Skiing Hit-n-Run at Breck

[tinymoose]

I find it amazing that we so readily apply the standards of an adult to a juvenile.

All this legal bantering is only distraction. None of us were there, we respond based on our own bias based on the testimony of a biased report.

Tried in the court of public opinion! I wouldn't wish it on anyone (except those who would support it)

And just What is the ski area to do with a 10 year old who collides with an adult? Accept the adults version of the incident, and banish the youth?

An impossible situation that returns unreasonable responses.

The impression I got from most people's posts and the victim's husband is that the issue isn't so much with the kid, but the parents since they were there at the time of the collision.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Most of the comments are about the behavior of the parent, not the kid

 

[tball]

And, comments about lack of reputations for reckless skiing and cursory enforcement of slow zones by the ski areas.

And just What is the ski area to do with a 10 year old who collides with an adult? Accept the adults version of the incident, and banish the youth?

The ski area could post on Facebook and Twitter that there was an alleged hit and run and descriptions. Breck doesn't seem very interested in finding the truth since there were no such posts that I've seen.

 

[CalG]

And, comments about lack of reputations for reckless skiing and enforcement of slow zones by the ski areas.


The ski area could post on Facebook and Twitter that there was an alleged hit and run and descriptions? It doesn't seem Breck is very interested in finding the truth since they did no such posts.

See post # 127 for comparison.

What is really KNOWN? The woman is hurt, she hit a tree, due to a collision with a youth.

The rest is in question... to say the least.

 

[CalG]

And, comments about lack of reputations for reckless skiing and cursory enforcement of slow zones by the ski areas.


The ski area could post on Facebook and Twitter that there was an alleged hit and run and descriptions. Breck doesn't seem very interested in finding the truth since there were no such posts that I've seen.

You must be aware that "eye witnesses" tend to be the LEAST reliable form of evidence in most court cases. Confusion dominates when things go wrong.
Read "What the Dog Saw" for added commentary.

 

[tball]

@CalG I agree with everything you wrote in the last couple of posts.

Do you disagree that Breck could do more to help the investigation to find the truth?

Summit County Sherriff is seeking public assistance into the investigation and put out a press release and a tweet.

Do you think Breck, maybe, should have retweeted this? It speaks volumes that they didn't.

http://www.co.summit.co.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=469​

SUMMIT COUNTY, CO – On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at approximately 7:12 p.m. the Summit County Sheriff’s Office received a report from a victim of a skier collision that had taken place earlier that day at approximately 12:30 p.m. on Reverie Ski Run on Peak 6 at Breckenridge Ski Resort. An unidentified juvenile male skier skiing with his father reportedly collided with the victim who then skied into a tree. The juvenile skier and father left the scene without providing name and contact information. Based upon the reported information this would be a violation of the Skier Safety Act law which requires all skiers/boarders involved in a collision to stop, exchange information and summon aid.

This case is under active investigation and no further information is being released at this time.

Witnesses and anyone with information about this collision are encouraged to contact Detective Sergeant Robert Pearce at 970-423-8925.​

 

[CalG]

@CalG I agree with everything you wrote in the last couple of posts.

Do you disagree that Breck could do more to help the investigation to find the truth?

Summit County Sherriff is seeking public assistance into the investigation and put out a press release and a tweet.

Do you think Breck, maybe, should have retweeted this? It speaks volumes that they didn't.

http://www.co.summit.co.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=469​

SUMMIT COUNTY, CO – On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at approximately 7:12 p.m. the Summit County Sheriff’s Office received a report from a victim of a skier collision that had taken place earlier that day at approximately 12:30 p.m. on Reverie Ski Run on Peak 6 at Breckenridge Ski Resort. An unidentified juvenile male skier skiing with his father reportedly collided with the victim who then skied into a tree. The juvenile skier and father left the scene without providing name and contact information. Based upon the reported information this would be a violation of the Skier Safety Act law which requires all skiers/boarders involved in a collision to stop, exchange information and summon aid.

This case is under active investigation and no further information is being released at this time.

