Subsonic Radio

One year after a 4-year-old Pennsylvania boy died after riding Epcot's Mission: Space simulator ride, his family has sued Walt Disney World for wrongful death.

The family of Daudi Bamuwamye sued the company Tuesday in Orange County Circuit Court seeking unspecified damages. They say company officials didn't adequately warn the public of the ride's hazards, should never have allowed a boy so small onto the ride, and didn't do enough to help him when he got off unconscious and stricken.

"They are exposing the general public to a ride whose forces they don't really understand," said Tampa attorney Robert A. Samartin, who is representing Daudi's parents, Moses and Agnes Bamuwamye of Sellersville, Pa.

Mission: Space spins riders inside a mock spaceship, using centrifugal force, other physical motion, video and audio to simulate a trip to Mars. The ride opened in the summer of 2003 and Disney has said more than 11 million people have been on it.

In April, a second person died after riding the attraction, a 49-year-old German woman named Hiltrud Blümel. At least another 10 have been hospitalized and at least another 130 have been treated at the scene for illnesses.

In May Disney revised the ride to offer a "lite" version that does not include centrifugal force. But the company has always maintained, and still insists, that the original version is safe.

A Disney spokeswoman denied all the assertions in the suit Tuesday and offered the family sympathy.

While on vacation, Daudi, his sister Ruth, and their mother rode Mission: Space on June 13, 2005. During the ride, Agnes Bamuwamye saw her son tense up, scream and then become unresponsive. When the ride ended, paramedics and later doctors at Florida Hospital Celebration were unable to resuscitate him.

An autopsy by Dr. Jan. C. Garavaglia, chief medical examiner for the district that includes Orange and Osceola counties, found that Daudi died of a heart attack caused by a previously undiagnosed, rare heart disease that gave him an enlarged heart flawed with scar tissue.

Another autopsy is pending for Blümel, though a preliminary report said she had severe high blood pressure and died of a stroke.

The Bamuwamye family was marking the anniversary of Daudi's death Wednesday in quiet solitude and was unavailable to comment, Samartin said.

"They are struggling. They have a surviving daughter and they are forging ahead. They are people of deep faith. That helps them," he said. "But it's a day-to-day struggle.

Disney spokeswoman Jacquee Polak called his death "a terrible loss to his loved ones. We sympathize with them. However, we disagree with the assertions of the lawsuit."

The Bamuwamye suit accuses Disney of not doing anything to modify the ride or adequately warn the public of danger even though many people have sought emergency medical attention since the ride's inception.

The family also faults Disney for allowing 44-inch children on the ride, when one national standard, suggested by the American Society for Testing and Materials, calls for a 48-inch minimum for rides of high acceleration. Daudi was 46 inches tall.

And the Bamuwamyes complain that Disney paramedics did not use a portable defibrillator on him. They say Disney boasts, in promotional materials, of having portable defibrillators throughout its theme parks, and 4,000 employees trained to use them.

"We're pretty confident it would have given this kid a chance, and possibly saved his life," Samartin said.

Polak acknowledged that there was no portable defibrillator stationed at Mission: Space. But she said well-trained, well-equipped paramedics handled the emergency response appropriately. She also said the 44-inch height is appropriate for the ride, and that Disney has no reason to change the ride or public warnings that are delivered through multiple signs and audio and video media. They warn, among other things, that people with heart conditions or high blood pressure should not ride.

"We believe the attraction is safe," she said.

GoofyInOhio wrote:If Disney wasn't at fault I'm not sure what the argument would be here.

AKLRULZ wrote:

GoofyInOhio wrote:If Disney wasn't at fault I'm not sure what the argument would be here.

Thing is, Goof, it wasn't Disney's fault. It wasn't anyone's fault. The child had a defect in his heart that no one knew about until his autopsy. Maybe had he not ridden MS he'd have died later in life in another extreme situation like atheletes sometimes do - we'll obviously never know. It was a tragedy with no blame.

rdeacon wrote:This is just a sad fact of our sue happy society. If some one can sue McDonalds ( and win! ) for not knowing the coffee is hot and they should be cautious and not spill it on themselves, then people will sue for anything. I guarantee as soon as it happened lawyers were beating down the family door to get them to sue. I would blame the lawyers more the family, but both are to blame. Sure Disney has a team of lawyers for just this type if thing. Sure it’s not the first time and won't be the last.

Stella Liebeck, 79, suffered third degree burns on her inner thighs and groin while adding sugar to her coffee at the drive-up window. Third degree burns are the most serious kind of burn. McDonalds knew it had a problem. There were at least 700 previous cases of scalding coffee incidents at McDonalds before Liebeck's case. McDonalds had settled many claim before but refused Liebeck's request for $20,000 compensation, forcing the case into court. Lawyers found that McDonalds makes its coffee 30-50 degrees hotter than other restaurants, about 190 degrees. Doctors testified that it only takes 2-7 seconds to cause a third degree burn at 190 degrees. McDonalds knew its coffee was exceptionally hot but testified that they had never consulted with burn specialist. The Shriner Burn Institute had previously warned McDonalds not to serve coffee above 130 degrees. And so the jury came back with a decision- $160,000 for compensatory damages. But because McDonalds was guilty of "willful, reckless, malicious or wanton conduct" punitive damages were also applied. The jury set the award at $2.7 million. The judge then reduced the fine to less than half a million. Ms. Liebeck then settled with McDonalds for a sum reported to be much less than a half million dollars. McDonald's coffee is now sold at the same temperature as most other restaurants.

Club33Hopeful wrote:

rdeacon wrote:This is just a sad fact of our sue happy society. If some one can sue McDonalds ( and win! ) for not knowing the coffee is hot and they should be cautious and not spill it on themselves, then people will sue for anything. I guarantee as soon as it happened lawyers were beating down the family door to get them to sue. I would blame the lawyers more the family, but both are to blame. Sure Disney has a team of lawyers for just this type if thing. Sure it’s not the first time and won't be the last.

Hmmm.

Well, a lot of distortions were made in the media about this case in particular, and it has somewhat turned into an urban legend. If you look at the particulars of the McDonald's Coffee case, it seems like Stella Liebeck was well within her rights to sue, and was justified in doing so. If it were not for Stella's actions, who knows how many more accidents would have happened at McDonald's. Look at the facts:

Stella Liebeck, 79, suffered third degree burns on her inner thighs and groin while adding sugar to her coffee at the drive-up window. Third degree burns are the most serious kind of burn. McDonalds knew it had a problem. There were at least 700 previous cases of scalding coffee incidents at McDonalds before Liebeck's case. McDonalds had settled many claim before but refused Liebeck's request for $20,000 compensation, forcing the case into court. Lawyers found that McDonalds makes its coffee 30-50 degrees hotter than other restaurants, about 190 degrees. Doctors testified that it only takes 2-7 seconds to cause a third degree burn at 190 degrees. McDonalds knew its coffee was exceptionally hot but testified that they had never consulted with burn specialist. The Shriner Burn Institute had previously warned McDonalds not to serve coffee above 130 degrees. And so the jury came back with a decision- $160,000 for compensatory damages. But because McDonalds was guilty of "willful, reckless, malicious or wanton conduct" punitive damages were also applied. The jury set the award at $2.7 million. The judge then reduced the fine to less than half a million. Ms. Liebeck then settled with McDonalds for a sum reported to be much less than a half million dollars. McDonald's coffee is now sold at the same temperature as most other restaurants.

bamafan19 wrote:I know this is off-subject, but the fact that she was holding HOT coffee any where near her groin area should have thrown the whole case out on stupidity.