/ Tito: Manslaughter Charges Filed

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Rob Naylor - on 26 Aug 2013
winhill - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

not totally surprising about the club guys, Camp are based in Lombardy, dunno who else.
winhill - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to winhill:

Kong too,
Jonny2vests - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

What a crock. Those people are no more to blame than Tito's old man.
Rob Naylor - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Jonny2vests:

I find the idea that the shop that sold the quickdraws or the ring manufacturer could be held responsible amazing. Might be more of a case with some of the others involved, depending on who was responsible for what in setting things up.
JLS on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

Yikes! That's quite a list.
givemetea - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Jonny2vests: I'm not surprised the club guys are being charged. It seems totally reasonable to expect them to check that the equipment being used by a 12-year-old in their charge is safe. In fact, it seems pretty negligent that they didn't. And it wasn't just one quickdraw that was incorrectly assembled but almost all of them - that should be pretty easy to spot with a quick glance.
morticiaskeeper - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor: the Italian legal system has to find someone responsible for a death. There is no such thing as an accident.

Long before Senna and Ratzenberger (too often forgotten) were killed, motor racing had problems with Italian law. Deaths were always declared at the hospital, thus stopping the crippling legal procedures from closing a circuit for years. Over the past 40 years, many figures in racing would never set foot in Italy, lest they be arrested on old charges.

Not excusing anyone who should be responsible, just pointing out the possible reason for the charges.

It seems a bit mystifying how the Italian judiciary pursue manslaughter so doggedly, when so much else is wrong and blind eyes are turned.
Erstwhile on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to morticiaskeeper:
> (In reply to Rob Naylor) the Italian legal system has to find someone responsible for a death. There is no such thing as an accident.
>

Not entirely true, but yes, in the case of minors they tend to look for a responsible adult. Having said that, there is a big gap between being charged in Italy and being convicted. (And even people who do get convicted never really go to prison.) It's not like the USA or GB.
tom_in_edinburgh - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:
> (In reply to Jonny2vests)
>
> I find the idea that the shop that sold the quickdraws or the ring manufacturer could be held responsible amazing.

If the ring was an add on product to be installed by the purchaser rather than part of a quickdraw supplied fully assembled and the instructions were inadequate it would be more understandable.

rallymania - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

from the country that gave the world this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626

there's a lot that goes on in the world i find surprising :-)
andrewmcleod - on 26 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

Does anybody actually know WHO assembled the quickdraws, and WHY they assembled them wrong?
Coel Hellier - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to andrewmcleod:

> Does anybody actually know WHO assembled the quickdraws, and WHY they assembled them wrong?

There is a suggestion that it was a non-climber, a teenage girlfriend of one of the party. They were thus assembled wrong because she had no knowledge of what she was doing.

If this is the case then (in my opinion) no blame should be attached to this person (and it must be a desperate tragedy for her; she has my sympathy), the blame is on the adults around who should have supervised and checked them.
phil456 - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor: Being very optiminstic, these charges of all even remotely involved may lead to a complete picture of exactly what happend, and that would have a benefit to the wider climbing community. If its correct that 8 out of 10 quickdraws were faulty ( incorrectly assembled ) then I can understand his dad wanting to have charges filed.
wme - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phil456:

I know that as a child there are supervisory issues and I'm not particularly comfortable playing devil's advocate, but if someone is climbing to 8b, shouldn't they be expected to check their own kit and know what to look for?
wme - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to wme: on my last message, delete 'expected' and insert 'encouraged/expected'.
Jimbo W on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Coel Hellier:

> There is a suggestion that it was a non-climber, a teenage girlfriend of one of the party. They were thus assembled wrong because she had no knowledge of what she was doing.
> If this is the case then (in my opinion) no blame should be attached to this person (and it must be a desperate tragedy for her; she has my sympathy), the blame is on the adults around who should have supervised and checked them.

