NO lawsuit in death of boy at GF

ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
steviej said:
So some of you are saying that there's no chance that Disney pulled the family behind closed doors and said, "we are so sorry for your tragedy (and genuinely meaning that), we want this to go away as fast as possible as we're sure you do too. So what do you say? Here's (insert offer here), and you never have to work again."

The fact of the matter is, Disney is on the NYSE, and Mr. Iger answers to a board of directors. And to put it bluntly, the board of directors doesn't care about Lane Graves, they don't care about the alligators, they don't care about any of us, they don't care about the images that Lane's parents will live over again and again in their lives. All they care about is their wallets.

And it happens every single day with thousands of companies in America. That's a fact.

EDITED: maybe saying the BoD doesn't care was a tad harsh, however, their wallets are their # 1 priority.
Click to expand...
Who is saying "no chance"? All anyone is saying is that we don't know. Which we don't. And we won't.

People need to stop talking out of their a**es.

I am sure Disney will make a generous donation to the foundation this family established.
 
wdwfan22

wdwfan22

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
Who is saying "no chance"? All anyone is saying is that we don't know. Which we don't. And we won't.

People need to stop talking out of their a**es.

I am sure Disney will make a generous donation to the foundation this family established.
Click to expand...

Yes they will make a generous donation in addition to the amount they have more then likely already given the family.
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
wdwfan22 said:
Yes they will make a generous donation in addition to the amount they have more then likely already given the family.
Click to expand...
"More then [sic] likely"? YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Given that you have no access to actual facts here, stop trying to make them up.
 
rael ramone

rael ramone

Well-Known Member
If there was a settlement, it could have come with a 'non-disclosure / non-disparagement' clause.

If they chose to pursue it, it likely wouldn't be because they were 'lawsuit happy', it would be because $DIS was legally, ethically, morally liable for the death. Many times lawsuits are about justice, and not dollars.

Oftentimes the decision to sue has to do with the behavior of the potential defendant post incident. I'm sure the $DIS team went to great lengths to have good relations with the victims family (the installation of fences & signs could have seen as a positive sign by the family). Sometimes all that is desired is a sincere apology.

As far as $DIS is concerned, this is the best news possible - it helps it leave the news cycle.
 
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
COProgressFan said:
I imagine Disney recognized the importance of just quietly settling this upfront, as soon as possible. Had a suit been brought, it would never have made it to court and been settled anyway. Disney would rather just pay a settlement now, if only to keep it from continuing to appear in the press.

It was a horrific situation everyone would just like to move on from. I know the family can never move on, though.
Click to expand...

Yes sometimes just owning up to one's responsibilies is best course of action regardless of what the lawyers say
 
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
rael ramone said:
If there was a settlement, it could have come with a 'non-disclosure / non-disparagement' clause.

If they chose to pursue it, it likely wouldn't be because they were 'lawsuit happy', it would be because $DIS was legally, ethically, morally liable for the death. Many times lawsuits are about justice, and not dollars.

Oftentimes the decision to sue has to do with the behavior of the potential defendant post incident. I'm sure the $DIS team went to great lengths to have good relations with the victims family (the installation of fences & signs could have seen as a positive sign by the family). Sometimes all that is desired is a sincere apology.

As far as $DIS is concerned, this is the best news possible - it helps it leave the news cycle.
Click to expand...

And starts to bring closure no matter how inadequate it seems as the loss of a child is a void which can never be filled.
 
Minthorne

Minthorne

Well-Known Member
I choose to believe that the parents requested that whatever Disney wanted to do to compensate be instead used to create the foundation in their son's name. I choose to believe they did this with the goal of making their sons life carry on in a positive way.

Good deeds create more good deeds. A lump of cash will never ease their pain. But a potential child's life saved in the future because this foundations work is a salve that can soothe the aching heart, even if just a little.

The first step in making good is believing in good.
 
Last edited:
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Two possibilities:

1) They reached an agreement without taking it to court. A settlement, donation to the foundation, etc.
2) The parents really screwed up (too far away when the kid was in the water) and knew they would lose in court due to their negligence.

That they are not suing out of the goodness of their hearts is extremely unlikely, and not very smart. Money won't bring their kid back, of course, but it can pay for therapy which they will probably need to deal with their loss.
 
Last edited:
21stamps

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Kamikaze said:
Two possibilities:

1) They reached an agreement without taking it to court. A settlement, donation to the foundation, etc.
2) The parents really screwed up (too far away when the kid was in the water) and knew they would lose in court due to their negligence.

