Hamilton Bridge Jumping Tragedy

[No Adventure Is Too Small]

Well it finally happened! We now have what could be claasified as a tragic
result from a wreckless nonsensical action. A young man may never walk again
another young man has permanently lost 3 digits. This is all the result of
something that has been ongoing for a while now ( from what I hear ).
Someone decides their life just isn't thrilling enough so they take a plunge
off a bridge in Hamilton, on a good day they make the jump with no consequence.
On a bad day something like Fridays event occurs now permanently changing the
lives of 2 people for a few seconds of thrill. This act in my humble opinion was never safe from its inception, and I feel its amazing that no one has died prior to this time.
I certainly wish that no one had ever been injured, but as long as you have people doing things without regard for themselves and others you will typically end up with this result. Now the blame game will most likely begin and it could be very interesting what resulting path it will take. I would not even be surprised if the Town of Hamilton is blamed in some fashion, ( you know if a municipality owns something well they are just automatically at fault right?) Sarcasm implicit in prior statement! The jumper can't be a fault, you know "the bridge was just too inviting not to jump from it". The injured boater can't be at fault "they were simply in the wrong place at the right time". I hear that within 2 hours people were at the bridge jumping again. So to say anyone learned anything from others misfortune would be to way overstate the truth of the matter. I hope that the young jumper will in fact be able to walk again in the future, and I hope the innocent boater can continue on in his life without overwhelming disadvantges caused by his injury. I just can't help but think that both would be far better served if this senseless activity had never happened in the first place.
Your opinions are greatly appreciated.

[matt_s]

Wishing tragedy wouldn't happen is the easy part. How would you prevent it?

[No Adventure Is Too Small]

Wishing tragedy wouldn't happen is the easy part. How would you prevent it?

I am sure that will be the topic of upcoming debate.
The answers that arise from that discussion may be sufficient to prevent
future incident, or maybe they won't.
The obvious answer is not all tragedy is preventable.

[RaceFan]

Anybody jumping from that bridge should be arrested , it's just plain stupid. Just like when people were jumping from the Nevada Mills Dam Bridge. Sometimes people need to be saved from hurting themselves or someone else.

[HoosierHelen]

Well it finally happened! We now have what could be claasified as a tragic
result from a wreckless nonsensical action. A young man may never walk again
another young man has permanently lost 3 digits. This is all the result of
something that has been ongoing for a while now ( from what I hear ).
Someone decides their life just isn't thrilling enough so they take a plunge
off a bridge in Hamilton, on a good day they make the jump with no consequence.
On a bad day something like Fridays event occurs now permanently changing the
lives of 2 people for a few seconds of thrill. This act in my humble opinion was never safe from its inception, and I feel its amazing that no one has died prior to this time.
I certainly wish that no one had ever been injured, but as long as you have people doing things without regard for themselves and others you will typically end up with this result. Now the blame game will most likely begin and it could be very interesting what resulting path it will take. I would not even be surprised if the Town of Hamilton is blamed in some fashion, ( you know if a municipality owns something well they are just automatically at fault right?) Sarcasm implicit in prior statement! The jumper can't be a fault, you know "the bridge was just too inviting not to jump from it". The injured boater can't be at fault "they were simply in the wrong place at the right time". I hear that within 2 hours people were at the bridge jumping again. So to say anyone learned anything from others misfortune would be to way overstate the truth of the matter. I hope that the young jumper will in fact be able to walk again in the future, and I hope the innocent boater can continue on in his life without overwhelming disadvantges caused by his injury. I just can't help but think that both would be far better served if this senseless activity had never happened in the first place.
Your opinions are greatly appreciated.

Horrible results from this free spirited youth who dived off this local bridge. Pretty darn sure he did not intend to do damage to himself or others when he took the fatefull plunge. I really believe the best question is how does the communty look forward and prevent future accidents as this?

[RaceFan]

Horrible results from this free spirited youth who dived off this local bridge. Pretty darn sure he did not intend to do damage to himself or others when he took the fatefull plunge. I really believe the best question is how does the communty look forward and prevent future accidents as this?