I couldn't agree more.
Lukem6 - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to wme: if we encourage them to be sole dependent then we are cutting corners, in sport climbing there's not a whole ton of gear to be checked it wouldn't take much to have a "buddy check" with someone senior or the belayer. But most importantly on any organised group day gear should be checked at least initially by the instructors/ organisers. Afterall it was only poor Titos first route of the day and he was warming up!
A simple out the bag gear check would have solved the issue and avoided this fate. I'd expected instructors at least look at the gear brought to the table by a group, as its their responsibility to make sure the group is safe.

Climbing hard just means you can climb hard. Doesn't lead to experience, knowledge or maturity. Some gifted people can get quite far in a skilled activity and still miss vital experiences to play safe. I saw a guy lead an E3 then sling a rock as a sole anchor that when his second arrived at the top of a route to check the anchor he found he could flip it with one hand!! he went ballistic but it was his mates 5th lead. So he had the climbing skill but not the knowledge to set up an anchor.
Jimbo W on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to wme:

> I know that as a child there are supervisory issues and I'm not particularly comfortable playing devil's advocate, but if someone is climbing to 8b, shouldn't they be expected to check their own kit and know what to look for?

It doesn't really matter what grade you can climb, if you are of an age to understand then you should be expected to try to take responsibility for your own safety, because that is how you learn within an apprenticeship. However, the responsibility that you should be learning to take does not imply the limits of liability, and nor does it mean that other's responsibility is not required. In my view it is still required. What is clearly distorting here is that Tito was clearly an incredible capable climber, and it would be all too easy to make the assumption that he would have been capable of being fully responsible. So I think that those who were responsible for his immediate care on the day have the responsibility for this sad accident. However, I would hope, while the lessons must be learnt, that a forgiving line could be taken, because I can easily imagine how those I know might make similar mistakes.
wme - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Lukem6: Understood. I suppose the uncomfortable truth will be who who is found guilty of what, and how that would set a precedent to others. I imagine retailers will be watching with vested interest.
ads.ukclimbing.com
Rob Naylor - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phil456:
> (In reply to Rob Naylor) Being very optiminstic, these charges of all even remotely involved may lead to a complete picture of exactly what happend, and that would have a benefit to the wider climbing community. If its correct that 8 out of 10 quickdraws were faulty ( incorrectly assembled ) then I can understand his dad wanting to have charges filed.

As I said, I can understand possible charges against some of those involved in setting things up, but bringing them against the retailer who sold the keepers, and the manufacturer of same, etc, is just to me a scatter-gun approach that detracts from actually getting a complete picture.
phleppy on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor: Before I say anything this was a tragedy which I feel for everyone involved, I was really shocked when I heard about it.

To blame the manufacturers is maybe pushing it a bit here, unless they are from some dodgy eastern European manufacturer, which I could imagine there wouldn't be any instructions with them.

I know he was only 12 but im really surprised he didn't check his own quick draws, climbing is dangerous even if your sport climbing and I would never set off up anything without double checking all my gear. Saying that I wasn't climbing when I was 12 so....

I would also like to know where was the father when all this was happening, his son was doing something dangerous and he was putting his trust in what would seem like random people.

And it's hard to believe anyone could miss such an obvious fault with something that is so important.
winhill - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Coel Hellier:
> (In reply to andrewmcleod)
>
> There is a suggestion that it was a non-climber, a teenage girlfriend of one of the party. They were thus assembled wrong because she had no knowledge of what she was doing.

Not seen that but seen lots of references to a parent of another climber.
pebbles - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:
>
>
> I would also like to know where was the father when all this was happening, his son was doing something dangerous and he was putting his trust in what would seem like random people.
>
>

blimey, thats a bit harsh! He was on a climbing trip run by the local climbing wall team.. thats hardly random people

Andy Nisbet - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

Manslaughter in Italy will be different to manslaughter in UK and may not necessarily be as serious an offence.
pebbles - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy: also, if you read the background, the whole issue with the rubber keepers involved in this accident is that it can make it easy to not spot when a QD has been assembled wrongly https://www.thebmc.co.uk/deadly-quickdraws-open-sling-rubber-band-accident
winhill - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:
>
> To blame the manufacturers is maybe pushing it a bit here, unless they are from some dodgy eastern European manufacturer, which I could imagine there wouldn't be any instructions with them.

