immunity to come back to the US and testify in the US against our border agents. The drug runner was caught smuggling drugs again 5 months later, but was never charged because that would have affected Alberto Gonzales’ case against our Border Agents. The trial of the Border Agents was held in a border town, with a ridiculous jury taken from a community especially antagonistic to border agents. The drug runner is now suing the US for $5 million. The agents have families including a baby on the way, and have been sentenced to 10 to 12 years in prison.

    These two Border Agents are on our side! For crying out loud, what is wrong with Tony Snow, Alberto Gonzales, and Mr. Bush?! Compounding the problem is how many ILLEGAL ALIENS are in our prisons who have access to these two ON OUR SIDE, putting the two in grave danger. Sure, some official has said he would do a heck of a job isolating these two from the general prison population. Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean must be pardoned now.

    I voted for Bush and Bush Sr. way too many times; Snow/Gonzales really they need to follow through on this most basic of issues. Tony Snow and Alberto Gonzales must resign; they are totally not serving the US, or even the people who voted for Bush.

    [Wesson: I have already drafted a post on this which I will publish around midnight. You’ll have every opportunity to comment on it then. I don’t know the facts of the case, but I compare the U.S. Attorney’s fact sheet to Debra Saunders’ columns on the issue. — P]

    Wesson (c20d28)

  2. Jesus wept.

    Have Americans gotten that stupid?

    Robert (8542ed)

  3. This radio station must have the dumbest lawyers in history. Too bad Nancy Grace wasn’t there to call her a bad mother as she keeled over. i’d be curious to know whether a release also might “absolve” a broadcast station of responsibility for the consequences of, say, people voluntarily playing “Russian Roulette for an X-Box Live on the Air,” or “Let’s Run Through The Cambodian Mine Field for a Date With Britney.” (It won’t be long … my sense is that as horrible and macabre and despicable and amoral as the whole things is, it’s damn entertaining, especially to reread/rehear it all in retrospect, the woman speaking about feeling ill just before she dies and so forth. and if it’s entertaining … well, you know the rest. woe is us.)

    anyway, i see this one as lining up along pretty conventional lines of “even idiots have personal responsibility” versus “we must criminalize the act of taking advantage of idiots.” in this case, tho, i don’t think civil society is yet ready to absolve people who giggle as a schmuck croaks of stupidity, grand guignol fever notwithstanding. and if there were docs around who did nothing — well they’re toast for obvious reasons.

    lbo (f86e7d)

  4. you voted too many times for bush sr. and jr.? go drink two gallons of water and tomorrow it won’t bother you anymore.

    what is the duty of care of a radio station toward adult contestants who have signed releases? no duty, no tort. society evolves under pressure from liability; no more water drinking contests, that should eliminate all forms of competitive eating/drinking. that little japanese fella who wins the hotdog eating contest every year will have to retire; hotdog intoxication liability is a too frightful specter. no more beer bowl at my undergraduate institution (how many beers you can down in an hour without puking); i was a strong contender but never the champ.
    dj’s get _paid_ to be provocative and insensitive. people driving to work in the morning want their radios to generate laughs. i might be embarrassed to disclose some of the funny shit i’ve laughed at on the radio.

    assistant devil's advocate (827970)

  5. I wouldn’t have trouble convicting these guys. If this isn’t manslaughter, the law needs changing.

    PrestoPundit (a2369b)

  6. On the Sacramento TV news, they show the contest winner holding up the Wii box, saying she’s never felt as sick in her life. This DJ’s are criminally stupid.