I'm pretty sure seatbelts fall into that catagory, and not wearing a motorcycle helmet(in states that require them). We don't intend to get in an accident but we are free to drive and ride a motorcycle for fun. Just like taking a 30 foot jump for the fun of it.

[Mrs.Slotz]

News Channel 15 interviewed the man who lost his fingers. His wife was by his side. The wife had tears in her eyes and made the comment that within an hour after this horrible accident, there were kids jumping off the bridge again! Hard to believe that the police did not block the bridge off for the rest of the day while they investigating the issue.

[RaceFan]

News Channel 15 interviewed the man who lost his fingers. His wife was by his side. The wife had tears in her eyes and made the comment that within an hour after this horrible accident, there were kids jumping off the bridge again! Hard to believe that the police did not block the bridge off for the rest of the day while they investigating the issue.

Usually it takes a bad accident to happen before anything is done to prevent something of this nature. Hopefully the County will do something to stop this before another person or persons gets hurt again.

[Torget]

Anybody jumping from that bridge should be arrested , it's just plain stupid. Just like when people were jumping from the Nevada Mills Dam Bridge. Sometimes people need to be saved from hurting themselves or someone else.

I disagree. People do stupid things all the time and yes, sometimes there are consequences that they didn't plan on happening. That's why it's called an accident. Most people learn from them but to make it illegal? Just because someone got hurt after all this time? I guess we should make driving a car, or racing illegal too then, might as well throw in fishing due to the possibility of drowning. People overeat, should we make criminals out of all fat people?

Personally I disagree with both the seatbelt and helmet laws(in some states). I think you're a dern fool for not wearing them, but I don't think it should be mandated. Same with jumping off a bridge. You're a dern fool in my opinion, but if you want to take the chance, you better be prepared to live with the cosequences if something goes wrong.

You can't save everyone or stop them from doing things like this.

[RaceFan]

I disagree. People do stupid things all the time and yes, sometimes there are consequences that they didn't plan on happening. That's why it's called an accident. Most people learn from them but to make it illegal? Just because someone got hurt after all this time? I guess we should make driving a car, or racing illegal too then, might as well throw in fishing due to the possibility of drowning. People overeat, should we make criminals out of all fat people?

Personally I disagree with both the seatbelt and helmet laws(in some states). I think you're a dern fool for not wearing them, but I don't think it should be mandated. Same with jumping off a bridge. You're a dern fool in my opinion, but if you want to take the chance, you better be prepared to live with the cosequences if something goes wrong.

You can't save everyone or stop them from doing things like this.

I agree that makes sense.

[HoosierHelen]

I disagree. People do stupid things all the time and yes, sometimes there are consequences that they didn't plan on happening. That's why it's called an accident. Most people learn from them but to make it illegal? Just because someone got hurt after all this time? I guess we should make driving a car, or racing illegal too then, might as well throw in fishing due to the possibility of drowning. People overeat, should we make criminals out of all fat people?

Personally I disagree with both the seatbelt and helmet laws(in some states). I think you're a dern fool for not wearing them, but I don't think it should be mandated. Same with jumping off a bridge. You're a dern fool in my opinion, but if you want to take the chance, you better be prepared to live with the cosequences if something goes wrong.

You can't save everyone or stop them from doing things like this.

Perhaps a 'Caution' sign posted that says 'Jumping off this Bridge has caused severe harm to others. Jump at your own risk and Caution for Watercraft in this area.'

We do have those caution signs for deer crossings. Something to the effect?

Of course we will probably need an additional sign posted for the watercraft informing them to be aware of possible falling humans from the upcoming overhead bridge.

We ALL do require reminders it seems.

[HomeyG]

I disagree. People do stupid things all the time and yes, sometimes there are consequences that they didn't plan on happening. That's why it's called an accident. Most people learn from them but to make it illegal? Just because someone got hurt after all this time? I guess we should make driving a car, or racing illegal too then, might as well throw in fishing due to the possibility of drowning. People overeat, should we make criminals out of all fat people?

