Snowboarders cited for triggering avalanche at Eisenhower tunnel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

I would put a few avy experts up on the stand to show that ski cuts are a standard safety practice and his utterance was a reaction to the rare experience of having a big slide as a result, which is actually true.

---

No respectable avalanche professional is going to claim that ski cutting slab that is likely to step down to the ground in that snowpack is a regularly recommended safety practice for the CO winter backcountry. It is not.

Asking that would allow the avalanche professional to accurately testify that ski cutting inbounds is the most risky mitigation action ski patrollers engage in and that they only do it when terrain is closed, not over open roads.

It also opens the line of inquiry as to whether these two snowboarders were professionally trained to ski cut for mitigation. (answer: no)

You may be right about the advisability of ski cutting, etc., but I could ginny up 3 ski guides in a heartbeat who teach avy courses that would say ski cutting IS a standard safety practice for backcountry skiers. I don't need a DOT professional or pro patroller to make a convincing argument to a jury. Could produce plenty of articles too, to refute your expert opinion. And the fact that a tiny little ski cut could cause the avy that actually occurred will solidify the premise that the equipment was placed in a terrible spot. We're talking about reasonable doubt here. These guys will walk, scot free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

You may be right about the advisability of ski cutting, etc., but I could ginny up 3 ski guides in a heartbeat who teach avy courses that would say ski cutting IS a standard safety practice for backcountry skiers. I don't need a DOT professional or pro patroller to make a convincing argument to a jury. Could produce plenty of articles too, to refute your expert opinion. And the fact that a tiny little ski cut could cause the avy that actually occurred will solidify the premise that the equipment was placed in a terrible spot. We're talking about reasonable doubt here. These guys will walk, scot free.

---

Ski guides aren’t avalanche control professionals

Ha! Maybe not to you they aren't, but they will be for the purposes of this case. Anybody certified to teach Avy 1 courses will be accepted as an expert for the purposes of testifying on the reasonableness of the actions these guys took that day. Avy 1 is the gold standard for the minimum necessary for the everywoman "getting out there safely." BTW - As long as we're talking about professionalism, is there any science weaker than avy science? I have a hard time coming up with an example.

The only weak thing here would be not throwing the book at these two assholes.

let he who is without sin cast the first book.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

Ha! Maybe not to you they aren't, but they will be for the purposes of this case. Anybody certified to teach Avy 1 courses will be accepted as an expert for the purposes of testifying on the reasonableness of the actions these guys took that day. Avy 1 is the gold standard for the minimum necessary for the everywoman "getting out there safely." BTW - As long as we're talking about professionalism, is there any science weaker than avy science? I have a hard time coming up with an example.

---

“Anyone with a trust fund and a pair of Dynafits is guide these days”

Avy 1 as the gold standard is kinda weak, it’s supposed to teach recreational users how to identify avalanche terrain and travel in it if I had a dollar for everyone that said they were “certified Avy 1” I would own a pair of Praxis RXs, these two guys were stupid for being in avalanche paths that are controlled to protect the highway telling the whole world probably even stupider

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

I would put a few avy experts up on the stand to show that ski cuts are a standard safety practice and his utterance was a reaction to the rare experience of having a big slide as a result, which is actually true. And then fall back to the fact that this would have happened eventually anyway, based on their having placed the avy equipment in the middle of a natural slide path. All you need is one juror to agree.

---

Everything else above is subjective bullshit but the last trumps all.

Quote:

---

All you need is one juror to agree.

---

BTW just about every avalanche expert would also say that ski cuts are not an effective tool for dealing with a hardslab.

I want to tell you a story. I'm going to ask you all to close your eyes while I tell you the story. I want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to yourselves. Go ahead. Close your eyes, please. This is a story about 2 snowboarders going on a tour. I want you to picture them. Can you see them? I want you to picture them. Now imagine there skiers.

Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

You may be right about the advisability of ski cutting, etc., but I could ginny up 3 ski guides in a heartbeat who teach avy courses that would say ski cutting IS a standard safety practice for backcountry skiers. I don't need a DOT professional or pro patroller to make a convincing argument to a jury. Could produce plenty of articles too, to refute your expert opinion. And the fact that a tiny little ski cut could cause the avy that actually occurred will solidify the premise that the equipment was placed in a terrible spot. We're talking about reasonable doubt here. These guys will walk, scot free.

