PURE Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 So what else has their 'little angel' done I wonder...robbed a store, shot somebody? H*S*T*H* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Read between the lines, folks. The family is not aggressively pursuing a case here, Lamar Flatt is. If you remember, almost immediately following the incident, the father was reported as saying the family is not blaming Six Flags, and doesn't plan on suing. In steps that one jacka$$ lawyer that every big city despises, whispers in their ear that he'll only take a percentage of whatever they may win in the suit, and off we go. Step one: tell the media what I've coached you to tell them. Step two: cry like crazy in court. Step three: let me make ridiculous statements to win over the judge/jury. Step four: cash your check. Step five: PMW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyD Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 ^Haha! PMW being the most important part! Well said! I think some people are blowing this way out of proportion! (Me included - Sorry Joe and McJaco, I missinterepreted something pages ago, didn't mean to!) I don't think the family have actually confirmed they are sueing Six Flags yet and if they do they don't have the best case! It is annoying that they think thier son did nothing wrong but when you're grieving over a loved one you're generally not thinking straight!!! They may sue, they may not, but lets wait untill they do before we start getting annoyed with them, remember they've lost thier son and I am sure anyone on these boards that has a son can imagine how painfully depressing that must be, no matter how stupid he was! On a side note - PMW 4 Eva Bro! Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 BULL-poo-poo He was at the wrong place at the wrong time because he was trying to cheat Six Flags out of a days admission to the park. How I was brought up, that's called stealing. It was an unfortunate accident for the people on the train witnessing the horrifyingly gruesome way Ferguson died. He did nothing wrong but trespass on private property through a dangerous, mechanical "NO PERSONNEL ZONE". Come on already...are we so far gone that we can't see right from wrong anymore? Not to split hairs or anything, but he wasn't trying to cheat Six Flags out of an addmision. He had already been into the park that day. He had gone out for lunch, and was coming back in. So he had already paid for a days admission. He was just taking a short cut back in or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheArchfiend Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Read between the lines, folks. The family is not aggressively pursuing a case here, Lamar Flatt is. If you remember, almost immediately following the incident, the father was reported as saying the family is not blaming Six Flags, and doesn't plan on suing. In steps that one jacka$$ lawyer that every big city despises, whispers in their ear that he'll only take a percentage of whatever they may win in the suit, and off we go. Step one: tell the media what I've coached you to tell them. Step two: cry like crazy in court. Step three: let me make ridiculous statements to win over the judge/jury. Step four: cash your check. Step five: PMW. I'm confused... Why would the "M" in step five be neccessary if they had already cashed the check in step four? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Mo money mo problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 ^lol. I'm confused... Why would the "M" in step five be neccessary if they had already cashed the check in step four? It's just part of the universal equation. With M(i.e., the cashed check) comes W&P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheArchfiend Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 It's just part of the universal equation. With M(i.e., the cashed check) comes W&P. That's kind of like the underpants knome theory: Step 1. Steal underpants Step 2. Profit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 ^ Exactly. It's all mathematical, really. My years of hardcore pimpin' ejumucated me on one valuable lesson. M=W&P=mo'$=mo' W&P. If you's a good bidnez man, you can profits from that money Six Flags pays you. More flags=more fun. Is it obvious I'm really bored at work right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandaman Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I'd like to see the potential court transcript on this one. Lamar Flatt: "Six Flags has a staggering history of lies and fallacies. Have you ever noticed that at a single Six Flags park, there are MORE than six flags flying at one time? Preposterous. The prosecution rests. ...Also, PMW." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenA07 Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Just want to point out the fact that if this kid's parents do decide to sue Six Flags, it's not the lawyer, it is a jury (unless they chose a trial by judge) that will have to decide that Six Flags was negligent. If I was Six Flags I might just let this one go to trial if there was a suit. As somebody else said, as far as I understand it if you've followed (or exceeded) state regulations it is going to be difficult to prove that there was negligence. My guess is that if a suit is filed it is going to be dismissed for failing to state a claim on which relief can be granted. I would not at all be surprised if Six Flags just offers the family a token settlement of say $25,000-$30,000. It would be enough to shut the family up and would put an end to bad publicity, and wouldn't really have any big effect on Six Flags in terms of money. The elephant in the room that I'm sure Six Flags is worried about is the SFKK incident. From what I've seen in that case Six Flags was negligent, and could very well end up having to pay a large sum of money. The chain isn't going to want anymore bad press, and that really all this Batman incident can bring them. Basically I think if there is any kind of legal action against Six Flags, the chain will offer a settlement in the $25,000 range just to make this go away. If the parties decline that, and demand more, I would not be all that shocked to see Six Flags agree to move