It says in the OP that the manufacturer is based in Lombardy!

They cost 30 pence in Italy, how much of that covers the packaging and instructions, I don't know. Do they come with instructions?
>
> I would also like to know where was the father when all this was happening, his son was doing something dangerous and he was putting his trust in what would seem like random people.

Some of the reports say that this was the first time he was without his father, but even so if you read any of the reports, they say it was his club,hardly random.


Coel Hellier - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to pebbles:

> the whole issue with the rubber keepers involved in this accident is that it can make it easy to
> not spot when a QD has been assembled wrongly

Not that, *again*. That issue with open slings has nothing to do with Tito's accident. The closed-sling draws used by Tito looked (according to the reports on a French site) like the picture in the first post here. http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=556073 It does seem surprising to me that such bad assembly would go unnoticed.
Michael Ryan - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:

> And it's hard to believe anyone could miss such an obvious fault with something that is so important.

The opposite is true. How many climbers check quick draws, even when using someone else's? It is rare, but probably more common now.

As I recall, Tito borrowed some quick draws from the girl he was climbing with and a relative of the girl assembled them.

It was tragic and could have happened to anyone.

A good measured response here: http://eveningsends.com/2013/07/tito-traversa-death/

beardy mike - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor: http://www.grimper.com/news-mauvais-montage-degaines-utilisees-tito-traversa those would be Kong carabiners if they are the same as the ones he was using.
winhill - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Coel Hellier:
> (In reply to pebbles)
>
> It does seem surprising to me that such bad assembly would go unnoticed.

It would be perfectly possible for the dog bone/tape not to have been pushed all the way through the rubber, so that some of it was obscuring the carabiner when viewed face on.

Then they could be racked first but then covered by the correctly thread draws that were going to be used first.

But none of this I Can't Believe It's Not Butter speculation is very much help.
The Pylon King on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Rob Naylor:

The thing that i don't understand is since when did you have to assemble quickdraws? - all the ones i have ever bought come assembled, as i would expect them to be.

Why would something as simple as a quick draw need assembling after purchase?

Its like buying a car that you have to put the wheels on yourself.

There is something serious wrong there on the manufacturers part.
blurty - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to The Pylon King:

I had no idea that the rubber keepers could be at the root of such a serious problem

Knowing what I do now, I think I'd want to take ready-made quick-draws apart, just to make sure they had been correctly assembled anyway.
elsewhere on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to The Pylon King:
You can add the rubber keeper to existing quickdraws or buying the dogbone/sling separately (eg https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=dogbone+climbing&tbm=shop ) so self assembly can be required.

Coel Hellier - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to The Pylon King:

> Why would something as simple as a quick draw need assembling after purchase?

One reason is wanting something different from the default krabs (e.g. I use an ultra-light CAMP nano for the gear end, but a larger, easier-to-clip krab for the rope end).
phleppy on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH: If that 'girl' gets criminal charges brought to her I think it's unfair, I reckon this will haunt her for the rest of her life, how is a criminal conviction and maybe prison a good result from all this, well... it isn't is it.

Sorry if I upset anyone with my comments but I just think there's a blame game going on here and I just don't agree with it.
Coel Hellier - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:

> If that 'girl' gets criminal charges brought to her I think it's unfair

The girl is not one of those being charged or under investigation.
johncoxmysteriously - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:

>I just think there's a blame game going on here and I just don't agree with it.

Didn't stop you posting blaming a 12-year-old and his bereaved father, I noticed.

>Sorry if I upset anyone with my comments

Don't worry, I shouldn't think you upset anyone. Just made rather a lot of people think you're an embarrassing halfwit, that's all.

jcm
phleppy on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: oooooh 'halfwit', scary!
Michael Ryan - on 27 Aug 2013
In reply to phleppy:

pay attention
ads.ukclimbing.com
In reply to phleppy:
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously) oooooh 'halfwit', scary!

I think he was being charitable and actually meant sixteenth-of-a-wit, but didn't want to take that much of a liberty with the English language.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.