That they are not suing out of the goodness of their hearts is extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...
It's truly sad that people feel this way.
 
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
21stamps said:
It's truly sad that people feel this way.
Click to expand...

Why is it 'sad'? Its just the way the world is, kiddo. To be perfectly honest, if this happened to my family, I would sue. Now, it wouldn't, because I would have never let my kid touch that water, but the point stands.

I've thought since day 1 that the father was way up the beach when this happened, and thats why he didn't see the gator.

I'm sure there is surveillance footage of the area, which we will obviously never see now. If the father was too far away to be reasonably attentive to the kid, it would prove negligence.

MansionButler84 said:
"More then [sic] likely"? YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Given that you have no access to actual facts here, stop trying to make them up.
Click to expand...

Neither do you, but we can speculate. There is no evidence to believe that an agreement could not have been reached. All the statement says is that they are not suing. Thats the only 'facts' we have.
 
steviej

steviej

Well-Known Member
fosse76 said:
Some of you, I think, are a bit naive if you think that this family simply decided not to sue for some altruistic belief that accidents can happen and no one s to blame. Disney could not have won a lawsuit. They absolutely wrote them a check, which without question waives liability and the right to sue.
Click to expand...

AMEN!
 
Rodan75

Rodan75

Well-Known Member
fosse76 said:
Some of you, I think, are a bit naive if you think that this family simply decided not to sue for some altruistic belief that accidents can happen and no one s to blame. Disney could not have won a lawsuit. They absolutely wrote them a check, which without question waives liability and the right to sue.
Click to expand...

Moreso than Disney 'couldn't have won a lawsuit' (I think they could have had a chance in FL courts), the expense of the bad publicity is significantly more than they would have had to pay even if they did lose a lawsuit.

I'm sure they settled with the family for a sum that was roughly the average loss in a wrongful death suit and volunteered contributions to the foundation for 20 years. Which, in my opinion is both the humane/moral thing to do and the right business choice.
 
ParentsOf4

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
Stop assuming the worst in everyone.

I don't normally disclose personal details but feel it's appropriate considering the way this thread is going.

My father died because a doctor screwed up his care. We decided not to sue because he admitted his mistake and seemed genuinely sorry for it. He did not intend for it to happen so we just let it go.

Sometimes mistakes happen and, sometimes, "I'm sorry" is enough for closure.

Different people grieve differently. There is no "right" or "wrong" way to grieve.

Whatever Disney did, it was enough for the Graves.

In the wake of their tremendous loss, the Graves family may have simply wanted closure. They may have simply wanted to move on.
 
21stamps

21stamps

Well-Known Member
ParentsOf4 said:
Stop assuming the worst in everyone.

I don't normally disclose personal details but feel it's appropriate considering the way this thread is going.

My father died because a doctor screwed up his care. We decided not to sue because he admitted his mistake and seemed genuinely sorry for it. He did not intend for it to happen so we just let it go.

Sometimes mistakes happen and, sometimes, "I'm sorry" is enough for closure.

Different people grieve differently. There is no "right" or "wrong" way to grieve.

Whatever Disney did, it was enough for the Graves.

In the wake of their tremendous loss, the Graves family may have simply wanted closure. They may have simply wanted to move on.
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing, I'm sorry for your loss.
Kamikaze said:
Why is it 'sad'? Its just the way the world is, kiddo. To be perfectly honest, if this happened to my family, I would sue. Now, it wouldn't, because I would have never let my kid touch that water, but the point stands.

I've thought since day 1 that the father was way up the beach when this happened, and thats why he didn't see the gator.

I'm sure there is surveillance footage of the area, which we will obviously never see now. If the father was too far away to be reasonably attentive to the kid, it would prove negligence.



Neither do you, but we can speculate. There is no evidence to believe that an agreement could not have been reached. All the statement says is that they are not suing. Thats the only 'facts' we have.
Click to expand...
It may be how you are, and there are plenty of people who feel the same as you. But I will and do believe that there are also still people left in this world who do not look for lawsuits. I'll also believe and know that at least some of us are intelligent enough to understand the difference between negligence and nature.

Why does there need to be speculation or looking for the worst in people, like parentsOf4 said? Seriously, the family released a statement, they aren't suing. So what does insulting speculations about their character accomplish?
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom