Buncrana pier victims family being sued

Arghus · 26-03-2018 7:33pm

I'm sure there's more to this than meets the eye, because it makes literally no sense.

I'm waiting for someone to come along here who actually knows something about the law, before I deem her worthy of the pit of fire.

Spanish Eyes · 26-03-2018 7:49pm

I suspect it could be the first of many claims associated with this tragedy. Watch this space.

Partner of drunk driver who tragically slipped his car into the water, has already sued Donegal CC for having a slippy slipway.

Nekarsulm · 26-03-2018 7:51pm

kerry cow wrote: »

Like ,I am shocked to read back over previous posts and it been news to me that the driver was 3 times over the legal limit .
What are people thinking .
I wouldn't reverse my car out the drive and back in again if I had a smell of it .

The drivers blood alcohol level was revealed at the inquest to be 3 times the limit.

There was algae on the slipway, and ironically this was always removed by officials in the past (presumably Council workers, or Harbour Authority , I don't know which)
But in recent times the practice was banned because of environmental concerns about the chemical used to clean the concrete.

strandroad · 26-03-2018 7:54pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I suspect it could be the first of many claims associated with this tragedy. Watch this space.

Partner of drunk driver who tragically slipped his car into the water, has already sued Donegal CC for having a slippy slipway.

How was the slipway lawsuit even entertained, if the car shouldn't be there in the first place, and definitely not with a DUI behind the wheel?

TallGlass · 26-03-2018 8:01pm

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Would like to read more details on exactly what's happening before ripping shreds from her, it obviously doesn't paint her in a good light though.

She is suing for PTSD or post traumatic stress from it.

Now, if she was in the car then I might say she has a point, from my understanding, she was basically watching there while the car sunk into the water.

All I can say is, no one forced her to watch the car sink and rubberneck like she done. At any stage, she could have decided to walk away. No one asked her to stay and watch or even help.

The last part, she is entitled to do what she is doing, but clearly hasn't thought this one over at all. She is going to get slammed by the community and I have my doubts about this claim being entertained and if it is, the sum of money is not going to be worth the hassle/backlash she will get.

But for me, the main part is the PTSD, she watched and no-one forced her to. The fella on the other hand, watched and decided that he had seen enough and action needed to be taken and went into the water to help. If anyone, he should be the one with PTSD.

26-03-2018 8:07pm

This is what she was reported to have said in March 2016.

She added: “It was very traumatic and difficult to stand on the pier and to watch what was unfolding in front of me. I saw Davitt swimming out to get the baby. I was afraid for his life as well as for the lives of the people in the car. When I saw the car sinking I was afraid that Davitt would dive under the water to try to help the people in the car.

“I shouted at him ‘Davitt come back, Davitt come back’. I could see he was struggling and that he was tiring fast as he held the baby really high up in the air. Just before the car sank there was no noise, no screams, you could hear a pin drop on the pier. I went down the slipway and Davitt handed the baby over to me.

“I went off the slipway and went into the water up to my waist. I didn’t want to go into the water any further in case no-one would get out of the water. I then crawled up the slipway with the baby in my arms. She was not crying and I thought that she was dead.

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/girlfriend-buncrana-hero-davitt-walsh-11080302

Graces7 · 26-03-2018 8:07pm

Nekarsulm wrote: »

The drivers blood alcohol level was revealed at the inquest to be 3 times the limit.

There was algae on the slipway, and ironically this was always removed by officials in the past (presumably Council workers, or Harbour Authority , I don't know which)
But in recent times the practice was banned because of environmental concerns about the chemical used to clean the concrete.

Algae can be cleared with spades/scrapers then power washed. It grows back; repeat. These are not huge areas.

Nekarsulm · 26-03-2018 8:10pm

I'm only making wild guess'es but often one person in a couple would sue the other if they were in a car crash.
I've heard of a wife suing her husband's insurance.
But it pretty much means the husband never drives again, and the wife takes over the driving and they have a nice lump sum into the bargain.

