TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3
Pages (4): [1] 2 3 4 »

Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3 TheStar.com - Ontario - Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3 BRACEBRIDGE � Ontario Provincial Police in Bracebridge have laid 34 charges under the Liquor License Act in connection with an accident last summer in which three young men were killed. Tyler Mulcahy, 20, Cory Mintz, 20, and Kourosh Totonchian, 19, all from Toronto, left the Lake Joseph Club in Port Carling shortly before their vehicle left the road and crashed into the Joseph River. A fourth person was was injured but escaped with her life. That the group had been at the Lake Joseph Club before the crash which raised questions about the obligations of establishments that serve alcohol. The crash happened July 3, 2008, on Peninsula Road near Minett. Clublink Corp. of King City is charged with permitting drunkenness on a licensed premises and supplying liquor to apparently intoxicated persons. The following individuals - employees or club directors - were also charged: Murray Blair of Muskoka Lakes, Patrick Brigham of Toronto, Paul David Campbell of Muskoka Lakes, Egidio Caravaggio of Muskoka Lakes, Ian Colterjohn, 22, of Toronto, Scott Davidson of Muskoka Lakes, James Flegg, 21, of Oakville, Charles Lorimar, 52, of King City, Jim Molenhuis of Muskoka Lakes, Walter Moon, 34, of Gravenhurst, Neil Osborne of Muskoka Lakes, Kuldip Sahi of Muskoka Lakes, Bruce Simmonds of Muskoka Lakes, Donald Turple of Muskoka Lakes, Robert Visentin of Muskoka Lakes, and Jack Winberg of Muskoka Lakes. They are to appear in Bracebridge court on Jan. 27. The investigation was undertaken by the the OPP with the assistance of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.

Personally, I think this is bullshit.

Some rich kids drive their dad's Audi up to their Muskoka cottage, drink a bit too much during lunch and crash the car and its the restaurant's fault?

Isn't the whole point of having a drinking age so we only serve drinks to those who should be old enough to make responsible decisions, such as whether or not they should drink and drive?

If I am going to a bar and driving my own car there, I know how much I can drink before it is unsafe to drive, I don't need the restaurant to babysit me like I am 8 years old!

The only way this can be justified is if the restaurant served these kids like 9 beers each... because that would be irresponsible of them, however, I doubt this is the case. And it seems as if they are charging every single person who works at that restaurant, which is also ridiculous.

EDIT: The only reason this is happening is because the upperclassish dad of the driver is making a big stink about it. Going on TV and saying 'OMG I can't believe they served my son some beer at lunch', when he should be saying 'maybe my son shouldn't have been drinking and driving'.

We were just talking about this at work.

My boss's daughters friends work there or something like that.

The bar responsible for how much they serve. They served them over around 35 drinks total. However, its hard to keep a track of how much your serving each person because other can buy it for you. The kids told them they were getting picked up but they lied and drove instead.

quote:

Originally posted by �Zm�zis The bar responsible for how much they serve. They served them over around 35 drinks total. However, its hard to keep a track of how much your serving each person because other can buy it for you. The kids told them they were getting picked up but they lied and drove instead.

Alright well 35 is definitely a lot. If they specifically lied about driving obviously they fully intended to drink and drive. The kids made a stupid decision and paid for it in the ultimate way.... I feel terrible for them but its not right to try to shift the blame around to others when these kids (who are actually adults) made the decision to drink and drive.

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man Alright well 35 is definitely a lot. If they specifically lied about driving obviously they fully intended to drink and drive. The kids made a stupid decision and paid for it in the ultimate way.... I feel terrible for them but its not right to try to shift the blame around to others when these kids (who are actually adults) made the decision to drink and drive.

No argument there...

any establishment that serves alcohol has a duty of care to not serve alcohol to someone who is intoxicated. The kids would still be alive if the golf club stopped serving them. I have handled several insurance claims along this line and in each one the establishment was held partially liable.

what i don't get is that they're charging 16 people with this. How does that make any sense.

because 16 people forced alcohol into them and then demanded they drive at gunpoint?

If i were one of those 16 people charged with such bullshit id leave the country and surrender my citizenship.

This place is ridiculous

quote:

Originally posted by Pett what i don't get is that they're charging 16 people with this. How does that make any sense.

in any lawsuit they are going to name as many parties as possible. In this case they are probably employees, directors and owners of the club.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 because 16 people forced alcohol into them and then demanded they drive at gunpoint?

Sure, you scoff today, but next time you're bound, gagged, funneled 35 bottles of Bud Light, and subsequently forced to drive to Las Vegas at gunpoint, you'll be thanking your lucky stars that our legal system has you taken care of!

Re: Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man Isn't the whole point of having a drinking age so we only serve drinks to those who should be old enough to make responsible decisions, such as whether or not they should drink and drive? If I am going to a bar and driving my own car there, I know how much I can drink before it is unsafe to drive, I don't need the restaurant to babysit me like I am 8 years old!

Time and time again, it has been shown that people drink and drive - people of all ages.
I do believe the establishment should be partly responsible for people who leave and cause bodily harm from behind the wheel but in this specific case I'm not sure the law is being applied appropriately.

The establishment has a legal responsibility to not serve people who are intoxicated, and the company defintely needs to be held accountable.. which they are through these charges.

That being said, charging all the staff is pretty whack. There's no way all of those people were involved in serving their drinks.

Re: Re: Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper Time and time again, it has been shown that people drink and drive - people of all ages. I do believe the establishment should be partly responsible for people who leave and cause bodily harm from behind the wheel but in this specific case I'm not sure the law is being applied appropriately.