Personally I disagree with both the seatbelt and helmet laws(in some states). I think you're a dern fool for not wearing them, but I don't think it should be mandated. Same with jumping off a bridge. You're a dern fool in my opinion, but if you want to take the chance, you better be prepared to live with the cosequences if something goes wrong.

You can't save everyone or stop them from doing things like this.

Simply put, you can't legislate away stupidity.

[Torget]

HH, That's a very good idea!

[armyda]

Actually I'm going to take the hard line here: And many here will **** me. A crime was committed. Why hasn't the prosecutor's office filed charges against the 17 yo?

IC 35-42-2-2
Criminal recklessness; element of hazing; liability barred for good faith report or judicial participation.
...
to perform an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury.
(b) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally performs:
(1) an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person; or
(2) hazing;...
... commits criminal recklessness. Except as provided in subsection (c), criminal recklessness is a Class B misdemeanor.
(c) The offense of criminal recklessness as defined in subsection (b) is:
(1) a Class A misdemeanor if the conduct includes the use of a vehicle;
(2) a Class D felony if:
(A) it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon; or
(B) the person committed aggressive driving (as defined in IC 9-21-8-55) that results in serious bodily injury to another person; or
(3) a Class C felony if:
(A) it is committed by shooting a firearm into an inhabited dwelling or other building or place where people are likely to gather; or
(B) the person committed aggressive driving (as defined in IC 9-21-8-55) that results in the death of another person.
(d) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) inflicts serious bodily injury on another person; or...


You want to know why no one has stopped jumping? There have not been any legal or civil repercussions. The sympathy being given because of his injury from his dumb actions should not stop the proper legal actions from taking place.

Sorry, you want to stop this behavior, use the current laws and legal system.

[Torget]

I still disagree. I don't believe his actions were reckless. Not too bright, but not reckless, and I don't believe that he had any intent to harm another person. He did not intend to possibly injur or cripple himself and the other guy.

I can see your point and can see that with a different view how a person could conclude the same thing you have, but in my view, it was an accident, nothing more. Granted, there was a not so good result, but I don't see anything that was/is criminal about it.

[SportsFan]

Just like a guy that was drinking and driving didn't "intend" to hurt anyone, but he did.... same thing right? The kid was performing an act that put others, including himself, in danger... that is RECKLESS.

[Torget]

Except that driving under the influence is illegal and is done knowingly by the driver that he could hit and injury or kill someone else. Jumping off a bridge is not the same thing as drinking and driving. No crime was being commited by the act of jumping off the bridge, whereas driving drunk is an illegal act that is being commited when an accident occurs.

[HomeyG]

Heard there may pass a local or county law making jumping off bridges illegal and subject to a fine, there is also talk of constructing a fence to preclude people from jumping off this bridge.

[SportsFan]

Except that driving under the influence is illegal and is done knowingly by the driver that he could hit and injury or kill someone else. Jumping off a bridge is not the same thing as drinking and driving. No crime was being commited by the act of jumping off the bridge, whereas driving drunk is an illegal act that is being commited when an accident occurs.

When you are doing something that could injure someone else it is reckless whether that activity is legal or not. You obviously THINK that if you didn't intend to hurt anyone you are fine and dandy and you are not. You are trying to tell me hitting someone upside the head with a baseball bat is fine as long as I didn't intend to hurt them. I would love to hear that defense in the court of law, "I wasn't trying to hurt him, just trying to knock some sense into him."

Without a doubt jumping off a bridge is reckless and in this case caused serious injury to an innocent bystander. This kid should be hauled off to the pokey and be charged with a crime.

[bigbass]

Maybe they should consider building a platform somewhere on the lake so the kids have a safe place to jump from. I have a sneaking suspicion that Hamilton lake and the Hamilton community are going to be around for a while.