In this cash, it's surprising the partner didn't go that route.
But then again, the Audi could have been in her name, and him a named driver, so as you can't sue yourself, she aimed at the Council.

KERSPLAT! · 26-03-2018 8:12pm

TallGlass wrote: »

She is suing for PTSD or post traumatic stress from it.

Now, if she was in the car then I might say she has a point, from my understanding, she was basically watching there while the car sunk into the water.

All I can say is, no one forced her to watch the car sink and rubberneck like she done. At any stage, she could have decided to walk away. No one asked her to stay and watch or even help.

The last part, she is entitled to do what she is doing, but clearly hasn't thought this one over at all. She is going to get slammed by the community and I have my doubts about this claim being entertained and if it is, the sum of money is not going to be worth the hassle/backlash she will get.

But for me, the main part is the PTSD, she watched and no-one forced her to. The fella on the other hand, watched and decided that he had seen enough and action needed to be taken and went into the water to help. If anyone, he should be the one with PTSD.

While I don't disagree with most of your post, she was hardly fùcking rubbernecking. Don't diminish her part in saving the baby. Sure, anyone would have done the same, but they didn't. She did.

Nekarsulm · 26-03-2018 8:18pm

Graces7 wrote: »

Algae can be cleared with spades/scrapers then power washed. It grows back; repeat. These are not huge areas.

You could with a power washer. Spades not so effective.

Either way, the 4x4's used by fishermen (when they don't use a tractor) would have very different tyres to the typical rubber fitted to Q7's, X5's and Range Rovers.
Massive wide tyres, tarmac thread and low profile, in every way the polar opposite of what you want for grip in slippery conditions.

mikemac2 · 26-03-2018 8:22pm

she wasnt very traumatised partying in amsterdam last weekend

Hah from the Facebook comments on Donegal Daily :pac:

Captain Obvious · 26-03-2018 8:23pm

TallGlass wrote: »

She is suing for PTSD or post traumatic stress from it.

Now, if she was in the car then I might say she has a point, from my understanding, she was basically watching there while the car sunk into the water.

All I can say is, no one forced her to watch the car sink and rubberneck like she done. At any stage, she could have decided to walk away. No one asked her to stay and watch or even help.

The last part, she is entitled to do what she is doing, but clearly hasn't thought this one over at all. She is going to get slammed by the community and I have my doubts about this claim being entertained and if it is, the sum of money is not going to be worth the hassle/backlash she will get.

But for me, the main part is the PTSD, she watched and no-one forced her to. The fella on the other hand, watched and decided that he had seen enough and action needed to be taken and went into the water to help. If anyone, he should be the one with PTSD.

How did you feel the last time you had to hear the screams of people as they began drowning despite your efforts to help them? Perhaps you could give her some advice on getting over it?

Spanish Eyes · 26-03-2018 8:31pm

If the mother/partner who was not there on the day can sue the council for a slippy slipway, then surely all those who were witnesses to that awful event can do the same.

Up to the courts to decide who is entitled to be recompensed for trauma or whatever.

Let them at it.

At the end of the day nothing will bring the drowned people/kids back.

suicide_circus · 26-03-2018 8:39pm

^^^a big wad of sweaty money can do wonders for the soul

iamwhoiam · 26-03-2018 8:39pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

If the mother/partner who was not there on the day can sue the council for a slippy slipway, then surely all those who were witnesses to that awful event can do the same.

Up to the courts to decide who is entitled to be recompensed for trauma or whatever.

Let them at it.

At the end of the day nothing will bring the drowned people/kids back.

She is not suing the council as far as I know . She is suing the family

corks finest · 26-03-2018 8:40pm

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2018/03/26/woman-who-helped-save-baby-in-buncrana-drowning-tragedy-sues-victims-family/
I take what Donegal Daily says with a pinch of salt but then again, nothing surprises me anymore...

Hard to believe?

Captain Obvious · 26-03-2018 8:42pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

She is not suing the council as far as I know . She is suing the family

Has that been confirmed? I'd say it's more likely she is suing the driver and his insurance and someone in his family is acting as his representative.