Witnesses and anyone with information about this collision are encouraged to contact Detective Sergeant Robert Pearce at 970-423-8925.​

Only that a "resort" is not in the law enforcement business. Untrained, unqualified, not responsible.

Much like a grocery store parking lot auto collision.

The people involved are there by their own volition. Shit happens,

The resort admin should not try to minimize the event, but... Did the indecent occur on state or federal forest property? (no reply needed to this question, just an aside to the issues of responsibility and jurisdiction)

 

[François Pugh]

See post # 127 for comparison.

What is really KNOWN? The woman is hurt, she hit a tree, due to a collision with a youth.

The rest is in question... to say the least.

We know Kim's wife was injured. Kim told us a story about how that happened.

 

[tball]

Only that a "resort" is not in the law enforcement business. Untrained, unqualified, not responsible.

Ski areas are in the enforcement business. They pull passes of reckless skiers.

There is no true law enforcement on the hill. If the ski area isn't enforcing reckless skiing, who is?

Is there any doubt ski areas should be doing more to police reckless skiers and snowboarders?

 

[Fishbowl]

And to anyone in this thread arguing that "we don't know the whole story", I couldn't disagree more. You NEVER leave an accident until you see the other person ski away. Period.

The husband left the scene as well, choosing to chase down a ten year old instead of checking on his wife. I'm not passing judgement on him, but it seems clear that no one knew the seriousness of her injuries until later. Had everyone been fully aware of the situation, they may have acted differently,

 

[chilehed]

You must be aware that "eye witnesses" tend to be the LEAST reliable form of evidence in most court cases

People keep saying that, but it's not as broad a brush as some would like. The way most people use it is so wrong it's damn close to an outright lie.

 

[Philpug]

The husband left the scene as well, choosing to chase down a ten year old instead of checking on his wife. I'm not passing judgement on him, but it seems clear that no one knew the seriousness of her injuries until later. Had everyone been fully aware of the situation, they may have acted differently,

I believe they had friends with them that stayed with the wife. Serious or not...the child knocked a women down with enough momentum that she went off the trail into the woods. They should have stayed to see IF she was ok.

 

[skibob]

I find it amazing that we so readily apply the standards of an adult to a juvenile.

All this legal bantering is only distraction. None of us were there, we respond based on our own bias based on the testimony of a biased report.

Tried in the court of public opinion! I wouldn't wish it on anyone (except those who would support it)

And just What is the ski area to do with a 10 year old who collides with an adult? Accept the adults version of the incident, and banish the youth?

An impossible situation that returns unreasonable responses.

WHat you and @Doby Man post are why I want to see more involvement from the resorts themselves. In the situations I posted it was an instructor and a patroller making the call. Nobody is a true "impartial 3rd party" but it helps. But of course, I also fear too much involvement by the resort . . .

 

[slowrider]

 

[tball]

Many here have made great suggestions for skiing off-piste and weekdays. I've personally done that for years and it makes a huge difference in safety. The chance of me getting hit weekdays and off-piste is fairly negligible.

Unfortunately, that advice doesn't work for families with kids. You have to learn to ski somewhere and it's not off-piste.

Kids are also stuck with school schedules which means skiing weekends and holidays. So, we have little choice but to put the most vulnerable at greatest risk on the slopes. If I'm missing a hack around this reality I'd love to hear any suggestions!

What do I do with our kiddos? We are skiing Copper this weekend (the MLK holiday). They are ready to graduate from greens to blues. I've kept them mostly on the easiest greens, both because that seems to be the advice of the respected instructors here and because they are the safest runs. We are blessed that the beginner area at Copper (Kokomo and Lumberjack lifts) must be one of the most isolated and safest beginner areas anywhere. The naturally divided terrain does make a huge difference.

So, what next? Given we are stuck skiing weekends and holidays, I'm tempted to skip blues and take them straight to bumps so they are in a safer environment. Any suggestions or advice?

 

[SBrown]

...So, what next? Given we are stuck skiing weekends and holidays, I'm tempted to skip blues and take them straight to bumps so they are in a safer environment. Any suggestions or advice?

Get out there early. Eat early. Bumps after lunch when groomers are crowded?

