• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Should the KDND Shock Jocks be prosecuted

Should the KDND Shock Jocks be prosecuted

  • yes

    Votes: 3 25.0%

  • no

    Votes: 9 75.0%
  • Total voters
    12

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,423
Reaction score
619
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
If you haven't heard or read any of the actual broadcast you can find some of it here.

Criminal Investigation Launched In Radio Contest Death - News

Isn't it time we said enough is enough of this stupid garbage that poses as entertainment, especially when the producers of this garbage are willing to put people's lives at risk "OH we had a realease".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the DJs didn't warn the contestants that this was dangerous, then yes, they may be liable. It doesn't sound like they had any malicious intent though, so it probably shouldn't be criminally prosecuted.
 
Kandahar said:
If the DJs didn't warn the contestants that this was dangerous, then yes, they may be liable. It doesn't sound like they had any malicious intent though, so it probably shouldn't be criminally prosecuted.
Click to expand...

Did they have any trained professionals around or any people available in case anything went horribly wrong? If they didn't. They should be prosecuted to the fullest extend of the law. Isn't what they did some kind of reckless endangerment? I'm pretty sure it is.
 
Kandahar said:
If the DJs didn't warn the contestants that this was dangerous, then yes, they may be liable. It doesn't sound like they had any malicious intent though, so it probably shouldn't be criminally prosecuted.
Click to expand...

agree

a darwin award should be her estate's only "win"
 
It is my opinion that if the representatives of a business

1) know something is dangerous,
2) encourage people to do or use it, and
3) don't share all the knowledge that they have about it and/or
4) fail to engage diligently in finding out the details concerning the nature of the danger.

They ought to be liable, IMO. I don't know if the law backs me up on this, but I think it should.

I believe that conditions 1 and 2 have likely been met. The 3rd is less established. It seems that they had the contestants sign waivers that at least vaguely stated that drinking large amounts of water is dangerous.

I think condition 4 is the most likely basis on which the station's liability could be established. I would ask them:

Did you understand that the activity could be dangerous?
What steps did you take to find out the exact nature of the risk?
Did you inform the contestants concerning your findings?
Did the contestants indicate that they understood what you told them?

The thing that really sticks in my craw about this is that when the nurse called in, the DJs had a cavalier attitude about the information this person was trying to convey. I wish the nurse had said "Well, they are at serious risk of dying, so I hope you have a good attorney. Please inform them of what I have said."
 
TurtleDude said:
agree

a darwin award should be her estate's only "win"
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. I have understood for a long while that water can be 'poisonous', and how consuming large quantities rapidly can harm us. However, I don't agree that people who don't have that knowledge should be considered stupid. It is fairly well known, but not common knowledge.

If the station knew it was dangerous, and didn't try to find out why or the level of risk, they should be liable.
 
Many people know that drinking too much water in a short period of time can be dangerous although it's rare for anyone to do that and so most never have a problem. You have to drink tons of water to cause something like this to happen. However this contest set up a situation where contestants were asked to do exactly that!

As a radio station they should have had lawyers and physicians and what not look into this contest. They should definitely be sued and they should definitely loose the lawsuit.

People sign waivers to do a lot of stuff today. My kids sign a waiver to play at the gym. I don't think the contestants in this contest were aware of the danger they put themselves in. The D.J.'s may not have been aware either but that is negligence on their part and they should pay for it.

I hope they're held accountable.
 
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."
Click to expand...

They should definitely be sued. Almost all game shows have people sign waivers but most are in case of accidents happening. This game requested the contestants actually do something that would result in death. That's not an accident in my opinion. They might've been too stupid to realize the danger of what they were asking but someone at that station should have been responsible for pointing that out. And no radio station should hold contests where they are asking people to do something that if done well will result in death.
 
I heard clips of them on the air and they took calls from callers warning them that people could die from an intake of too much water, and they blew it off and one DJ guy laughed and said that was why they had them sign releases.

They had a second call warning them of how specifically a person could die and with medical jargon to boot and they made another joke.

Somebody else called in and and their producer guy jumped in and they made a joke about how it is worth the prize...

It all sounded like fun. But of course, the mother died.
 
I think they are criminally negligent and should be prosecuted. They thought up the stunt and the station had the legal obligation to thoroughly check the stunt out and warn any participants beforehand of the dangers.
 
There is a better audio clip out there but I lost the link. Several people did call in and say that you could die from this. But the DJ's contradicted them saying that 'no your body won't let that happen, you will puke first'. Then they went on to say 'anyway we have releases signed'. Then during it all someone else called in and said something about it could kill you, they screamed into the room 'hey anyone dying in there yet' and again, we have releases signed.

They assured the contestants that noting would happen to them and even in the end when the one woman was complaining about her head hurting and being light headed they sent her home without seeking proper medical attention.

They should be prosecuted for manslaughter IMO, and do time for this outrageous act. Maybe it will finally send a message to these people that put on this nonsense that we as a society have had enough of them killing people outright and our children dying trying to emulate them.
 
A criminal prosecution in this case would be absolutely absurd. A civil suit is more likely....but even that is questionable.

