2 Year Old Dragged into Water by Gator at Disney Resort

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In addition to signs, there should be a fence around the lake.

Oh like we fence off oceans and forests?

Right? People are such idiots. Who needs common sense when someone can build a fence and think for you.

This is private property! Big difference. If you step in quicksand in a forest and die, too bad. If your neighbor has you over for a party and doesn't tell you there is quicksand in the backyard in a place that it looks pretty reasonable to walk near, then your neighbor will be liable if you get sucked in and die. You don't assume the risk in the same way. This concept has developed over centuries and makes a lot of sense.

What if your neighbor had a sign up that said "don't play in the sand" and you did anyway? Because that's what happened here.

"No swimming" often means "no life guard on duty" and not "alligators may eat you if you put your toe in." Also, presumably Disney employees are at the beach for these movie events, so they see kids at the edge of the water at night. Do they not say anything? Putting up an ambiguous sign and then failing to warn when people are ignoring it is doubly bad.

No swimming means no swimming. For a variety of reasons (one of which might be no life guard on duty). [/quote
Exactly. If you infer the incorrect reason that is really your problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disney will have to spend millions in public relations to restore its name as the 'safest place on earth.' I, personally, will never think of Disney the same way again.

And as far as some of you blaming the parents, I'll say it for them....kiss my ass.

I doubt it. Disney fanatics will still come. And those hotels will still be booked. And folks will still go in that water. People have very short memories.

well we're going in november. it was already booked. we aren't staying at disney though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's been seven or eight years since I was last at Disney World. I remember seeing signs around our resort that said to watch out for gators. We were staying at the Shades of Green resort, which is near the Polynesian resort. I don't remember if I saw the "watch for gators" signs at the Polynesian, the Shades of Green, or both. Of course, they may have changed the policy since then and don't have the signs anymore. It was a little unnerving to see the signs and made us very very aware when outside and walking around the resort.

They have the alligator signs at the military resort (Shades of Green) but not at the Disney owned properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disney will have to spend millions in public relations to restore its name as the 'safest place on earth.' I, personally, will never think of Disney the same way again.

And as far as some of you blaming the parents, I'll say it for them....kiss my ass.

Nobody ever calles Disney the safest place on earth, what are you smoking?

Try googling. Do people like you ever check anything out before opening your mouth?

Says the person who doesn't know there are gators in Florida. The irony...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is Disney liable? I would think so - a simple "no swimming" sign is not enough to stave off liability, right?

They'll pay, regardless of whether they believe they are at fault. They have the money, so they'll pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disney will have to spend millions in public relations to restore its name as the 'safest place on earth.' I, personally, will never think of Disney the same way again.

And as far as some of you blaming the parents, I'll say it for them....kiss my ass.

Nobody ever calles Disney the safest place on earth, what are you smoking?

Try googling. Do people like you ever check anything out before opening your mouth?

Says the person who doesn't know there are gators in Florida. The irony...

For the last time. We all know there are gators in Florida. What we do not expect is that a gator would grab a kid from a mad made lake at Disney World when Disney World encourages families to spend time on the beach at night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disney will have to spend millions in public relations to restore its name as the 'safest place on earth.' I, personally, will never think of Disney the same way again.

And as far as some of you blaming the parents, I'll say it for them....kiss my ass.

I doubt it. Disney fanatics will still come. And those hotels will still be booked. And folks will still go in that water. People have very short memories.

well we're going in november. it was already booked. we aren't staying at disney though.

We're going in November, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Disney liable? I would think so - a simple "no swimming" sign is not enough to stave off liability, right?

They'll pay, regardless of whether they believe they are at fault. They have the money, so they'll pay.

agreed. they will want this over as quickly as possible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Disney liable? I would think so - a simple "no swimming" sign is not enough to stave off liability, right?

They'll pay, regardless of whether they believe they are at fault. They have the money, so they'll pay.

