News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Our internal findings to date confirm that the ride systems functioned as intended, equipment was intact at the ride's start, throughout the duration of the ride and upon the ride vehicle's return to the station, and our Team Members followed procedures.

Interesting, seems to confirm that nothing broke or malfunctioned and the ride worked as designed. Wonder if that means there was a design flaw or this was simply an unpreventable tragedy?

 

[Tom Morrow]

Given what we know, it's highly likely this language is hedging her bets at best. It doesn't line up with the ME's statement (at least that we know of), and it doesn't line up of what's been said by others either. It implies a guest medical issue that seems to have not been the cause of death, which is my biggest issue with it.

I mean you can either trust that Karen Irwin is being transparent when it would be very bad for her to not be, or you can believe some idiot TikTok influencers or people in hysterics reporting what they thought they saw during an emergency.

 

[Comped]

I mean you can either trust that Karen Irwin is being transparent when it would be very bad for her to not be, or you can believe some idiot TikTok influencers or people in hysterics reporting what they thought they saw during an emergency.

I'm not sure I can trust that she is being transparent while there is still an investigation going on...

 

[disneylandtour]

Interesting, seems to confirm that nothing broke or malfunctioned and the ride worked as designed. Wonder if that means there was a design flaw or this was simply an unpreventable tragedy?

So this is my read. There's compassion here. But also, the subtext seems to be: if someone is at fault it's Mack, not us. I'd expect, sadly, this is where the legal lines are now being drawn.

 

[Comped]

So this is my read. There's compassion here. But also, the subtext seems to be: if someone is at fault it's Mack, not us. I'd expect, sadly, this is where the legal lines are now being drawn.

I think it puts more blame on the victim than Mack (let alone Universal itself). But given what's been already said publicly, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Blaming Mack, even by subtext, would be a very bold move for her (let alone the entire company) especially because they knew it was going to leak.

 

[VicariousCorpse]

So this is my read. There's compassion here. But also, the subtext seems to be: if someone is at fault it's Mack, not us. I'd expect, sadly, this is where the legal lines are now being drawn.

I think it puts more blame on the victim than Mack (let alone Universal itself). But given what's been already said publicly, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Blaming Mack, even by subtext, would be a very bold move for her (let alone the entire company) especially because they knew it was going to leak.

Not everything has to be nefarious. Maybe she just wants to update her team on a very serious matter. That they care about safety and didn't carelessly send this man to his death. These kind of safety investigations aren't going to be swayed by some slick PR talk by Universal. They aren't trying to cast blame, they are trying to put people's concerns at ease.

Of course huge money is at stake here; imagine the public perception if they were caught trying to cover up details about a death in their newest flagship park. They have every interest in transparency where applicable here.

 

[Comped]

Not everything has to be nefarious. Maybe she just wants to update her team on a very serious matter. That they care about safety and didn't carelessly send this man to his death. These kind of safety investigations aren't going to be swayed by some slick PR talk by Universal. They aren't trying to cast blame, they are trying to put people's concerns at ease.

Of course huge money is at stake here; imagine the public perception if they were caught trying to cover up details about a death in their newest flagship park. They have every interest in transparency where applicable here.

Transparency in an internal statement versus a public statement are two very different things. Especially when the investigation shows no signs of slowing down and there has been zero rush from the company to publicly announce the same. Probably for a reason. They don't need to be covering anything up externally, just merely understating or not correctly stating what happened internally. Such internal shenanigans are not unheard of in this industry and it wouldn't have them in any trouble legally (or in terms of mass PR). It's probably much more of a reassuring letter than it is anything talking about the substantive results of a still ongoing investigation.

 

[Mr Ferret 75]

Man,… y’all will argue over anything

No we won't .