on with trial. If the parties decide that they want to attempt to get to trial I personally do not think this case would survive long enough to ever see a jury, unless there are facts that are missing that are really damning for Six Flags. Finally just because it has come up, in regards to the McDonalds coffee case, I'm not sure if it was pointed out but the judge reduced the amount to somewhere in the range of half a million, so she didn't get that huge settlement she won. Also as others have said, there was a lot more to that case then a women simply spilling hot coffee, McDonalds knew they served the coffee too hot and there had been many other reported burns from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCityBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I'm not suprised the family is doing this. It all comes down to money in the end. I highly doubt the family will get anything if it goes to trial but they could. I no longer feel sorry for the family. They deserve the same fate their son had for trying to sue the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesdillaman Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 ^ You should feel sorry for the family. It IS a tragedy no matter what the cause. How would you like that to be your son. This was a horrible end to what should've been a great day for their son. Lawyer's ambitions, as was stated earlier on this page even, are the likely basis for this. Once the lawyers realize they don't have a case, this will drop out of the news. -James Dillaman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim S. Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 The park should sue the family for having an idiot for a son. The enthusiast community should file a class action suit too for inconveniencing the park and potentially making our prices go up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCityBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 ^ I did untuil i saw the story on CNN not too long ago that it was the familys decision to sue not the lawyer. Thats why i no longer feel sorry for them. If that make me a bad person then fine. I can honestly see this getting thrown out and the family getting nothing but just stateing if they do get any money then it's sad the family now puts a price on their sons head. I can understand SF being nice enough to pay for the funeral but thats it. this family does not deserve anything after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I'm not suprised the family is doing this. It all comes down to money in the end. I highly doubt the family will get anything if it goes to trial but they could. I no longer feel sorry for the family. They deserve the same fate their son had for trying to sue the park. A bit harsh, no? Has someone not had enough P&W lately? I did untuil i saw the story on CNN not too long ago that it was the familys decision to sue not the lawyer. Thats why i no longer feel sorry for them. You believe everything you hear or read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCityBoy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I don't normally believe everything but CNN is a pretty believable source. Now if i had heard it here or any other coaster rlates site i might question it until i hear otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 That's kind of like the underpants knome theory: Step 1. Steal underpants Step 2. Profit Except for the fact that you screwed it up! Step 1: Steal underpands Step 2: ???? Step 3: Profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheArchfiend Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Except for the fact that you screwed it up! Step 1: Steal underpands Step 2: ???? Step 3: Profit. Ah... that's right. The underpants knomes are going to show me no mercy for getting their master plan wrong. Good catch To one up you, I do believe they were "Phases" not "Steps". But I got that wrong too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Also the fact that they're Gnomes, not Knomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheArchfiend Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Also the fact that they're Gnomes, not Knomes. Sorry, Knoebels on the mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goliath513 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 The only ting the family should get out of the lawsuit is a bad reputation for producing such an idiot of a child and knowing they won't have to deal with what he might have done later in life if he had not been killed. The family deserves some good PW too. No M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the sound Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 You know if this happened in a nation outside of america, the media would have left the story and the family of the incident alone by now and also no-one would be sued. Or attempted to be sued. Anyway, I think this now counts as the second roller-coaster related darwin award, as sad for freinds and family and witnesses as it is. The first being published in volume IV about the woman who wanted "airtime". http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2003-12.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesdillaman Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 ^ That was a long, sad drive home. I hate the image on the page. I was an avid reader of the darwin awards books, but that goes too far. Not to mention it states that "catching airtime" means standing up on a roller coaster. The entire article is very uncouth. I can't get the image of her fiance out of my mind, and I can't believe they would be so insensitive. It makes me wonder how many of the other darwin award stories were so sensationalized and filled with shoddy information. -James Dillaman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tmcdllr Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 What about the riders and people who witnessed this? I am very curious to read their point of view and details of the incident. Have any of them come forward and said anything? I know it must be difficult for them but surely at least one person has to have talked to the media by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now