Legal Commentary

Negligent Pool Installation Leads to Criminal Prosecution

By TChris

Given the Republican aversion to business regulation that has dominated government for so many years, it has become increasingly unusual to see civil penalties assessed against businesses that manufacture unsafe products, that install those products in an unsafe manner, or that provide an unsafe working environment for their employees. It is extraordinarily unusual to see criminal prosecutions of businesses when negligence leads to death. That's what makes the prosecution of David Lionetti both newsworthy and troublesome.

David Lionetti was arrested yesterday on a manslaughter charge in the death of Zachary Cohn. Six-year-old Cohn drowned last summer after becoming trapped by the suction of a drain in his family's pool in Greenwich, Conn. The pool had been installed by Lionetti's company Shoreline Pools. ... In issuing the warrant for Lionetti's arrest, law enforcement officials state that he failed to have his company install mandated safety devices in the Cohn family pool. As a result Zachary Cohn was able to remove the cover and was caught in the suction power of the drain. His parents were unable to free him before he drowned.

If the alleged facts are true, Lionetti's company was clearly negligent and civilly liable for damages. But if Lionetti is criminally responsible for negligence, why not also arrest the actual installers who failed to install the required safety devices? And why not arrest the parents who failed to supervise their child as he removed the drain cover? Should every act of negligence be treated as a crime? [more ...]

For that matter, why wasn't the president of Ford Motors prosecuted when Ford decided not to spend the additional $11 per car it would have taken to keep Ford Pintos from exploding in rear end collisions? Why not arrest the presidents of the tobacco companies who lied to the public and to Congress about the dangers of inhaling tobacco smoke? Or the manufacturers and distributors of unsafe toys, unsafe food, unsafe car seats for children, or a variety of other products that have caused death due to corporate malfeasance?

True, if Lionetti made a deliberate decision not to comply with safety statutes in order to cut costs, he's in a much different position than individuals who are passively negligent. He arguably acted with a state of mind that was deliberately indifferent to a serious risk. But the same is certainly true of larger players like Ford or Phillip Morris.

Is Lionetti being prosecuted because he's a small potato who doesn't have the resources or political clout of a big business? Is it fair to prosecute Lionetti while giving a pass to corporations that have negligently caused the deaths of thousands?

Full post as published by TalkLeft on July 22, 2008 (boomark / email).