Hard Rock Hotel Collapse -- New Orleans -- Part 5 1

[NOLAscience]

thread815-499478

Update on the legal issues associated with the Hard Rock Hotel Collapse (2019). Orleans Parish District Attorney Jason Williams is going to bring two key witnesses before the Grand Jury on "Thursday". [Unclear if that is Thursday Sept 7 or Thursday Sept 14]

 

[NOLAscience]

DA Jason Williams reported yesterday that a state Grand Jury returned a "no true bill" in the Hard Rock Hotel collapse case, meaning that 9 of 12 jurors decided that there wasn't enough evidence to hold someone criminally liable for the collapse. The burden of proof for criminal liability is much higher than that for civil liability.

https://www.nola.com/news/courts/st...cle_e94311e0-63a6-11ee-9c79-1b4b918cb4fe.html

I'm not sure what evidence I would have to see to hold someone criminally responsible for an engineering failure. There would have to be gross disregard for the codes and standards of practice. This would probably require someone on the design team testifying to statements made. What do you think?

 

[JLNJ]

For such a collapse, there HAD to be gross disregard for codes and standards of practice. Previous threads seemed to indicate that many of the beam sizes were just populated and there was no real engineering performed. It seems to me that the EOR completely looked the other way, or at best, was completely uninvolved. Whether this rises to criminal, I have no idea. I doubt there was mal intent or malice of forethought. Is being stupid, or lazy, or unaware, or too cowardly to speak up a criminal act? I don't know. I suppose you would have to prove that the EOR intentionally looked the other way knowing that a collapse was likely. Tough to prove unless he or she wrote that down and emailed it.

 

[spsalso]

"Involuntary manslaughter can be charged if a person acts recklessly or carelessly and a person dies as a result."

In this case, KNOWING that no load calculations were done, and being in a position to have caused them to be done would seem pretty reckless or careless.

Perhaps the district attorney did not adequately present the case.


spsalso

 

[3DDave]

It appears that OSHA has not released an official report so the prosecution would have no basis to find factual basis to proceed. If they pay for an independent report and OSHA releases a report that is not identical then both would be called into question. Without that OSHA report and a finalized judgement from OSHA the prosecutor was screwed along with the families by the filing window closing.

 

[Tomfh]

Is being stupid, or lazy, or unaware, or too cowardly to speak up a criminal act?

I’d be very surprised if there’s a single engineer that hasn’t at some point acted stupidly, or been lazy with a design, or been unaware of some particular issue, or turned a blind eye to this or that.

 

[spsalso]

OSHA is not the creator of evidence of fact. Yes, there could be a conflict between an OSHA report and someone else's. But declining to prosecute because the as-yet unreleased OSHA report MIGHT contradict your experts is, at best, cowardly.




Most everyone in construction has made mistakes. Or worse. Sometimes they're so egregious that the "mistaker" must be held accountable. I do hope that what's being said is not that, since everyone makes mistakes, no one should be held accountable.

There IS an upside to this concept, though: we can all stop paying for liability insurance!!! And those bonds: gone!

spsalso

 

[3DDave]

spsalso - why didn't you write a report? Was it just the money?

 

[dik]

... smells of corruption, or political connections.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[spsalso]

"spsalso - why didn't you write a report?"

It's a nice compliment that you feel that I should have been contacted by the DA to do such a thing. That did not happen.


"Was it just the money?"

Since there was no contact from the appropriate authorities, that question is meaningless.



spsalso

 

[spsalso]

from OSHA:

https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/citations/HeaslipEngineeringLLC_1443736_032620.pdf

Issuance date of 3/26/2020


Heaslip Engineering:

a) Floor beams on the 16th floor were under-designed in load capacity.
b) The western side exterior bay was not tied into a rigid portion of the structure for floors 9 through 15 between column lines 1 and 9.
c) Cantilevers on the 17th and 18th floors exceeded the manufacturer's guidance for maximum spans.

A question could be: Who did or did not do the above designs?

A DA could have subpoenaed those designs/calculations. I wonder if that happened in the last several years.


spsalso

 

[Rabbit12]

I recall looking at some of the plans when this collapse happened. It was pretty obvious very quickly there were areas that were questionable. As a person who does more and more reviews these days vs. actual design, I can say without a doubt I would have been asking some pretty pointed questions about those areas and likely requesting some additional supporting calculations. I have to think Heaslip did not do a thorough review of the project.

 

[phamENG]

My WAG: draftsman drew the initial plans/made the initial model and populated it with some random beam sizes, handed off to junior engineer. Junior engineer saw the beam sizes, assumed somebody else sized them, and didn't check them. Senior engineer assumed the junior engineer did his job and didn't check anything. Draftsman applied the principal's seal and signature and emailed the plans.

Does it violate lots of regulations? Yes. Is it terrifying? Absolutely. Is it how a lot of small consulting firms do business? You bet.

 

[WesternJeb]

Hitting the nail on the head there, phamENG. We started to require our draftsmen put everything they "size" in red text to make sure this doesn't happen to us after some very close calls.

 

[JStephen]

Maybe there was a "moon gravity"/"earth gravity" switch and somebody forgot to toggle it.

We had an issue come up on vessel software. On the basic vessel design, the element being designed displays red if inadequate, otherwise green.
On the saddle supports, it doesn't do that, and you have to peruse the stress ratios to see if anything is >1.
But also, if you don't input weights, liquid levels, wind factors, seismic factors, etc., the software just doesn't perform the saddle check.
Result: Users assumed the saddle they inputted was "good" because it didn't turn red on the display, when in fact, no check had even been performed.

 

[3DDave]

Who is responsible for laying out the floor plan?

 

[spsalso]

"Draftsman applied the principal's seal and signature..."

Since draftsman had full authority to do so, the responsibility rests on the principal. That's where the buck stops.

Or are we arguing that the draftsman has authority only until something goes wrong, at which it now is the draftsman's fault.




spsalso

 

[phamENG]

Neither. The draftsman never had that authority, at least not in the states where I'm licensed.

It's the principal's responsibilityto ensure that a) the project is competed and checked and b) the draftsman doesn't have access to his/her seal or a facsimile of the EOR's signature.

 

[davidbeach]

Ha ha. Not a draftsmen, but back in the day when I was producing drawings (draftsfolk did the bulk of the work) I could have the signing PE's stamp applied to the drawings and then layout 60ish drawing to be wet signed (AHJ required blue signature on black drawings). My laying them out was the final check, signing was a formality. It's been nearly 19 years since I did anything that needed to be signed, and well over 20 years since I started signing my own work product that needed to be signed, but don't think for a moment that everything signed by a principle of a firm has actually been checked in detail by the signer. Something signed by somebody a few layers deeper into the organization is actually to have been reviewed by the signer.

I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations

 

[phamENG]

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it's not common practice. But, like speeding, just because it's commonly done doesn't mean it's in accordance with the law. And it doesn't mean it can't kill someone.