[Torget]

Sportsfan,

Where in the world did you get that hitting someone with a bat would be OK out of what I said? I stated what I believe and supported my belief, You made up stuff and claim that's what I meant. Your assumptions are so far in left field they're not even in the park anymore. If you want to argue, go find someone else.

Just so that you will know, hitting someone upside the head with a baseball bat would be considered assault, if you were intending to hit them in the head. If you are taking some practice swings and someone walks up behind you and you hit them, not knowing they are there, then it is an accident, not a crime.

If you can't understand that simple break down, I don't know what to tell you.

[Torget]

Let me also add that reckless would be running through a crowd wildly swinging a bat in all directions.

[RaceFan]

Just like a guy that was drinking and driving didn't "intend" to hurt anyone, but he did.... same thing right? The kid was performing an act that put others, including himself, in danger... that is RECKLESS.

That is very true and he should be held responsible for his actions.

[RaceFan]

Perhaps a 'Caution' sign posted that says 'Jumping off this Bridge has caused severe harm to others. Jump at your own risk and Caution for Watercraft in this area.'

We do have those caution signs for deer crossings. Something to the effect?

Of course we will probably need an additional sign posted for the watercraft informing them to be aware of possible falling humans from the upcoming overhead bridge.

We ALL do require reminders it seems.

Maybe a sign for the boaters "Watch for falling items". And a sign on the Bridge "Jumping Off Bridge $5,000 fine and possible jail time".

[SportsFan]

Sportsfan,

Where in the world did you get that hitting someone with a bat would be OK out of what I said? I stated what I believe and supported my belief, You made up stuff and claim that's what I meant. Your assumptions are so far in left field they're not even in the park anymore. If you want to argue, go find someone else.

Just so that you will know, hitting someone upside the head with a baseball bat would be considered assault, if you were intending to hit them in the head. If you are taking some practice swings and someone walks up behind you and you hit them, not knowing they are there, then it is an accident, not a crime.

If you can't understand that simple break down, I don't know what to tell you.

You stated this....

I still disagree. I don't believe his actions were reckless. Not too bright, but not reckless, and I don't believe that he had any intent to harm another person. He did not intend to possibly injur or cripple himself and the other guy.


You are stating that since he didn't mean to hurt anyone he is not reckless and should not be charged with a crime. A drunk driver isn't out there trying to hurt anyone, but is still being reckless. Saying that since he didn't intend to hurt the other person doesn't get him off the hook. I didn't mean to hurt and permanently hurt the guy I smacked up side the head with the baseball bat.... so I shouldn't be charged with a crime?

[SportsFan]

Let me also add that reckless would be running through a crowd wildly swinging a bat in all directions.

What if you aren't intending to injure anyone? Is that reckless?

[Torget]

Please re-read my posts in their entirety. Answers to your questions are already there.

I do feel that I need to clarify that I never said the kid should get off scott free. In fact I said he should be prepared to live with the consequences of his actions. I agree that he should be held responsible, but a criminal, he is not. Just a kid who made a bad/stupid choice. No crime was commited apparently as there have not been any charges filed that I am aware of. That may change as the investigation and more information becomes available, but for what is known right now, no crime was commited.

Holding someone accountable for the result of their actions does not make a person a criminal, nor does it mean that a crime was commited. That's what lawsuits are for.

[Todd Ianuzzi]

Actually I'm going to take the hard line here: And many here will **** me. A crime was committed. Why hasn't the prosecutor's office filed charges against the 17 yo?

IC 35-42-2-2
Criminal recklessness; element of hazing; liability barred for good faith report or judicial participation.
...
to perform an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury.
(b) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally performs:
(1) an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person; or
(2) hazing;...
... commits criminal recklessness. Except as provided in subsection (c), criminal recklessness is a Class B misdemeanor.
(c) The offense of criminal recklessness as defined in subsection (b) is:
(1) a Class A misdemeanor if the conduct includes the use of a vehicle;
(2) a Class D felony if:
(A) it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon; or
(B) the person committed aggressive driving (as defined in IC 9-21-8-55) that results in serious bodily injury to another person; or
(3) a Class C felony if:
(A) it is committed by shooting a firearm into an inhabited dwelling or other building or place where people are likely to gather; or
(B) the person committed aggressive driving (as defined in IC 9-21-8-55) that results in the death of another person.
(d) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) inflicts serious bodily injury on another person; or...