My parents always took us out of school so we could ski weekdays, but it's a different world now.

We definitely ended up overterraining our youngest; I don't think it had horribly negative effects but I'm sure her technique would be better if we hadn't. Part of the reason was because she did get hit in ski school once, and part of the reason was because she was the youngest, and it just happens when the family wants to ski together. We started on blacks pretty early with her; they are just safer.

 

[skibob]

Many here have made great suggestions for skiing off-piste and weekdays. I've personally done that for years and it makes a huge difference in safety. The chance of me getting hit weekdays and off-piste is fairly negligible.

Unfortunately, that advice doesn't work for families with kids. You have to learn to ski somewhere and it's not off-piste.

Kids are also stuck with school schedules which means skiing weekends and holidays. So, we have little choice but to put the most vulnerable at greatest risk on the slopes. If I'm missing a hack around this reality I'd love to hear any suggestions!

What do I do with our kiddos? We are skiing Copper this weekend (the MLK holiday). They are ready to graduate from greens to blues. I've kept them mostly on the easiest greens, both because that seems to be the advice of the respected instructors here and because they are the safest there. We are blessed that the beginner area at Copper (Kokomo and Lumberjack lifts) must be one of the most isolated and safest beginner areas anywhere. The naturally divided terrain does make a huge difference.

So, what next? Given we are stuck skiing weekends and holidays, I'm tempted to skip blues and take them straight to bumps so they are in a safer environment. Any suggestions or advice?

That is a unique and promising idea. They are already used to skiing slowly, so why not take them straight to bumps. Let the rush of a little speed wait. They may even be better off for it.

 

[Seldomski]

@tball I think where is best to go on mountain is likely to be resort specific. In addition to what @SBrown said, you can talk to the ski school and get some recommendations for training areas that are off the beaten path. You want to avoid any area someone is likely to blast through to get to 'the gnar.' You want an area that is otherwise a dead end, not a transit center.

For instance, at Vail, Game Creek Bowl, run Lost Boy. Or possibly runs under Sourdough lift.

Plan to download at end of the day. In my experience, any runs at a Vail resort marked 'family' or 'slow zone' is a death trap.

 

[Nathanvg]

So, what next? Given we are stuck skiing weekends and holidays, I'm tempted to skip blues and take them straight to bumps so they are in a safer environment. Any suggestions or advice?

Go to a smaller ski area. For example, Cooper is close to Copper. Cooper has one double chair and one triple. Compare that to Copper where you have multiple quad and six packs dumping skiers into overlapping runs. End result is probably less than 20% the volume of people per run at Cooper.

Cooper isn't for everyone. There isn't any lodging on mountain and there are not really any true black runs. But I've been with beginner skiers before and really enjoyed the uncrowded skiing.

 

[moreoutdoorYuri]

Most of the comments are about the behavior of the parent, not the kid

AND what appears to be a lack of followup and acceptance by Breck, that 'incidents' should promote either better 'enforcement on hill' or other avenues to create safer environments for their customers.
Did Breck do full interviews of the victim and 'witnesses' ? Did Breck check the 'environmental' conditions of the mishap area? What has Breck done?
- - - - - - - - - - -

See post # 127 for comparison.

What is really KNOWN? The woman is hurt, she hit a tree, due to a collision with a youth.

The rest is in question... to say the least.

You must be aware that "eye witnesses" tend to be the LEAST reliable form of evidence in most court cases. Confusion dominates when things go wrong.
Read "What the Dog Saw" for added commentary.

accumulated above comments +,
all which miss the main point
collision mishaps which happen in the rear 180 degrees of the injured party are COMPLETELY the responsibility of the perp, not the victim.
in this case, the weight of 'purpose' and effort should be totally in aid of the victim...
pragmatic rationalization gives that warm glow of 'correctness' - until it happens to you, and you become the victim

my assumption : 50% of the 'outrage' by us, here is for the immediate incident and support of the victim.
The remainder of vitriol is spread between the obvious ongoing degradation of the skiing experience for all of us by inconsiderate sheeple AND commiseration by those of us who have been 'victims' as well.
and all is 100% justifiable !