Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 417
  1. #276
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick View Post
    Seems to me that they should have closed the area with signs or whatever if it was so obviously “reckless” to ski there.
    This was discussed at length earlier in the thread.

  2. #277
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,741
    Quote Originally Posted by m2711c View Post
    wonder how many folks are going to refrain from reporting now that it’s known that it will be used against them in court...
    People keep saying this...but I would always assume if I self-report actions that resulted in loss of life or property, that will be used against me. How often does this happen in avalanche reporting? I'm not aware of any prior incidents (certainly not aware of all incidents that exist) where self-reporting where there was loss of life or property wasn't used against the offending party. Some bring up the Telluride/Tempters incident - but I haven't seen evidence the snowboarders self reported.
    I french kissed Kelly Kapowski.

  3. #278
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,741
    Quote Originally Posted by billyk View Post
    Does anyone find it odd that a system designed to create avalanches was destroyed by an avalanche? Sounds like a design defect to me.
    Not necessarily. I don't think we have the enough information to make that determination. They're not perfect, but I think CAIC and CDOT do a damn fine job of mitigating avalanche risk for drivers. I doubt they randomly placed that obellx, rather likely taking into account historical data for that slope, how it most typically loads/slides, and where obellx would be most effective for protecting the tunnel/road, NOT making it safe for skiers/riders above that point.
    I french kissed Kelly Kapowski.

  4. #279
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Salida, CO
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    Not a lawyer, but pretty sure words like "recklessness" have much more specific definitions in a court of law than in everyday use.
    Guessing that's where the conversation on the go pro footage comes in

  5. #280
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,064
    Quote Originally Posted by fastfred View Post
    whats reckless?
    how do you define that?
    i'm sure my definition and yours are very different
    Personal definitions don't matter.

    “A person acts recklessly when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur or a that circumstance exists.” § 18-1-501(8)

  6. #281
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,785
    Quote Originally Posted by cravenmorhead View Post
    Personal definitions don't matter.

    “A person acts recklessly when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur or a that circumstance exists.” § 18-1-501(8)
    And then we have juries that get to decide whether they met that definition. Fred may think that different jury members may interpret that definition differently, and he's right, but that's the whole point of juries, and (for a prosecutor) deciding if you can convince a jury to convict or not.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  7. #282
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,071
    Quote Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark View Post

    Yes, it is open to the public. It won't go to trial, but if it does, I can get you a virtual link, or in the courthouse if you so choose.
    It would be interesting to watch.
    "True love is much easier to find with a helicopter"

  8. #283
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    And then we have juries that get to decide whether they met that definition. Fred may think that different jury members may interpret that definition differently, and he's right, but that's the whole point of juries, and (for a prosecutor) deciding if you can convince a jury to convict or not.
    Seems pretty clear to me that their actions don't meet that definition.

  9. #284
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,785
    Quote Originally Posted by skiracer88_00 View Post
    Seems pretty clear to me that their actions don't meet that definition.
    I waffle on this one depending on mood. I certainly think some will find that their actions DO meet this definition. But ultimately, I don't think the DA will be able to win over an entire jury. Which is why this is never going to trial unless the DA insists on the hudge restitution number.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  10. #285
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    your vacation
    Posts
    4,718
    da's office doesn't have the money to goto trial or the time
    straight up fishy
    I hope they bring up the placement of the cannon (bad placement is my argument) why didn't cdot blow the hill if they had this toy?
    it's pretty easy to demonize these clowns and make them look stupid that is the only hope the da has, finding a jury in thornton or highlands ranch that agrees they are idtiots would be easy finding people in a mtn town not so easy

    the lesson to learn is to keep your mouth shut and keep walking don't say anything to anyone cause it will getused against you and don't post shit online it will be used against you too the new world order doesn't care about your rights

  11. #286
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,741
    Quote Originally Posted by fastfred View Post
    I hope they bring up the placement of the cannon (bad placement is my argument) why didn't cdot blow the hill if they had this toy?
    it's pretty easy to demonize these clowns and make them look stupid that is the only hope the da has

    the lesson to learn is to keep your mouth shut and keep walking don't say anything to anyone cause it will getused against you and don't post shit online it will be used against you too the new world order doesn't care about your rights
    The obellx is below where the snowboarders triggered the avalanche. Of course, avalanches can be triggered from below, but the terrain where the obellx is located isn't very well connected to the trigger point in this incident. Even if the obellx was higher on the slope, we all know avalanche mitigation isn't perfect and can't be relied on 100%. I bet CAIC/CDOT knows more about best placement of the obellx than any of us do.