 

[lazyboy97o]

Transparency in an internal statement versus a public statement are two very different things. Especially when the investigation shows no signs of slowing down and there has been zero rush from the company to publicly announce the same. Probably for a reason. They don't need to be covering anything up externally, just merely understating or not correctly stating what happened internally. Such internal shenanigans are not unheard of in this industry and it wouldn't have them in any trouble legally (or in terms of mass PR). It's probably much more of a reassuring letter than it is anything talking about the substantive results of a still ongoing investigation.

Internal documents don’t have some sort of special status that prevents them from being used against a company either in terms of public perception or legal action. If this statement is false, misleading or even just weaselly then it is absolutely a liability for Universal.

 

[Andrew C]

No we won't .

Took me a moment. Slow off the mark this morning.

 

[Mr Ferret 75]

Took me a moment. Slow off the mark this morning.

No you aren't.

 

[mkt]

A friend in the newsmedia reached out to me - the final autopsy is expected within 90 days. So around Christmas we’ll have the full report, which should spell out the specific injuries and whether there were any contributing medical factors. The preliminary finding of “multiple blunt force trauma” is already public, but the final report will give a clearer picture of how those injuries actually happened, and whether or not any pre-existing conditions amplified the outcome.

 

[Andrew C]

A friend in the newsmedia reached out to me - the final autopsy is expected within 90 days. So around Christmas we’ll have the full report, which should spell out the specific injuries and whether there were any contributing medical factors. The preliminary finding of “multiple blunt force trauma” is already public, but the final report will give a clearer picture of how those injuries actually happened, and whether or not any pre-existing conditions amplified the outcome.

Thanks for the update. Do you expect the attraction to be closed this entire time, or just don’t know anything further?

 

[mkt]

Thanks for the update. Do you expect the attraction to be closed this entire time, or just don’t know anything further?

I know nothing further, but would guess that due to the press and the fact that there is a death, the reopening of the attraction is now beyond the decision makers in Orlando and is now up to the C-suite in Philadelphia.

This is speculation though.

 

[Disstevefan1]

A friend in the newsmedia reached out to me - the final autopsy is expected within 90 days. So around Christmas we’ll have the full report, which should spell out the specific injuries and whether there were any contributing medical factors. The preliminary finding of “multiple blunt force trauma” is already public, but the final report will give a clearer picture of how those injuries actually happened, and whether or not any pre-existing conditions amplified the outcome.

I wish we knew where the multiple blunt force trauma occurred on the body.

 

[mkt]

I wish we knew where the multiple blunt force trauma occurred on the body.

We'll know in 90 days hopefully.

 

[Disney Analyst]

We'll know in 90 days hopefully.

Due to it being relatively high profile, I could see the report being finished faster.

 

[mkt]

Due to it being relatively high profile, I could see the report being finished faster.

That’s reasonable. I texted to confirm, and their words were “that’s what the ME’s office has told us.”
I’ll take 90 days as the target, but given how high-profile this is, I wouldn’t be surprised if it slips into early 2026.

 

[disneylandtour]

I think it puts more blame on the victim than Mack (let alone Universal itself). But given what's been already said publicly, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Blaming Mack, even by subtext, would be a very bold move for her (let alone the entire company) especially because they knew it was going to leak.

A guess here: as similar Mack coaster have similars ADA / Amputee guidance, I'm guessing these similar statements of guidance came from Mack. And the pieces, with the Thorpe Park change, seem to be pointing to something related to body type as at least one cause of the tragedy, which is related to to the ADA / Amputee guidance. Again, there's a lot of unknowns presently, but my sense, based on the small pieces known, seems to point things gently in this direction.

 

[disneylandtour]

A friend in the newsmedia reached out to me - the final autopsy is expected within 90 days. So around Christmas we’ll have the full report, which should spell out the specific injuries and whether there were any contributing medical factors. The preliminary finding of “multiple blunt force trauma” is already public, but the final report will give a clearer picture of how those injuries actually happened, and whether or not any pre-existing conditions amplified the outcome.

With past Orlando park tragedies, if there were pre-existing conditions, they almost always came out quickly with the initial report.