Possible conflict of interest in Disney monorail case

trr1

trr1

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Possible conflict of interest in Disney monorail case


Sep 9, 2010

A possible conflict of interest has arisen in the hearing regarding monorail pilot Austin Wuennenberg's death. Wuennenberg was killed while on duty at Walt Disney World July 5, 2009. Judge Robert Evans revealed to lawyers that he worked as a monorail pilot for Disney 35 years ago. Attorneys are meeting with their clients to decide how to proceed and if this should be a factor in the case.

couldnt they just get a new Judge?
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
trr1 said:
Possible conflict of interest in Disney monorail case


Sep 9, 2010

A possible conflict of interest has arisen in the hearing regarding monorail pilot Austin Wuennenberg's death. Wuennenberg was killed while on duty at Walt Disney World July 5, 2009. Judge Robert Evans revealed to lawyers that he worked as a monorail pilot for Disney 35 years ago. Attorneys are meeting with their clients to decide how to proceed and if this should be a factor in the case.

couldnt they just get a new Judge?
Click to expand...


Great, another monorail thread.
 
Buried20KLeague

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
trr1 said:
couldnt they just get a new Judge?
Click to expand...

Sure... But you might see both sides agree to let him try the case, as being an expert in the field could be seen as positive from either side.

Could go either way. I think the judge basically discloses the info and just waits to hear what both sides want to do about it.
 
s8film40

s8film40

Well-Known Member
If he worked there 35 years ago his experience is completely different than it is now. He drove different trains, there was no block light system, and employees at that time were of a much higher quality. Although it's likely he might have been working there during the systems first collision between Blue and Red in '74.
 
mp2bill

mp2bill

Well-Known Member
Buried20KLeague said:
Sure... But you might see both sides agree to let him try the case, as being an expert in the field could be seen as positive from either side.

Could go either way. I think the judge basically discloses the info and just waits to hear what both sides want to do about it.
Click to expand...

Good point! I really don't see the need for a new judge.
 
RunnerEd

RunnerEd

Well-Known Member
It almost sounds like Disney might actually let this go to trial. I don't see how that is anything but a negative for Disney. Give the grieving mother anything she wants just shy of the deed to Disneyland, implement the TSA's safety improvements and move forward.
 
tigsmom

tigsmom

Well-Known Member
Possible conflict of interest; all sides will get together and discuss this. They may feel he has something to offer, they may feel he will be prejudiced and they may feel it doesn't matter. It was 35 years ago and may have no bearing whatsoever on the case, he will let the lawyers decide.
 
muteki

muteki

Well-Known Member
s8film40 said:
If he worked there 35 years ago his experience is completely different than it is now. He drove different trains, there was no block light system, and employees at that time were of a much higher quality. Although it's likely he might have been working there during the systems first collision between Blue and Red in '74.
Click to expand...

The time since he last piloted should have no bearing on whether or not this is a conflict of interest. The fact that he did at any given time makes me question his objectivity.

Just get a new judge, problem solved.
 
lnsemsf

lnsemsf

Well-Known Member
As I understand the law, which granted is not to the highest degree, it's not about whether both lawyers want him to step aside, it's about whether the judge wants to take himself off this case. Once a judge is assigned, he's assigned no matter if the lawyers want him there or not. What they'll have to do is get together with the judge and convince him that he's either not impartial, or appears to be not impartial and will be overturned on an appeal. If the lawyers can't do that and the judge refuses to recuse himself because he's committed no legal or ethical violation, then he'll stay the judge on the case. You can't just "get a new judge" like you could change your babysitter if you don't like the music they listen to. It's a more complex situation and judges don't like to take recuse themselves if they feel that they are still fully capable of being impartial.
 
Master Yoda

Master Yoda

Pro Star Wars geek.
Premium Member
tigsmom said:
Possible conflict of interest; all sides will get together and discuss this. They may feel he has something to offer, they may feel he will be prejudiced and they may feel it doesn't matter. It was 35 years ago and may have no bearing whatsoever on the case, he will let the lawyers decide.
Click to expand...
Agreed. As a judge he should be impartial regardless of his past but we all know that either side will claim conflict of interest should they loose. It is much better to bring it up now and have both parties agree on a course of action.
 
s8film40

s8film40

Well-Known Member
muteki said:
The time since he last piloted should have no bearing on whether or not this is a conflict of interest. The fact that he did at any given time makes me question his objectivity.

Just get a new judge, problem solved.
Click to expand...

I agree that it is a conflict. The time has a bearing on his knowledge of the way monorails are operated. With the time period since he worked there he could have worked at the skyway and would have the same amount of knowledge of monorails.
 
Pioneer Hall

Pioneer Hall

Well-Known Member
s8film40 said:
If he worked there 35 years ago his experience is completely different than it is now. He drove different trains, there was no block light system, and employees at that time were of a much higher quality. Although it's likely he might have been working there during the systems first collision between Blue and Red in '74.
Click to expand...

Regardless of how different his training is now it is better for him to disclose it and have the discussion as opposed to it becoming an issue later. If he didn't go this route it could lead to a mistrial if one of the lawyers found out and wanted to challenge it.
 
T

T-1MILLION

New Member
If a judge has had or has a family pet dog and is dealing with a case of a dog killer does that mean they should find another judge? Seriously, judges are trained to be impartial the best they possibly can.

With that sort of wondering in mind it seems like the one side of the case has already admitted to guilt and fault.

Everyone has lost a loved one and many wrongfully...that should be enough for any judge to see.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom