Cycle Event Director criminally liable for Competitor's death

On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 19:10:45 GMT, "Sam"
wrote:


"Mike Murray" wrote in message
news:URtZa.78240$cF.24406@rwcrnsc53...


And I thought we had problems with ridiculous liability actions in the US.

This was a criminal case; I see the US as having a civil liability problem
more than criminal.


Indeed it was a criminal case. However, the police waited almost a
year before deciding to prosecute. In other words it took some time
for them to figure out if indeed there was a case to answer.

SNOOPY


--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:51:16 GMT, "Mike Murray"
wrote:


And I thought we had problems with ridiculous liability actions
in the US.


In what way do you consider the case ridiculous?

SNOOPY


--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:07:27 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:28:14 GMT, Kyle Legate wrote:

Snoopy wrote:
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 13:27:28 GMT, "Kyle Legate"
wrote:

I'm speaking from the perspective of Canadian events. Professional
events--what are those?

Interestingly, if it was a professional event, the course would have been
regarded as a workplace, and the OSH investigative policy is geared toward
identifying and prosecuting a single person in the management structure
who is "responsible". a.k.a. buck-hunting :-)


Why do you imply 'Le Race' wasn't a professional event? Wasn't
Astrid Anderson a professional event organizer?

SNOOPY




--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:41:30 +1200, Snoopy
te**yson@caverock.*et.*z.*is'n' wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:07:27 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:28:14 GMT, Kyle Legate
wrote:

Snoopy wrote:
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 13:27:28 GMT, "Kyle Legate"
wrote:

I'm speaking from the perspective of Canadian events. Professional
events--what are those?

Interestingly, if it was a professional event, the course would have
been regarded as a workplace, and the OSH investigative policy is geared
toward identifying and prosecuting a single person in the management
structure who is "responsible". a.k.a. buck-hunting :-)


Why do you imply 'Le Race' wasn't a professional event? Wasn't
Astrid Anderson a professional event organizer?

The cyclists were not being paid to ride in the race, therefore it was not
their workplace. Of course there are no professional cycle races in NZ, but
if you think about it, OSH would have jurisdiction at a Super 12 game.



--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:21:45 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:


Why do you imply 'Le Race' wasn't a professional event? Wasn't
Astrid Anderson a professional event organizer?

The cyclists were not being paid to ride in the race, therefore it was not
their workplace. Of course there are no professional cycle races in NZ, but
if you think about it, OSH would have jurisdiction at a Super 12 game.


If you accept that Super Twelve Rugby Football matches are
professional, because the players are being paid a retainer, what
about cyclists who are on some kind of money deal? I am sure that
there were some cyclists in 'Le Race' that were receiving Hilary
commission support for example. Given that they are being paid to
cycle (albeit not in that specific event), does not that make 'Le
Race' a professional event? After all, there was even prize money
for the first male and female rider home.

SNOOPY



--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:35:41 +1200, Snoopy
te**yson@caverock.*et.*z.*is'n' wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:21:45 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:


Why do you imply 'Le Race' wasn't a professional event? Wasn't
Astrid Anderson a professional event organizer?

The cyclists were not being paid to ride in the race, therefore it was
not their workplace. Of course there are no professional cycle races in
NZ, but if you think about it, OSH would have jurisdiction at a Super 12
game.


If you accept that Super Twelve Rugby Football matches are
professional, because the players are being paid a retainer, what
about cyclists who are on some kind of money deal? I am sure that
there were some cyclists in 'Le Race' that were receiving Hilary
commission support for example. Given that they are being paid to
cycle (albeit not in that specific event), does not that make 'Le
Race' a professional event? After all, there was even prize money
for the first male and female rider home.

No, even if the cyclists are eraning money for cycling, it is coming from
someone other than the Le Race organizers, so there isn't an employer-
employee relationship between the event company and the cyclists. (And
prize money doesn't count).
But the rugby players are full time employees. Jockeys, I think, are mostly
contractors, althogh the DOL defines the difference between employer and
contractor on who has most control over the terms and conditions of work.

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Hi there,

Snoopy wrote:
9th August 2003, Christchurch, New Zealand

Astrid Anderson, director of the 'LeRace' cycling event over a
challenging 100km winding hill course over two hill ranges between
Christchurch City and Akaroa was today found guilty of a 'criminal
negligence' charge.

Yes, but there are very mixed emotions on the outcome.

For sure it was a tragic accident to have happen, and my sympathies
go to the family of the cyclist, but to think that the race organiser
will be held criminally negligent seems a little harsh. It would be a
harrowing enough experience for Anderson to deal with a death during
an event she has organised, let alone to face criminal charges as a
result of the death. Perhaps a harsh judgement IMHO...

The talked about 'opening of the floodgates' with regard to liability
in future sports events held on public roads is another topic under the
microscope. Those who think this case paves the way for future events
will be interested to know that the Police Traffic Management Plan rules
that currently exist have seen the demise of many popular road based
events already. The 'Rangiora 20', a 20 mile road-running race from
Christchurch to Rangiora is one example of a popular event that now is
not run because of the cost and logistics involved in seeking Police
approval of a Traffic Management Plan. Athletics Canterbury has its
annual road-running championships around the Avon loop usually...I do
believe that recently that event has been moved off the roads due to
the cost of running it being too prohibitive...hardly could call it a
'road-running' championships if it was on grass could we?!