    These two made themselves look stupid, their video shows that.

    What rights of theirs were violated? You believe "hit and run" is the best approach in life?
    I french kissed Kelly Kapowski.

  12. #287
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,785
    Quote Originally Posted by FiveLarge View Post
    I bet CAIC/CDOT knows more about best placement of the obellx than any of us do.
    Nah, man, that's crazy talk. Fred is clearly the avalanche mitigation equipment expert here.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  13. #288
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    19,215

  14. #289
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    on the banks of Fish Creek
    Posts
    7,514
    See?

  15. #290
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,013
    Interesting opinion. Still remains to be seen

  16. #291
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    557
    James Moss, an attorney with more than 35 years of experience in recreation law...

    “You never report to CAIC from here on out, period,” Moss said.

    “And I’m a big supporter of the CAIC. They do phenomenal work. It’s a horrendously difficult job that saves a lot of lives,” he said. “But this case is threatening future lives for a $170,000 piece of equipment and a road that gets buried probably every other week in the winter season.”
    Yikes

  17. #292
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Salida, CO
    Posts
    1,976
    “You never report to CAIC from here on out, period,” Moss said.

    Bullshit! No one I know will stop reporting avi observations because two dipshits were stupid enough to post their actions. The real shame is wasting Ethan's time except if he gets paid some sweet $$ as an expert witness! In fact I think the exposure might cause some big ego's to reconsider skiing a line that might result in damages. But I doubt it.

  18. #293
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    your vacation
    Posts
    4,718
    hoping for a jury summons

  19. #294
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    the Low Sierra
    Posts
    17,818
    you guys ever notice that Jason Blevins publishes most of his articles at 420am - sorta makes a fella wonder
    I didn't believe in reincarnation when I was your age either.

  20. #295
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Aloft
    Posts
    4,074
    Thats some hardcore wake and bake

  21. #296
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,785
    Very weird to write an article making it sound like Phil Weiser is weighing in, when the motion is the CAIC's attorney filing a motion. Phil's name appears on every. single. thing. that gets filed by an office of 250 attorneys. I mean, there's a reason for that, because he is ultimately responsible, but Ethan's attorney filing a motion doesn't mean that Phil is personally weighing in. Or is even aware of it.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  22. #297
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Aloft
    Posts
    4,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    Very weird to write an article making it sound like Phil Weiser is weighing in, when the motion is the CAIC's attorney filing a motion. Phil's name appears on every. single. thing. that gets filed by an office of 250 attorneys. I mean, there's a reason for that, because he is ultimately responsible, but Ethan's attorney filing a motion doesn't mean that Phil is personally weighing in. Or is even aware of it.


    Agree, but don't you think Weiser has been at least briefed on this by now? Its pretty high profile for two seperate state agencies. I know you are in this world and know WAY more than I. I've been involved with state cases and couldn't imagine, if this was in my world, that the Assisant AG wouldn't get buy off from whatever the hierarchy is over there. Again would defer this to you, but interesting if thats not the case.

  23. #298
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    the Low Sierra
    Posts
    17,818
    working on a SnowBrains article as we type

    any of you dentists want to weigh in on the record?
    I didn't believe in reincarnation when I was your age either.

  24. #299
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Soups View Post
    Agree, but don't you think Weiser has been at least briefed on this by now? Its pretty high profile for two seperate state agencies. I know you are in this world and know WAY more than I. I've been involved with state cases and couldn't imagine, if this was in my world, that the Assisant AG wouldn't get buy off from whatever the hierarchy is over there. Again would defer this to you, but interesting if thats not the case.
    No idea; maybe. It is making news so I guess probably. But still, he's not writing the brief, and on the scale of high profile cases, this isn't really high up compared to opioid and ACA and voting rights and whatever. But getting buy off and treating the brief as if Phil wrote it himself are two different things. Not to mention that this is a case where the AG is representing a state agency, it's not the AG weighing in on its own (which does happen). It would be more accurate to treat that motion as coming from Ethan and not Phil.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  25. #300
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    the Low Sierra
    Posts
    17,818
    I try to keep this stuff and the SB stuff separate

    I might refer to "social media" but I don't post links to these pages or ever even refer to TGR Forums
    I didn't believe in reincarnation when I was your age either.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •