Can Engineers Predict When a Structure Will Fall?

  • Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Hearing
In summary, the owners of the club at Pier 34 plead guilty/no contenst to involuntary manslaughter and their sentencing hearing began today. They will each serve eleven to 22 months house arrest and seven years of probation, and must set up 1,000 hours of community service through a mentoring program for innercity youth.
  • #1
russ_watters
Mentor
23,168
10,380
I update this story from time to time as it is a good ethics case study for engineers. The owners of the club at Pier 34 plead guilty/no contenst to involuntary manslaughter and their sentencing hearing began today.

I see on virtually a daily basis, in my job and in life, people who don't take their responsibilities seriously enough and fail to consider the ramifications of their actions/inactions. These guys, I suspect, are going to spend a long time in jail because of it.

http://www.nbc10.com/news/13552211/detail.html?dl=headlineclick
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
russ_watters said:
These guys, I suspect, are going to spend a long time in jail because of it.

http://www.nbc10.com/news/13552211/detail.html?dl=headlineclick
Seems not -
Heat nightclub operator Eli Karetny, of Cherry Hill, N.J., was ordered to serve nine to 18 months on house arrest, then five years of probation.

Pier 34 owner Michael Asbell, of Merion, will serve 11 to 22 months house arrest and seven years of probation.

Additionally, Karetny and Asbell will each need to set up 1,000 hours of community service through a mentoring program for innercity youth.
Must have a lot of money / influential friends.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
The judge went easy on them because they are old. Personally, I don't consider that to be a good reason to let people get away with murder.
 
  • #4
That was such a horrid fire. As the law goes, involuntary manslaughter would be the only way to charge them. Now that that is done, the civil law sutes can begin.
 
  • #5
russ_watters said:
The judge went easy on them because they are old. Personally, I don't consider that to be a good reason to let people get away with murder.

just out of curiosity what do you think it would have accomplished to sentence to 15? or life? or death? the people are dead, ruining two more lives does what?

or do you think this it would have acted as a deterrant?
 
  • #6
hypatia said:
That was such a horrid fire. As the law goes, involuntary manslaughter would be the only way to charge them. Now that that is done, the civil law sutes can begin.
Wrong night club. This one collapsed into the Delaware River and killed 4 people.
 
  • #7
ice109 said:
just out of curiosity what do you think it would have accomplished to sentence to 15? or life? or death? the people are dead, ruining two more lives does what?
That argument applies to most crimes and implies that we shouldn't punish people for crimes. Punishment isn't just about getting people off the street, it is about punishing them.
or do you think this it would have acted as a deterrant?
I do. Like I said in the OP, people should take their actions more seriously. There are a lot of club owners (and others) who play Russian Roulette with the safety of their patrons - whether by opening up a club that is essentially guaranteed to collapse or chaining fire exits so they can't escape a fire.

I can't begin to imagine what was on the minds of these owners when they opened the club that night, but they were told this would happen - that makes it worse than Russian Roulette. They knew the chamber they got had a bullet in it and pulled the trigger anyway. That's like opening up a club that is already on fire.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
The engineers should win awards

You know your a great engineer when...

You can predict when a structure is going to fall naturally within a relative standard deviation of...6 sigma

Engineering sure has come a long way for us grad students! I could probably have come as close if I knew we were planning to blow it up that evening :cool:
 

1. What was the outcome of the Pier 34 sentencing hearing?

The outcome of the Pier 34 sentencing hearing was that the owner of the restaurant, Frank Smith, was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to 15 years in prison.

2. What led to the Pier 34 sentencing hearing?

The Pier 34 sentencing hearing was the result of a tragic incident in which a balcony collapsed, killing three people and injuring many others. It was determined that the balcony collapse was due to the negligence and lack of maintenance by the restaurant's owner.

3. How long did the Pier 34 sentencing hearing last?

The Pier 34 sentencing hearing lasted for several weeks, as both the prosecution and defense presented their arguments and evidence. The jury deliberated for two days before reaching a verdict.

4. What were the key factors considered in the Pier 34 sentencing hearing?

The key factors considered in the Pier 34 sentencing hearing included the severity of the incident, the level of negligence displayed by the restaurant owner, and any previous history of safety violations or incidents. The impact on the victims and their families was also taken into account.

5. Is the Pier 34 sentencing hearing open to the public?

Yes, the Pier 34 sentencing hearing was open to the public, as most court hearings are. However, due to the high-profile nature of the case, there were limited seats available and strict security measures in place.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top