Stargate · 26-03-2018 8:46pm

If it's true, health profession ( cardiac physiologist ) Heart of stone. What is the world coming to?

Purple Mountain · 26-03-2018 8:46pm

I can totally understand how she would be traumatised by the event.
She saw her boyfriend swim out into deep water not knowing if he'd come back.
She also went into the water herself.
After the outcome, it's no wonder she has whatever stress and trauma she has...but..I think it's very insulting and unnecessary to seek financial gain from this tragedy.
It's crass and insensitive at best.

Graces7 · 26-03-2018 8:47pm

Captain Obvious wrote: »

How did you feel the last time you had to hear the screams of people as they began drowning despite your efforts to help them? Perhaps you could give her some advice on getting over it?

Is that the point? At what stage do you then decide to sue the family ie send a "legal letter" to the 86 year old father who has lost his son and other precious family? Have they not suffered enough? How will money help her?

Captain Obvious · 26-03-2018 8:49pm

Graces7 wrote: »

Is that the point? At what stage do you then decide to sue the family ie send a "legal letter" to the 86 year old father who has lost his son and other precious family? Have they not suffered enough? How will money help her?

Well that depends. If she has had to get counselling it will help her pay for that. If she had to take time off work to deal with the trauma she will get recompensed for that.

iamwhoiam · 26-03-2018 8:50pm

Graces7 wrote: »

Is that the point? At what stage do you then decide to sue the family ie send a "legal letter" to the 86 year old father who has lost his son and other precious family? Have they not suffered enough? How will money help her?

I agree . There must be thousands of people who were traumatised from witnessing horrors . I very much doubt they felt the need to make it about them
A member of my family witness a young girl jump from a bridge on a motorway and land near his car . He was deeply shocked but never once felt it was ever about him .

jackboy · 26-03-2018 8:51pm

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2018/03/26/woman-who-helped-save-baby-in-buncrana-drowning-tragedy-sues-victims-family/
I take what Donegal Daily says with a pinch of salt but then again, nothing surprises me anymore...

Comments at the end are gas. Unbelievably aggressive. What's the story with so many people calling her a tramp?

bucketybuck · 26-03-2018 8:52pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

then surely all those who were witnesses to that awful event can do the same.

Up to the courts to decide who is entitled

TallGlass wrote: »

The last part, she is entitled to do what she is doing

Bollocks to you, her, and everybody else who has made "entitlement" such a dirty word.

Funny how these days the only time you hear the word "entitled" is when some scab wants a handout.

bear1 · 26-03-2018 8:52pm

So this, let's call her a person, who has been trained as a nurse, held a baby while her ex swam out and did most of the work, is now suing the estate of the family that died for trauma.
Have I seriously just read it like that?
I hope she gets counter sued.

OldMrBrennan83 · 26-03-2018 8:53pm

This post has been deleted.

iamwhoiam · 26-03-2018 8:54pm

bear1 wrote: »

So this, let's call her a person, who has been trained as a nurse, held a baby while her ex swam out and did most of the work, is now suing the estate of the family that died for trauma.
Have I seriously just read it like that?
I hope she gets counter sued.

Just to be pedantic she is not a nurse she is a cardiac physiologist

nacho libre · 26-03-2018 8:59pm

I knew there would be one or two defending the actions of this vile brat. As if the elderly man has not suffered enough.:(

TheChizler · 26-03-2018 9:09pm

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I think it's very insulting and unnecessary to seek financial gain from this tragedy.
It's crass and insensitive at best.

Didn't the article mention she was just suing for loss of earnings? It's way too sparse on details, irresponsible reporting in my view, being purposely vague in order to stir up outrage. We have know way of knowing is she's in it for gain, or if she's been having flashbacks and unable to work for the last year due to extreme PTSD and is unable to even make rent or something like that. It's very easy to assume the worst without getting both sides, and here we hardly even have one side.

I'd at least like to know who she's suing, the estate or the insurance via the estate.

JJJJNR · 26-03-2018 9:11pm

Something not sitting right about this, possible smear campaign, someone using a fake solicitor to extort money.