You want to know why no one has stopped jumping? There have not been any legal or civil repercussions. The sympathy being given because of his injury from his dumb actions should not stop the proper legal actions from taking place.

Sorry, you want to stop this behavior, use the current laws and legal system.

Do define "reckless," you have to go to IN. Code 35-41-1-2

IC 35-41-2-2
Culpability
Sec. 2. (a) A person engages in conduct "intentionally" if, when he engages in the conduct, it is his conscious objective to do so.
(b) A person engages in conduct "knowingly" if, when he engages in the conduct, he is aware of a high probability that he is doing so.
(c) A person engages in conduct "recklessly" if he engages in the conduct in plain, conscious, and unjustifiable disregard of harm that might result and the disregard involves a substantial deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.
(d) Unless the statute defining the offense provides otherwise, if a kind of culpability is required for commission of an offense, it is required with respect to every material element of the prohibited conduct.

I can't quite figure out from the thread what exactly happened, but that would the legal test to determine the culpability of the kid jumping off the bridge.

[RaceFan]

A civil suit against this jumper would probably do more good, that way he has to think about it for a long time.

[Todd Ianuzzi]

Do define "reckless," you have to go to IN. Code 35-41-1-2

IC 35-41-2-2
Culpability
Sec. 2. (a) A person engages in conduct "intentionally" if, when he engages in the conduct, it is his conscious objective to do so.
(b) A person engages in conduct "knowingly" if, when he engages in the conduct, he is aware of a high probability that he is doing so.
(c) A person engages in conduct "recklessly" if he engages in the conduct in plain, conscious, and unjustifiable disregard of harm that might result and the disregard involves a substantial deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.
(d) Unless the statute defining the offense provides otherwise, if a kind of culpability is required for commission of an offense, it is required with respect to every material element of the prohibited conduct.

I can't quite figure out from the thread what exactly happened, but that would the legal test to determine the culpability of the kid jumping off the bridge.

This piqued my interest so I checked it out. (We used to jump from the bridges into the Lake Wawasee channels when we were kids. I acted more like my Avatar back then.)

From the news stories I saw, it would seem hard to put these facts into the Indiana definition of recklessness for the culpability requirement of criminal recklessness.

1. The bridge jumping is not an act that is a concious disregard of harm to others. By operation, the bridge jumpers do not seek to land on or near boaters or others in the water. And it would seem farily easy for the jumpers to watch for boats or other jumpers and avoid them.

If the jumpers were timing or aiming their jumps to get as close as they could to boats without hitting them, that would be a different situation. And this would probably get the jumpers punched out by the boat owners. (Not advocating violence, but some problems contain the seeds of their own solutions.)

2. The authorities were likely well aware of this conduct and took no steps to stop it. So it would not be a substantial deviation from standards of conduct in the community.

Sad story. I hope the kid is not paralyzed and the guy in the boat comes out as well as is possible.

[Todd Ianuzzi]

Maybe a sign for the boaters "Watch for falling items". .

Good one Race Fan!

[Torget]

Thank you Todd I. That is exactly my position.

[armyda]

Todd,

You are the attorney, not I so thank you for your insight in this. You are probably correct, especially in your statement that it would be difficult to show criminal action.



1. The bridge jumping is not an act that is a concious disregard of harm to others. By operation, the bridge jumpers do not seek to land on or near boaters or others in the water. And it would seem farily easy for the jumpers to watch for boats or other jumpers and avoid them.


Lets call this throwing objects from a bridge. In this case the objects are people. If you throw rocks off of a bridge over a creek, you wouldn't expect there to be travelers there. If you throw rocks off of a bridge over a roadway, you can logically expect that there are vehicles and people moving along that roadway. Therefore in throwing an object off of a bridge over a traveled way will create a hazard to those who are using the route for traveling. So, throwing objects into that pathway can reasonably be construed as creating a hazard for those traveling.