---

I don't know you and I don't know where you are from, but your name suggests you are used to a maritime snowpack and not a continental snowpack. Ski cuts are not standard safety practice in a continental snowpack, they aren't L1 curriculum, and no halfway respected guide will say ski cutting a line that could bury a road is a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKIP IN7RO

I want to tell you a story. I'm going to ask you all to close your eyes while I tell you the story. I want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to yourselves. Go ahead. Close your eyes, please. This is a story about 2 snowboarders going on a tour. I want you to picture them. Can you see them? I want you to picture them. Now imagine there skiers.

---

It doesn’t matter that they were snowboarding, skiers are just as stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

I don't know you and I don't know where you are from, but your name suggests you are used to a maritime snowpack and not a continental snowpack. Ski cuts are not standard safety practice in a continental snowpack, they aren't L1 curriculum, and no halfway respected guide will say ski cutting a line that could bury a road is a good idea.

---

Yeah, I'm sure ski cuts are just a maritime thing. Regardless, they will get experts who say otherwise. And what's your beef with that? We're talking about a court case here, not debating real life best practices. AFAIC, they probably shouldn't have put those avy devices there. And they definitely should have made the slopes above off limits. I suspect a jury will find those to be significant errors of judgement made by bonafide avalanche professionals, mitigating the culpability of hapless recreationalists.

Does anyone find it odd that a system designed to create avalanches was destroyed by an avalanche? Sounds like a design defect to me.

Quote:

---

I suspect a jury will find those to be significant errors of judgement made by bonafide avalanche professionals, mitigating the culpability of hapless recreationalists.

---

Not a Lawyer here, just a washed up former avalanche professional.

Please explain how the siting of those Daisies by avalanche professionals has anything to do with the poor decision making on the part of two other people? Ostensibly people who by their own claim are avalanche experts or at least well educated in avalanche hazards.

Are you saying if the equipment had not been there these guys would be liable?

One has little to do with the other.

If there had been vehicles parked in the run out and they were damaged would that have made any difference? If there had been traffic on the bypass and someone was killed would these guys be liable for some sort of a Homicide charge?

Quote:

---

As long as we're talking about professionalism, is there any science weaker than avy science? I have a hard time coming up with an example.

---

Guess you don't know much about the subject so it is easy to be critical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion 2020

Not trying to start a fight but if you are that worried about demonstrating a pattern of recklessness maybe you should be looking at your behavior.

Have a safe winter.

---

Fair question. I post obs from other people's skier triggered avi's (that I've seen but been uninvolved in), from pits/analyses where I've decided backed off, or very small sluffs, block failures, or even naturals I've witnessed. And in full disclosure, I have posted a couple where I made a mistake or missed a terrain feature. Not proud of those. Nobody has been caught or hurt and no 'highway fixtures damaged.'
I always posted for the same reasons these guys did; awareness and maybe it'll help someone else be safer.
Where I live, we are all very quick to MMQB any avi mistakes and the court of public opinion is often way more critical than it is understanding. So like Redacted said, could a 'good' lawyer take all that and spin it up to make it look bad? Yeah maybe so.
So that's my point, just makes me think twice.

Have a safe winter also

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion 2020

Guess you don't know much about the subject so it is easy to be critical.

---

Yup.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billyk

Does anyone find it odd that a system designed to create avalanches was destroyed by an avalanche? Sounds like a design defect to me.

---

This.

The O'Bellx clearly would have been taken out by a slide at some point. This was just a golden opportunity for the "experts" to blame someone else and not take the ding on their insurance premium.

OK, great, so what?

Were they charged with destruction of property?

@ MoN, got it and understand. Best wishes for some snow.

They were charged with reckless endangerment, and the DA is seeking restitution, which they can get if they can prove (1) the defendants committed a crime and (2) the crime was the cause of the property damage at issue. For all the talk of "precedent" in this case, these are all pretty standard elements of criminal procedure. Any time somebody does something stupid (and arguably reckless) that causes six figures of damage, it shouldn't be a surprise that they get charged with a crime.

Incase anyone wants to watch the motions hearing today at 3pm

https://judicial.webex.com/webappng/...532906FC0AAFD8

video and photos to be allowed at trial. No 4th amendment violation.

https://www.summitdaily.com/news/cri...sed-avalanche/


Trial set for mar25

wonder how many folks are going to refrain from reporting now that it’s known that it will be used against them in court...

How often do avalanche incidents end up in Court?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m2711c

wonder how many folks are going to refrain from reporting now that it’s known that it will be used against them in court...

---

This is what I'm flummoxed by - surely the public interest in sharing information for the purposes of education trumps the public interest of prosecuting / sending the message, however dumb their actions may have been. But I suppose if you're the Sheriff's Office, that unintended consequence of putting a chill on avy information sharing isn't as much of a concern as it would be for CAIC.