Inmate's family plans to sue over fatal fall

they should sue! i don't care if it was an "inmate" or "lower lifeform" as some of the readers on here would say - they should have at least at a railing up to prevent this fall and death!!

sounds like his opportunistic "family" smell a big
$$$ettlement......

Negligence regarding the safety of a person permitted to work at the facility is the determining factor. The family will get a settlement, the only thing left is to determine the amount.

No one has asked the question, "Why are they using inmates?" Is it cheap labor or slave labor? Safety training is a requirement at ANY industrial site. Are inmates getting this, or only "employees"? I think Las Cruces, Dona Ana County, and the State of New Mexico all need to catch up to current day working safety standards. Without, they will be facing many law suits. The family SHOULD suit and win.

And what happens when the worker (don't matter who)
does not use a harness when in heights.

It is an OSHA requirement.

All the years of my employment, we were trained to THINK safety. and we as employers have the right to refuse to do a job when you are in danger.

Didn't this guy use his thinking cap, that when you get up in high places you need to use something to protect you from falls? when there is a potential of that happening?

I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit.

My understanding of Workman Comp injuries is that they have the right to refuse you if you fail to use the protection for yourself when provided.
Meaning to say, you don't go to work all stoned out (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) and expect someone to pay your injuries because you can't think straight. I know this is not the case of this one person, but I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it.

The job still has to get done no matter who does it.
Devise a worker harness that will prevent a rapid decent, a "decelerator" to avoid this kind of concrete poisoning. Did the prisoner contribute to his own death?

It is very common knowledge that if you die while in custody as a prisoner of the county or state that your survivors who appear give a short squat can probably make a few hundred thousand bucks off the stupidity of your "loved one" being there in the first place.

Stay out of jail.

SUE!!!!!!!

Duh wrote:

And what happens when the worker (don't matter who)
does not use a harness when in heights.
It is an OSHA requirement.
All the years of my employment, we were trained to THINK safety. and we as employers have the right to refuse to do a job when you are in danger.
Didn't this guy use his thinking cap, that when you get up in high places you need to use something to protect you from falls? when there is a potential of that happening?
I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit.
My understanding of Workman Comp injuries is that they have the right to refuse you if you fail to use the protection for yourself when provided.
Meaning to say, you don't go to work all stoned out (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) and expect someone to pay your injuries because you can't think straight. I know this is not the case of this one person, but I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it.

This was an inmate so they probably didn't have any kind of training. This case would not fall under workmans comp because he was not employed. The other thing would this inmate be taken back for not obeying an officer and get some kind of disciplinary action against him because he refused to do a job that was ordered of him. These are some of the things you need to wonder about since this was no ordinary employee.

Society is past the point where a working inmate is subjected to a lower standard of personal safety than an individual who applies for and receives an employment position.

I smell a lawsuit, especially after OSHA investigates.

A wrongful death suit usually pays what the victim would have earned the remaining years of their life, so I would say about $500 bucks would cover this lying thief.

Duh wrote:

And what happens when the worker (don't matter who)
does not use a harness when in heights.
It is an OSHA requirement.
All the years of my employment, we were trained to THINK safety. and we as employers have the right to refuse to do a job when you are in danger.
Didn't this guy use his thinking cap, that when you get up in high places you need to use something to protect you from falls? when there is a potential of that happening?
I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit.
My understanding of Workman Comp injuries is that they have the right to refuse you if you fail to use the protection for yourself when provided.
Meaning to say, you don't go to work all stoned out (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) and expect someone to pay your injuries because you can't think straight. I know this is not the case of this one person, but I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it.

I guess this guy had it all planned out. A 16 foot fall, landing on his back (I wonder how excrutiatingly painful that must have been), and then the slow death accompanied by hemorrhaging internally and having all your bones crushed. If this was the case, he planned it out very well. OSHA cited these guys for safety non-compliance (I believe this article mentions this). OSHA requires the employer to provide the harness and safety training, it's hard for an inmate to provide their own. I don't think they sell harnesses through the jail commissary either.

I see he got the death penalty. I thought the State abolished it a couple years back!

Paying the family off will be cheaper than housing him in jail.

Duh wrote:

And what happens when the worker (don't matter who)
does not use a harness when in heights.
It is an OSHA requirement.
All the years of my employment, we were trained to THINK safety. and we as employers have the right to refuse to do a job when you are in danger.
Didn't this guy use his thinking cap, that when you get up in high places you need to use something to protect you from falls? when there is a potential of that happening?
I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit.
My understanding of Workman Comp injuries is that they have the right to refuse you if you fail to use the protection for yourself when provided.
Meaning to say, you don't go to work all stoned out (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) and expect someone to pay your injuries because you can't think straight. I know this is not the case of this one person, but I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it.

How can you be "sure" that protection was provided? The way I read the story this guy was working at ground level and fell into an open pit. If the waste center could not even secure the area with a simple railing then what makes you think they would provide harness' for everyone walking around at ground level?

Duh wrote:

And what happens when the worker (don't matter who)
does not use a harness when in heights.
It is an OSHA requirement.
All the years of my employment, we were trained to THINK safety. and we as employers have the right to refuse to do a job when you are in danger.
Didn't this guy use his thinking cap, that when you get up in high places you need to use something to protect you from falls? when there is a potential of that happening?
I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit.
My understanding of Workman Comp injuries is that they have the right to refuse you if you fail to use the protection for yourself when provided.
Meaning to say, you don't go to work all stoned out (under the influence of drugs or alcohol) and expect someone to pay your injuries because you can't think straight. I know this is not the case of this one person, but I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it.

Referring to your ignorant comments: "I guess this guy was wanting to fall so that the family can use the SAFETY measure this guy failed to do, that is called law suit." AND "I'm sure protection was provided and he failed to use it."

Your so sure huh?...Get outta here!...You have no idea and your soo sure!...jerk!...He was human for God's sake...People like you with no hearts should be locked away!...when your times comes around i hope you get locked away in hell you heartless jerk.

They will sue and they will win. Somebody failed this man, inmate or not.

Good luck on the lawsuit! Hopefully you will win several million dollars.

He would undoubtably be covered under WC, however, willfull negligence can allow an individual to sue outside of WC law. It's all going to rest on the degree of negligence - for example, if the facility was known to have been aware of an unsafe work environment prior to the accident. I'm very sure that at least some lawyers will cash in on this case.

Zig_Zag wrote:

A wrongful death suit usually pays what the victim would have earned the remaining years of their life, so I would say about $500 bucks would cover this lying thief.

When you wrote this, were you zigging? Or were you zagging? I can't discern which. Please clarify.