People of all ages do drink and drive, but I believe adults should be held responsible for their actions. Yes the bar should be held partially responsible but I think it depends on the specific circumstance. If these kids told the bartender they were getting picked up, who is the bar to interrupt their nice summer afternoon of drinking, assuming it doesn't go overboard to the point that they are getting out of control. Obviously if you see a kid stumble or they are slurring or something then that a sign to stop, but if they are just casually ordering drinks over a few hours then who is the bar to say they are too drunk. In this case though, I must say 35 drinks is quite a bit...

quote:

Originally posted by activate The establishment has a legal responsibility to not serve people who are intoxicated

What does 'intoxicated' mean exactly in this context? I bet there isn't a bar in the entire world that can go a whole night without serving someone who is 'intoxicated'.

There really is no way to tell if someone is too intoxicated unless they are totally hammered, like if they are slurring or stumbling. I could probably down 10 beers and still appear to be fine while ordering a drink at a bar, but would obviously be way too fucked up to drive. The only way to enforce the 'dont serve intoxicated people' rule would be to give a breathalizer to everyone who approaches the bar, which is obviously unrealistic.

I really think this 'dont serve intoxicated people' rule can only apply to extreme circumstances where the bar knows someone is fucked and keeps serving them drinks and then lets them leave the bar unaccompanied.

Re: Re: Re: Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man People of all ages do drink and drive, but I believe adults should be held responsible for their actions.

oook...well, the "adults" in this situation happen to be the people that are dead.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper oook...well, the "adults" in this situation happen to be the people that are dead.

So that means we automatically have to shift the blame to a living person since the ones who are actually responsible are dead?

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man What does 'intoxicated' mean exactly in this context? I bet there isn't a bar in the entire world that can go a whole night without serving someone who is 'intoxicated'.

very true, but it IS the law, and it is mandatory that license holders follow it. It is also taught as part of the smart serve traning that all servers and bartenders are supposed to have if they serve alcohol.

info on how to judge whether someone is intoxicated can be easily found on the AGCO website. http://www.agco.on.ca/pdf/Non-Forms/3057E.pdf

They also provide this info to license holders and i'm told they also send regular email updates as well as through the mail

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man What does 'intoxicated' mean exactly in this context? I bet there isn't a bar in the entire world that can go a whole night without serving someone who is 'intoxicated'.

That is exactly what I was thinking.

I personally think this sort of law needs to be rebuked.

typical canadian attitude. blame anyone BUT the real person responsible

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan typical canadian attitude. blame anyone BUT the real person responsible

Yeah everyone is making it look like 'oh these poor little kids were allowed to get drunk at a bar and then allowed to drive' and its all the evil golf clubs fault. Why has no one said: these kids made an irresponsible decision and paid for it.

I think their age plays a big factor too. No one would be saying anything if the same thing happened and it were a group of 40 year old men instead. The media/police are acting like these kids were 12 years old and unable to make decisions on their own.

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man Yeah everyone is making it look like 'oh these poor little kids were allowed to get drunk at a bar and then allowed to drive' and its all the evil golf clubs fault. Why has no one said: these kids made an irresponsible decision and paid for it. I think their age plays a big factor too. No one would be saying anything if the same thing happened and it were a group of 40 year old men instead. The media/police are acting like these kids were 12 years old and unable to make decisions on their own.

It is almost always the parents who don't want to believe their kids were little idiots because of the way they were raised. Same thing happened recently, then the father lobbied the gov for stiffer driving conditions for teens.

Nobody, but the drivers and passengers should be responsible.

quote:

Originally posted by activate very true, but it IS the law, and it is mandatory that license holders follow it. It is also taught as part of the smart serve traning that all servers and bartenders are supposed to have if they serve alcohol. info on how to judge whether someone is intoxicated can be easily found on the AGCO website. http://www.agco.on.ca/pdf/Non-Forms/3057E.pdf They also provide this info to license holders and i'm told they also send regular email updates as well as through the mail

^^

What he said.

Re: Golf club, employees and directors charged over crash that killed 3

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man EDIT: The only reason this is happening is because the upperclassish dad of the driver is making a big stink about it. Going on TV and saying 'OMG I can't believe they served my son some beer at lunch', when he should be saying 'maybe my son shouldn't have been drinking and driving'.

I believe this is the same Dad that has been pushing for a change to the new driver rules.

I think there needs to be a balance of blame...

The establishment knows the rules to have a license to serve booze and the Dad should really buck up and realize that some of this does fall on the shoulders of those involved.

They all broke the law and changing making the current laws stricter likely would not have deterred this from happening.

quote:

Originally posted by teufel-man Yeah everyone is making it look like 'oh these poor little kids were allowed to get drunk at a bar and then allowed to drive' and its all the evil golf clubs fault. Why has no one said: these kids made an irresponsible decision and paid for it.

I don't think anyone is saying that. Any establishment that serves alcohol has laws they must obey. If they fail to obey these laws then they will be held accountable.

quote:

Originally posted by ChemEnhanced I don't think anyone is saying that. Any establishment that serves alcohol has laws they must obey. If they fail to obey these laws then they will be held accountable.

and it's not like the charges the country club and employees are facing are criminal charges.

Realistically, the worst thing the business faces is a license suspension and a fine, and the worst thing facing the employees is a fine.

quote:

Originally posted by activate and it's not like the charges the country club and employees are facing are criminal charges. Realistically, the worst thing the business faces is a license suspension and a fine, and the worst thing facing the employees is a fine.

For any negligence claim....which is where the money is....the employees will be covered under the insurance policy the club will have. In reality, any individual named in this lawsuit doesn't have much to worry about.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.