And they will pay BIG! It would behoove them to make the offer BEFORE the attorneys attack making the alligators look like bunnies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disney will have to spend millions in public relations to restore its name as the 'safest place on earth.' I, personally, will never think of Disney the same way again.

And as far as some of you blaming the parents, I'll say it for them....kiss my ass.

Nobody ever calles Disney the safest place on earth, what are you smoking?

Try googling. Do people like you ever check anything out before opening your mouth?

Says the person who doesn't know there are gators in Florida. The irony...

For the last time. We all know there are gators in Florida. What we do not expect is that a gator would grab a kid from a mad made lake at Disney World when Disney World encourages families to spend time on the beach at night.

Your comment does nothing to change my position. In fact, it makes you look even more ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Disney liable? I would think so - a simple "no swimming" sign is not enough to stave off liability, right?

They'll pay, regardless of whether they believe they are at fault. They have the money, so they'll pay.

And they will pay BIG! It would behoove them to make the offer BEFORE the attorneys attack making the alligators look like bunnies.

Are you the person who is salivating over a "billion dollar" settlement? If so, your obsession is getting weird.

And don't be so sure that a jury would award more. That jury will be made up of Floridians who know about the dangers of alligators.

[Anonymous]

I don't think any of these questions have black and white answers. If Disney is sued, the issue will be whether and to what extent they had a duty to this family, and whether and to what extent they were negligent in fulfilling any duty they had. A "reasonable person" standard is typically applied to this sort of analysis, and I don't think it's black and white whether a reasonable person would have known there were gators in that water capable and inclined to eat a small child. Lots of people here saying "only an idiot wouldn't know", but LOTS of people also saying "I would have had no idea." Would be a really interesting question to see hashed out in court, although I can't imagine Disney will let it go that far. The damage to Disney's image just from media coverage of a trial would make it worth it for Disney to just pay up quickly and hope it goes away quickly.

[Anonymous]

So, when you read the sign on a cup of coffee from McDonalds that says, "Caution Contents hot" do you automatically assume that it's hot, but probably not really that hot. So, you take the chance of burning your tongue and drink? Is that why people are saying that the "No Swimming" sign should have included "No Wading"? Are they ASSUMING that the sign is there just because there is no lifeguard? Are people really this dense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think any of these questions have black and white answers. If Disney is sued, the issue will be whether and to what extent they had a duty to this family, and whether and to what extent they were negligent in fulfilling any duty they had. A "reasonable person" standard is typically applied to this sort of analysis, and I don't think it's black and white whether a reasonable person would have known there were gators in that water capable and inclined to eat a small child. Lots of people here saying "only an idiot wouldn't know", but LOTS of people also saying "I would have had no idea." Would be a really interesting question to see hashed out in court, although I can't imagine Disney will let it go that far. The damage to Disney's image just from media coverage of a trial would make it worth it for Disney to just pay up quickly and hope it goes away quickly.

The concepts of attractive nuisance and Disney's own knowledge of the danger, plus the adequacy of the warning will all be at play, too. The reasonable person analysis is complicated by the property owner's behavior here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In addition to signs, there should be a fence around the lake.

Oh like we fence off oceans and forests?

Right? People are such idiots. Who needs common sense when someone can build a fence and think for you.

This is private property! Big difference. If you step in quicksand in a forest and die, too bad. If your neighbor has you over for a party and doesn't tell you there is quicksand in the backyard in a place that it looks pretty reasonable to walk near, then your neighbor will be liable if you get sucked in and die. You don't assume the risk in the same way. This concept has developed over centuries and makes a lot of sense.

Private property but the water feeds into other bodies of water in Florida which are NOT private. Why don't you get that?

And, using your analogy, if your neighbor doesn't tell you about quicksand but says not to walk in a certain area and you do, it's your fault. Your list of dangers don't have to be itemized.

Yes but if neighbor and his wife see you and other guests walking in the quicksand throughout the party and they don't say anything and look the other way because they don't want to mess up the ambiance at their party by making a scene, then said neighbor is at fault.