This bridge, though not a roadway, was and is intended to be used as a passageway for people. Properties on the one side are provided Lake access via this bridge. Therefore it is entirely reasonable to expect that there will be boats & people passing through it.

You are correct in that it would be pretty easy to check for boats or people traveling towards or through the passage under the bridge. The jumper did not apparently check. Thus showing disregard for the potential hazard his actions could create for others. The other option is that he did check and still jumped, thinking he could beat the boat. That would show even more of a disregard for the potential effects on others.



2. The authorities were likely well aware of this conduct and took no steps to stop it. So it would not be a substantial deviation from standards of conduct in the community.

This point I have to agree with.

My layman's point of view

[No Adventure Is Too Small]

I hope for the best result possible for all involved as well.
I don't feel that the jumping from this bridge is either safe or a responsible thing to be doing.
Having said that, I am fully aware that you can't legislate and enforce behavior effectively.
Even if an ordinance is created and passed all violaters won't be caught.
I am fairly certain a fence is not the answer, anyone wanting to jump badly enough would surely circumvent the fence.
While it would be great if there were an easy solution, it doesn't appear that will be the case.
If you happen to read all of the commentary from the last few days on Wane.com it pretty well illustrates
a large part of the problem here, that being ATTITUDES.
There is no clear consensus on whats right or wrong in reference to the issue.

[michael medeski]

Properties on the one side are provided Lake access via this bridge. Therefore it is entirely reasonable to expect that there will be boats & people passing through it.

from what i recall there are not too many (if any) properties on the other side of that bridge. it's mostly vacant, overpriced lots for sale.


that way he has to think about it for a long time.

yeah, because i'm sure he will forget all about being paralyzed. :stupid:


Maybe a sign for the boaters "Watch for falling items". And a sign on the Bridge "Jumping Off Bridge $5,000 fine and possible jail time".

i think the fine/punishment is a good idea. that's the same m.o. for people who like to base jump off towers and buildings.

i was thinking more of a sign that reads "sound horn".... like what trains do at crossings.

[RaceFan]

from what i recall there are not too many (if any) properties on the other side of that bridge. it's mostly vacant, overpriced lots for sale.



yeah, because i'm sure he will forget all about being paralyzed. :stupid:



i think the fine/punishment is a good idea. that's the same m.o. for people who like to base jump off towers and buildings.

i was thinking more of a sign that reads "sound horn".... like what trains do at crossings.

Well Thank-You Michael,very well said. Sorry I didn't realize he was paralyzed.

[krazetrain]

I was thinking more of a sign that reads "sound horn".... like what trains do at crossings.
While a sign to "sound horn" may work, it would then put the onus on the boaters. Put up a sign telling about the injury or a sign with symbols such as a stickman figure jumping from bridge equals a stckman in a wheelchair ,grave ( RIP tombstone) marker or in handcuffs. If the boaters were required sound horns, you will add to the noise pollution plus there would be the one boater with a train whistle installed.
Instead of complicating a situation like this by placing more regulations on the boaters, the simple "don't jump from bridge" is better of the options. If you are going to require boaters to sound horn, doesn't that send the message that it is okay to jump from the bridge? Simpler yet, just ban swimming or wading near the bridge. In Indiana trains must sound the whistle signal of 2 longs ,a short and another long beginning at least 20 second prior to/and until reaching the crossing . If the crossing does not have gates or flashers, it will have a stop sign for motorists to beware of trains. If you had a designated " CROSSWADE" for swimmers, traversing the channel, then "use horns" for boaters would be prudent! Regardless of the claims made by the " Dupont Safety Process" all accidents are not preventable.

[2cents]

Perhaps a 'Caution' sign posted that says 'Jumping off this Bridge has caused severe harm to others. Jump at your own risk and Caution for Watercraft in this area.'

