Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park

[Seaweed Doc]

Re: Suit squeeze and flooding. [text deleted]. Some may argue that you can't have both squeezing and partial flooding, but this is incorrect. First, the open zipper caused the dry suit to leak water. The zipper was open 4-5 inches, but it had neoprene flaps underneaths and rolls on either side of the zipper mechanism, which likely prevented some water from entering and air from escaping. Plus, Linnea's BCD was pressed into the back of her shoulders, where the zipper was, and Linnea descended on her back. Nobody ever said the dry suit "flooded," but the fact is Linnea's undergarments were soaked through from water entering the dry suit.

As for evidence of squeeze, there was significant bruising on Linnea's neck and torso where rolls in the dry suit constricted and/or material pressed into her flesh. The oversized dry suit did not compress in a uniform fashion, it folded and rippled. Constriction of Linnea's torso and difficulty breathing and moving is obvious on Bob's video, particularly at 60 feet and on the bottom at 124 feet. The evidence shows what it shows.

Finally, two of our experts voluntarily tested the impact of suit squeeze under similar circumstances. Neither died, but neither was happy when they came up. Don't try this at home.

Thank you again for responding to this conversation. Your responses are "refreshing" (if that's the right word for a tragedy) in that we get a better understanding of what actually happened, and they are great as "teachable moments" for all of us.

I initially had a hard time wrapping my head around an open zipper and suit squeeze, but I think there's several possible explanations.

1. Anybody that's taught dry suit knows that students often struggle with getting the air out of the suit even when they're not incapacitated by squeeze and have had proper prep. in the classroom and pool. You have to get your left shoulder (in most suits) to the highest point to have a shot at it, and even then it may take some wiggling and waiting to get the air from your feet past constrictions created by the weight belt (if there is one) and the BCD. With the back zipper open a bit, you'd need to do a pretty weird contortion to get your back as the highest point. If nothing else, I expect air would still be trapped around your upper shoulders and neck. And that presumes you realize the issue and you've had at least modest pool and academic training.

2. I'm trying to wrap my head around the physics of this, but for sake of speculation: If air is compressed in the suit, it may not readily move. Usually we're worried about venting air as it expands on ascent. That's actually easier in my mind, since the air is in fact expanding and creating an outward "push." In the open zipper situation, we need to replace air with water to relieve the squeeze. Especially with a "too big" suit, I can imagine pockets of air being trapped by folds in the suit.

3. The water pressure inside the suit is no different than the water pressure outside the suit. Unless an air bubble escapes, it will be under pressure even if the suit is unzipped.

Regardless, the evidence said Linnea was squeezed and others in similar circumstances report the same thing.

 

[Wheeler925]

Thank you again for responding to this conversation. Your responses are "refreshing" (if that's the right word for a tragedy) in that we get a better understanding of what actually happened, and they are great as "teachable moments" for all of us.

I initially had a hard time wrapping my head around an open zipper and suit squeeze, but I think there's several possible explanations.

1. Anybody that's taught dry suit knows that students often struggle with getting the air out of the suit even when they're not incapacitated by squeeze and have had proper prep. in the classroom and pool. You have to get your left shoulder (in most suits) to the highest point to have a shot at it, and even then it may take some wiggling and waiting to get the air from your feet past constrictions created by the weight belt (if there is one) and the BCD. With the back zipper open a bit, you'd need to do a pretty weird contortion to get your back as the highest point. If nothing else, I expect air would still be trapped around your upper shoulders and neck. And that presumes you realize the issue and you've had at least modest pool and academic training.

2. I'm trying to wrap my head around the physics of this, but for sake of speculation: If air is compressed in the suit, it may not readily move. Usually we're worried about venting air as it expands on ascent. That's actually easier in my mind, since the air is in fact expanding and creating an outward "push." In the open zipper situation, we need to replace air with water to relieve the squeeze. Especially with a "too big" suit, I can imagine pockets of air being trapped by folds in the suit.

3. The water pressure inside the suit is no different than the water pressure outside the suit. Unless an air bubble escapes, it will be under pressure even if the suit is unzipped.

Regardless, the evidence said Linnea was squeezed and others in similar circumstances report the same thing.

None of this makes sense. But I think the assumption is that though the suit wasn't closed, it wasn't flooded.. like it was closed enough to not allow significant water entry.. which is a fine enough explanation.

 

[Alex Ouroboros]

I'm surprised the other divers there that day continue to dive. Got a link to the whole report?

Just the one at the beginning of this post,,, which is the filed complaint..

Honestly I can’t believe what I read.

 

[Wheeler925]

Just the one at the beginning of this post,,, which is the filed complaint..

Honestly I can’t believe what I read.

Oh.. well without knowing the details of the outcome, the complaint is just allegations - one side.

 

[Wookie]

Oh.. well without knowing the details of the outcome, the complaint is just allegations - one side.

It settled.

All we will ever know are the allegations.

 

[stretchthepenn]

I recently spoke with a friend of mine who knows Debbie Snow and was familiar with her before the incident. To paraphrase his words, "Um...she wasn't allowed to dive with us."

 

[Rick Brant]

Doubt it came up in the lawsuit but selling a dry suit with a non-standard connector to a random young buyer seems crazy to me. I'm not a dry suit user but if I understood the video correctly, the visual differences between the suit in question and a "standard" dry suit connector were minimal. Obviously buyer beware applies in this case and this is far from the most egregious lapse, but the idea of throwing a dry suit out my front door for some random teenager to come pick up just sounds crazy.

 

[Subfiend]

Very interesting. Horrible situation that was 110% avoidable. Do you know the make and model of the drysuit? Curiosity has me.

Custom made by Brooks in Canada. The original owner was a commercial diver and she bought it to use for work.

 

[Subfiend]

True.

I've seen a frame grab of her plunging backward. It's horrifying and haunting. The family doesn't want it circulating. For me, that's that. Except for use in litigation, or ideally prosecution, that preference that it be private trumps whatever lessons might come from using it as on object lesson. Except...maybe both PADI and the US Attorney's Office should be forced to have enlargements posted on an interior wall as a reminder of the costs of screwing up.

The frame grab was actually inserted into the complaint with the permission of the family, knowing it would become public information, but this was an extremely hard decision. PADI filed a motion to strike the complaint because it contained too much detail, but the Court denied this motion.

The video of the second dive will never circulate. Copies provided to the parties in discovery were supposed to be destroyed pursuant to a Court order. These copies were watermarked, so if one finds its way into the wild, we will know who did not comply with the Court order. But I don't expect this to ever happen. Nobody involved in the case was too thrilled to have possession of the video.

 

[pauldw]

So I'm not a lawyer. But I would guess that since the NPS ranger was a divemaster and didn't check if they had a permit, means of communication, etc.., the defense would argue that the federal government had partial blame. Just a wild arsed guess.

I don't think that the fact that the ranger happens to dive as a hobby, means that in his job as a ranger he's supposed to be doing dive checks. Where there really should be heads rolling is with the investigators who so badly botched the investigation.