I ask the question, '...was the Traffic Management Plan implemented for
'LeRace' adequate?..', as it seems there is too little focus on other
issues in Astrid Andersons case...

Kind regards,

Chris Wilkinson, Christchurch.

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:06:07 +1200, Chris Wilkinson
wrote:


there are very mixed emotions on the outcome.

For sure it was a tragic accident to have happen, and my sympathies
go to the family of the cyclist, but to think that the race organiser
will be held criminally negligent seems a little harsh. It would be a
harrowing enough experience for Anderson to deal with a death during
an event she has organised, let alone to face criminal charges as a
result of the death. Perhaps a harsh judgement IMHO...


The operation of the law in a case such as this cannot consider
emotion. For sure if the convicted person shows genuine remorse,
that may be taken into account at the time of sentencing. But just
because someone was 'emotionally traumatized' can't be taken into
account when you are considering whether to charge that person or not.


The talked about 'opening of the floodgates' with regard to liability
in future sports events held on public roads is another topic under the
microscope. Those who think this case paves the way for future events
will be interested to know that the Police Traffic Management Plan rules
that currently exist have seen the demise of many popular road based
events already. The 'Rangiora 20', a 20 mile road-running race from
Christchurch to Rangiora is one example of a popular event that now is
not run because of the cost and logistics involved in seeking Police
approval of a Traffic Management Plan.


Now, now Chris be fair. Isn't it the local councils and/or Tranzit
New Zealand (in other words those directly responsible for the roads)
that have to approve these plans? I would suspect that if you went
to the police directly for 'approval' of your plan you would get a
blank look. Rightly so I think because it is the job of the police
to enforce the law. Not approve Traffic Management Plans for
sporting events! IMO it is very doubtful that the police would be
able to do a better job of identifying the hazards of a running race
than the committee putting on the race itself. If, however, something
went wrong with your event, at -that- point the police might suddenly
become very interested in the detail of your Traffic Management Plan!


Athletics Canterbury has its
annual road-running championships around the Avon loop usually...I do
believe that recently that event has been moved off the roads due to
the cost of running it being too prohibitive...hardly could call it a
'road-running' championships if it was on grass could we?!


Was that the 'road running' event that was moved to the Ruapuna motor
racing track?


I ask the question, '...was the Traffic Management Plan implemented for
'LeRace' adequate?..', as it seems there is too little focus on other
issues in Astrid Andersons case...


An important question to ask.....

At no time during the trial was the Traffic Management Plan itself
considered inadequate. Indeed it was praised as being if anything
ahead of its time in the detail. It was suggested at the time of the
trial that few if any event organizer in the country was working to a
plan of as high a standard. Evidence was given that Ms Anderson
consulted with safety experts and all suggestions were
enthusiastically taken up. However, There was some suggestion that
the implementation of the plan was not up to scratch in particular
areas.

For example the traffic management plan identified cattle grids as a
road hazard and the solution to this problem was to cover them with
boards for the day. However, the Sky video of the event clearly
showed competitors going over a cattle grid with no flat board across
it. I don't think it was suggested that this oversight in this
instance was dangerous. The particular cattle grid concerned was on
a flat or even an uphill section of the course. Nevertheless the
fact that this mistake was captured 'on film' may have resulted in
'the missing cattle grid board' batting above its weight.

A question mark over the real need for a check point on the summit
road at all, and its practical efficacy, was also raised. Apparently
the safety manager of the event was not consulted over this.

Crucially Ms Anderson identified 'competitors getting the wrong
information' as one of the hazards to guard against in the traffic
management plan. The crown contended that many did, including the
fatally injured Mrs Caldwell. However, the fact that at least half
the competitors got the correct message from the information that the
crown considered was 'wrong' does not seem to have been adequately
explained.

SNOOPY


--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:45:37 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:35:41 +1200, Snoopy
te**yson@caverock.*et.*z.*is'n' wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:21:45 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:



After all, there was even prize money
for the first male and female rider home.

No, even if the cyclists are eraning money for cycling, it is coming from
someone other than the Le Race organizers, so there isn't an employer-
employee relationship between the event company and the cyclists. (And
prize money doesn't count).


Why doesn't prize money count?

SNOOPY



--
Join the fight against aggressive, unrepentant
spammers 'china-netcom'. E-mail me for more
details

--

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:01:18 +1200, Snoopy
te**yson@caverock.*et.*z.*is'n' wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:45:37 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:35:41 +1200, Snoopy
te**yson@caverock.*et.*z.*is'n' wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:21:45 +1200, Richard Grevers
wrote:



After all, there was even prize money
for the first male and female rider home.

No, even if the cyclists are eraning money for cycling, it is coming
from someone other than the Le Race organizers, so there isn't an
employer-employee relationship between the event company and the
cyclists. (And prize money doesn't count).


Why doesn't prize money count?

Ask OSH. Probably because if I said to you "Please come and paint my house
and I'll give you a 1 in 100 chance of receiving $5000 for it", that
wouldn't be considered as me employing you.

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/