    Wesson (c20d28)

  7. Btw, Wesson, I don’t know if you’re going to be thrilled with my take on the Border Patrol shooting case. But we can discuss it on that thread.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  8. If memory serves me correctly, a waiver may not necessarily protect the station if they are found negligent. Plus I seem to remember that in the United States one cannot sign away their rights in a waiver under many circumstances. In some news reports about this incident it was mentioned that the contestants were never informed of the risks involved in ingesting that much water nor did the waivers indicate this risk. If that is so, the station’s management and dj’s may be held responsible in a criminal court as well as a civil court. I could see charges of criminal negligence (or whatever that jurisdiction’s equivalent is) being brought upon individuals involved. At the very least, I forsee the station, the station owner, the station management and the station’s morning show jocks all being names in a civil suit collectively. The radio careers of the morning show jocks are probably over. And they will have to live with the fact that they not only aided in the death of the woman but they were so callous as to joke about dying by drinking too much water.

    Carl (4b6f17)

  9. Speaking based on publicly available information, so this could all be wrong depending on how actual facts conflict:

    No one wins a brilliancy prize here. But the person who drank the water ended up dead. The idiots who encouraged her aren’t. And I think the radio station is more morally culpable; an uninformed person would gain a sense of safety that they wouldn’t have you do this if it weren’t safe.

    The DJ’s aren’t hired for their genius; some producer or something (Justin knows the workings better, I’m sure) should have stopped it before it began. When they got the call, they should have stopped it.

    Without knowing all the details, it’s hard to say on criminal liability; this might rise to the level of an involuntary manslaughter. The transcript Pat cites above is… bad for the DJ’s.

    As to the civil issues, I expect the station will settle. If I were running a radio station, I’d want to settle so long as the plaintiff were remotely reasonable; I don’t see any reason to conclude that her family won’t be. (I’m not looking at the release, but the chance that the case will get defensed on a motion for summary judgment strikes me as possible, but unlikely; once it gets to a jury, it’s the end of the world for the station.)

    This is really tragic for the woman’s family. One hopes the DJ’s and other individuals responsible will apologize to them. They ought to. I don’t care what their lawyers say. They should do the right thing now that they’ve done the wrong thing. You’ve got to decide whether you’re sole concern is you, or if you have a concern about doing the right thing; what you do here determines what kind of person you are.

    –JRM

    JRM (355c21)

  10. It’s cruel, but the DJs are not liable. Darwin award…

    TCO (fb11cc)

  11. Except for proving the existence of a specific warning, I’d think that the transcript would help the DJs more than hurt them. The fact that the DJs joked about somebody dying seems to prove that they didn’t believe there was any real danger. They were mocking the idea that someone could die from drinking water.

    Doc Rampage (57b67a)

  12. Unless a judge throws the case out before it gets started the family will win big.

    davod (5fdaa2)

  13. The fact that the DJs joked about somebody dying seems to prove that they didn’t believe there was any real danger.

    I wouldn’t be lenient on the station even if they had been ignorant of the risks, because when you put together a contest involving people doing something odd and extreme to their bodies it is obvious you should consult a medical expert, and certainly after contestants look ill you should have them go to a doctor.

    When I first heard this story I assumed the DJs were ignorant of the risks that are easy to find on Google. It’s turning out that wasn’t the case, which is important if there are criminal charges.

    The linked article mentions the DJs were aware of a college student dying during hazing in similar fashion (that was a more clear-cut criminal case, due to the coercion). Also, one of the DJs asked on air if they could get “water poisioning” and die. Put that with the nurse calling in to warn them and the callous attitude they took when contestants got so sick they actually looked like they were dying, and it’s hard to find any sympathy for the station.

    The contestants didn’t know about water intoxication and had no idea they potentially could die. It was presented as if it would just be funny to see if they could keep from peeing. I also saw an interview with a guy who had won a pool table in a similar contest at another station and wound up in an emergency room afterwards. He, too, didn’t know that would happen to him, let alone that he could’ve died.

    It’s cruel, but the DJs are not liable.

    So if a station comes up with a contest that involves health risks that lay people will not be aware of, it’s okay for the station to hold the contest and whoever dies…so be it?

    You’re always gonna be able to find people who will jump at the chance to be on the air doing weird things. Are you saying you’d be okay with seeing people die on the air on a regular basis whenever slick media exploiters get them to do something crazy that they don’t know is dangerous?