I heard a civil lawyer for the family talking about the suit being filed and he said something about how it was negligent to engage in this contest without educating themselves and the contestants first about the possible dangers.

MY POINT EXACTLY.

Where is this Country going? What about personal responsibility. We have become such a litigious society that we are always looking to blame someone else.....its never personal responsibility.....its always about shifting that responsibility.

Yes.....the station should have educated themselves before engaging in the stunt....and they could be held partially civilly liable. But that also has to be balanced with the fact that this woman should have educated HERSELF about the possible dangers and should have taken personal responsibility to not let herself get to this point.
 

I agree that we have to be held responsible for our own actions, absolutely. But, if the woman who died had no idea that it was dangerous, and the DJs had been told that it was... I just believe that people should be held liable for luring other people into dangerous situations, but you have indicated that you agree with that anyway, I think. Let me be clear: I believe that the DJs or producers can only be liable if they were at some point told it was dangerous (which, apparently, they were).

These people should be in the agony of profound guilt right now. When the thought crosses their minds "I should have checked out the dangers", no one should consolingly say to them "How could you have known?" The fact is, they could have known and chose not to.
 
Prosecuted for what? Murder?.... NO... maybe some minor form of involuntary man slaughter at best. This is what you call a accident. It was not intentional, and has been something I have heard on numerous radio stations being done. The bulk of te responsibility lands on guess wh... the woman. She agreed to the stunt and signed a release saying that she agreed. Of course as with the DJ's she had no real clue how wrong this could go.
 
Unfortunate Accident. No Murder. Civil Case. Punitive Damages. Lady Should Have Educated Herself. Sucks.
 

Exactly how was someone lured into this completely 100% voluntary act for which they had to sign a release form? Sorry this falls on her shoulders. Who told them with any credance it was dangerous? Are you talking about Caller ... Exactly what wieght does a caller have. For al they, you or I knew he was an unemployed sanitation worker....
 

If I know that something could be dangerous, choose not to find out whether it in fact is, and: For my own selfish benefit, encourage you to engage in that activity THEN I am partially responsible for the harm that comes to you.

Despite what you may think, we ARE a society. That means community. Therefore, when we don't watch out for each other, we should be held responsible in the appropriate degree.

Do I think that they are criminally negligent? Probably not, but it should be looked at. Do I think that they are civilly negligent? Definitely.
 

................................................
 

People who agree to be contestants on radio shows don't expect that the radio show is going to ask them to do something that will kill them if done well.

If this was an accident "related" to the game but not something that a reasonable person might expect to happen that would be a straight up accident.

In this case however she was asked to do something that any dr. would tell her not to do! Callers called in with warnings. The show show should have known better. The DJ's were joking about the danger for heavens sake. And the woman probably thought the whole time she was fine because they wouldn't have that type of contest if it was really dangerous. Just like the loons eating the crazy **** on fear factor sign releases but don't expect that the show is going to feed them something that is actually unsafe. They eat gross stuff but the stuff is completely checked out. The show doesn't just get the waiver signed and then feed them whatever the hell they feel like cause they signed a waiver. The bugs and creepy arse food is all checked and monitored for saftey. This show was irresponsible.

If this show had people come in and drink themselves to death with alcohol it wouldn't matter that the contestant had signed a waiver. They would still be held responsible for the contest. And I feel they should be for this as well.

As a business you do not ask people to do something without first making sure that what you're asking is safe. The fact that they talked about the possibility of death with laughter, ignored callers, and then the woman died is just sick.

Personally I don't think they should go to jail or be charged but I think the station should be sued big time!
 
Kandahar said:
If the DJs didn't warn the contestants that this was dangerous, then yes, they may be liable. It doesn't sound like they had any malicious intent though, so it probably shouldn't be criminally prosecuted.
Click to expand...
Just how stupid can people be ??
I favor the survival of the fittest; and that people act with responsibility for their actions.. Do not rely on others...
 
Write down the time, the day, the year....This is a first I agree with Disney Dude but maybe not for the same reason........

People have to take responsibility for the choices they make.......I say no.....
 
By earthworm
Just how stupid can people be ??
Click to expand...

I operate under the assumption that a person is stupid until they display Intelligence.
 
I don't believe they should be civilly liable as they did have a release. However, that release does not absolve them of criminal liability. There is clear indication that the two instigated the death of this woman. They willfully instigated a deadly situation with enticements. There was clear knowledge (thus the waiver) that involvement in their little stunt was dangerous and even deadly.

However, the woman did sign a waiver and knowingly took part in a dangerous contest. Civil liability goes out the window in that regard. Though any death is tragic, no one needs to be rewarded for her foolishness.
 
earthworm said:
Just how stupid can people be ??
I favor the survival of the fittest; and that people act with responsibility for their actions.. Do not rely on others...
Click to expand...

What does the subject at hand have to do with survival of the fittest?

--------------------------------------------------------------------

On that note. Why didn't the DJs have a trained emergency unit around in case something went horribly wrong? And why didnt they research this activity and all of it's dangers before telling people it was ok to do it?
 


I think he was implying that a woman stupid enough to drink water until she dies over a nintendo wii does is not fit to add to the gene pool. I am inclined to agree with him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…