We do have those caution signs for deer crossings. Something to the effect?

Of course we will probably need an additional sign posted for the watercraft informing them to be aware of possible falling humans from the upcoming overhead bridge.

We ALL do require reminders it seems.

The signs are an excellent idea. I’m thinking the signs for the Watercraft should read “Caution – Stupid People Jumping from Bridge”. Even though it isn’t politically correct, it may produce a stigma to discourage people from jumping off the bridge. Most people don’t want to be labeled as being stupid.

[hideaway70]

I don't think the signs would have made any difference in this young mans decision to jump off that bridge. The kids that jumped, and will continue to jump, know it is a "daring" thing to do. That's part of the appeal. They like the rush from doing something forbidden and dangerous.

[burgundystar77]

Well it finally happened! We now have what could be claasified as a tragic
result from a wreckless nonsensical action. A young man may never walk again
another young man has permanently lost 3 digits. This is all the result of
something that has been ongoing for a while now ( from what I hear ).
Someone decides their life just isn't thrilling enough so they take a plunge
off a bridge in Hamilton, on a good day they make the jump with no consequence.
On a bad day something like Fridays event occurs now permanently changing the
lives of 2 people for a few seconds of thrill. This act in my humble opinion was never safe from its inception, and I feel its amazing that no one has died prior to this time.
I certainly wish that no one had ever been injured, but as long as you have people doing things without regard for themselves and others you will typically end up with this result. Now the blame game will most likely begin and it could be very interesting what resulting path it will take. I would not even be surprised if the Town of Hamilton is blamed in some fashion, ( you know if a municipality owns something well they are just automatically at fault right?) Sarcasm implicit in prior statement! The jumper can't be a fault, you know "the bridge was just too inviting not to jump from it". The injured boater can't be at fault "they were simply in the wrong place at the right time". I hear that within 2 hours people were at the bridge jumping again. So to say anyone learned anything from others misfortune would be to way overstate the truth of the matter. I hope that the young jumper will in fact be able to walk again in the future, and I hope the innocent boater can continue on in his life without overwhelming disadvantges caused by his injury. I just can't help but think that both would be far better served if this senseless activity had never happened in the first place.
Your opinions are greatly appreciated.
Which bridge? Around by the spillway or another spot?!? And OMG

[No Adventure Is Too Small]

Which bridge? Around by the spillway or another spot?!? And OMG

The bridge on lane 280 off 300

[TheBigB]

The bridge on lane 280 off 300

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=hamilton+lake,+in&hl=en&ll=41.554837,-84.927594&spn=0.001808,0.002991&sll=32.859626,-117.226853&sspn=0.01624,0.023925&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=19

[burgundystar77]

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=hamilton+lake,+in&hl=en&ll=41.554837,-84.927594&spn=0.001808,0.002991&sll=32.859626,-117.226853&sspn=0.01624,0.023925&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=19
Ah I see. I don't remember anything like this happening when I roamed the town when I was a teen-we had Tim's Pizza Place, now Rose Brothers and hung out at the beach and around the spillway alot....there was always something to do and noone made dares like this!

[No Adventure Is Too Small]

Ah I see. I don't remember anything like this happening when I roamed the town when I was a teen-we had Tim's Pizza Place, now Rose Brothers and hung out at the beach and around the spillway alot....there was always something to do and noone made dares like this!

Unfortunately it has nothing to do with a "Dare" it is a common occurence with teens and adults alike.
It has been happening since the bridge was installed some people are just to wreckless for their own good.
Now about as many entities as you can imagine are listed in a tort claim.

[burgundystar77]

Unfortunately it has nothing to do with a "Dare" it is a common occurence with teens and adults alike.
It has been happening since the bridge was installed some people are just to wreckless for their own good.
Now about as many entities as you can imagine are listed in a tort claim.
Oh; I thought this started out as them in a dare or a 'thrill seek'! "Entities listed in a tort claim"???

[hideaway70]

On a more positive note...

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=241194869258479