    I’ve seen comments elsewhere (at Ace’s) that have the attitude that the waiver should absolve all liability. Apprently people think waivers cover everything and all circumstances, which is not true.

    How much waivers are enforced varies state to state, but I can’t imagine this one being enforced for these circumstances anywhere. Waivers generally have to be well worded and inform someone of the inherent risks. None of these contestants were aware of water intoxication and what that can do, and it looks like the station actually made sure to keep this information from them.

    One of the contestants even states that the waiver “dealt solely with publicity, not health and safety.”

    In any case, when we’re talking about whether the station was criminally negligence in a way that resulted in death, the station must realize they’re screwed, should try and settle, should feel lucky more people didn’t die, and should worry about criminal charges.

    The Sacrmento Bee has this to say about that:

    To prove involuntary manslaughter, California jury instructions say there must be evidence of a death in the course of actions that involve a high degree of risk of death — or harm — without due caution, according to legal texts.

    The elements of a crime seem to be in place, said Sacramento attorney Kathy Druliner, who was previously a prosecutor.

    “If I was a prosecutor I would file that in a New York second,” she said. “Those (disc jockeys) need to be held accountable.”

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  14. When we’re talking about whether they’re criminally negligent, I meant. I don’t know if they are guilty of a crime, but that the waiver will be worthless in the lawsuit.

    Here’s the link to the article, which I forgot to include.

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  15. How sad it is P. that you assume the worst possible intent in people. I don’t really believe that any of them would joke about someone’s death that way. They just didn’t take it seriously since water is not normally deemed a poison.

    Psyberian, the Infuriating (bfbfee)

  16. Still unclear to me if the DJ’s, etc. understood there was a threat and were callous, or joked in scoff- as did the teacher referred to in the post on the previous thread. As they seemed unconcerned when she complained of a headache, they must have been either very irresponsible, still clueless about the risk, or putting on a cruel front to deny culpability.

    I think a civil remedy to the family is probably more important than criminal action, from what’s been discussd so far, unless there has been a history of negligent behavior, that’s my 2 cents.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  17. All of that is not to say I don’t think the woman used poor judgment before and after. I don’t understand why so many people jump at the chance to get on the air in order to say and do all sorts of things that can harm them or haunt them. It’s sometimes even disturbing to watch American Idol auditions, where you’re left thinking, “Damn, will this girl ever stop being made fun of….”

    And the woman probably would’ve lived had she just gone to a doctor. But there’s lots of people who will do anything but go to a doctor if they aren’t convinced they’re dying.

    When I was in high school I had a zit turn into an infection and I totally didn’t wanna go to a doctor. My mom finally dragged me. The doctor told me I could’ve died from it had I waited longer! Died from a zit! Now that would’ve been a pretty pathetic way to die…..

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  18. Dangers of the common chemical know as water here.

    Toxic = Anything in a large enough dose.

    Where do you draw the line between stupid and criminal?

    Don’t see any criminal here, but a whole lot of stupid.

    Gerald (4fcb45)

  19. Link to audio excerpts of the show:
    http://www.sacbee.com/static/newsroom/kdndslides/index.html

    Before the contest, the DJs briefly discuss a Chico college student who died of excessive water drinking a couple years back.

    MichaelD (e97609)

  20. Does California have a law against negligent assisted suicide? Because that’s what this case is, at worst. Are the DJs held to a higher standard of knowing what water can do to a person who drinks too much of it than the person who volunteers to drink it? Ooops, sorry … “Viewed in retrospect, it was not unforeseeable, that offering a prize to someone to drink more water than anyone else would result in that person’s death.” Hang them, they’re witches!

    nk (47858f)

  21. What is the collective noun for a group of idiots, anyway?

    mojo (8096f2)

  22. I was inclined to think there was no criminal act, but if this is accurate

    To prove involuntary manslaughter, California jury instructions say there must be evidence of a death in the course of actions that involve a high degree of risk of death — or harm — without due caution, according to legal texts.

    then I’d have to reconsider.

    The contest operators lack of knowledge of the dangers inherent in excessive water consumption certainly do not absolve them of guilt. Failure to adequately research the risk of such an unusual event could be spun as a disregard for contestant safety.

    ThomasD (21cdd1)

  23. Thomas D,

    That’s pretty clear cut in a case of dynamiting a mountain side. Or even driving at 60 mph in a achool zone. But in a water-drinking contest I think there has to be some kind of proof of awareness of the danger. And there is also the question of “actions”. They did not waterboard her. All they did was offer her a prize. She drank voluntarily.

    nk (5a2f98)

  24. Probably not a crime, but these DJs are REALLY not going to like the civil jury’s reactions to those taped shows.

    But I’m sure that the other DJ’s coverage will have lots of funny bits about how they’re getting hosed…

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  25. NK,

    I’m not sure if Cali law requires awareness of the danger, indifference to the potential risks that may exist in an otherwise unusual act may be sufficient.

    The station created an incentive to engage in an inherently dangerous act. Again, my first inclination is to say that this, while stupid, is not a crime. Cali law may say otherwise.

    What if they dared people to high wire walk without safety gear? Personally, I wouldn’t find that criminal – because the risks are obvious to the so called reasonable man. Corporate lawyer types might faint at the thought of such a contest. Yet the dangers of excessive water consumption are not quite so apparent to the lay person. Bringing us back to the contest operators duty (or lack thereof) to identify and communicate potential risks.

    ThomasD (21cdd1)

  26. If the waiver doesn’t say anything about health risks then I think it is irrelevant just as it would be if a ceiling panel fell and injured a contestant.

    Also there are things you can’t waive, for example duels (with lethal weapons) are illegal even if all involved sign waivers.

    James B. Shearer (fc887e)

  27. 21 mojo: What is the collective noun for a group of idiots, anyway?

    Liberals?
    Democrats?
    Kennedy’s?

    So many choices . . .

    Jim C (07c383)

  28. Anyone knows what too much water dose those idiots should get life for such a stupid contest

    krazy kagu (4ca035)

  29. They did not waterboard her. All they did was offer her a prize. She drank voluntarily.

    But before they offered her the prize, they handed her a waiver. The staff knew that was for their own protection against any potential fallout. Routine research should go hand-in-hand with any extreme ratings-driven stunt.

    The female lead on the show has a degree in Sociology, which implies some awareness of consequences, clear thinking and the idea of cause and effect.

    Even though Jennifer Strange felt sick before the end of the segment, they had her on live… yet offered no medical assistance. They allowed her to leave with a headache, dizziness and bloating. Of course, a nurse called in to warn of the dangers of too much water. But the glib morning hosts replied, “yeah, we know. We got a waiver. Got us the insurance! No problems here.”

    Background on Entercom… David Field CEO:
    Has a B.A. from Amherst College and an M.B.A. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Field was named the 2006 Radio Executive of the Year by Radio Ink Magazine and was also recognized one of the best CEO’s in America by Institutional Investor Magazine in 2006. Mr. Field is the son of Joseph M. Field.

    Joseph M. Field (founder)
    Before entering the broadcasting business, he practiced law for 14 years in New York (including service as an Assistant United States Attorney) and Philadelphia. […] Mr. Field has a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania and an L.L.B. from Yale Law School. Mr. Field is the father of David J. Field.
    ——-

    Yet no one was minding the store …

    Vermont Neighbor (cd4d85)

  30. Here Here for the condemining the ridiculous stunts of radio, TV and the like. If I allowed them to influence my life- I would hate to think where I might be at today. WHILE I agree the liability of the station goes without question in today’s society of litigation.
    Where is personal reponsibility and common sense? If I drink water before a ultra sound- you bet I have to go……
    Wiifii and playstation and commercilization seem to far outway the common sense in the world. What happened to a bout of personal responsibility????

    J Dugas (bcab13)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0765 secs.