I asked a news friend in Texas if they have coroner inquests. He said yes, it seems their function is a bit different than Canadian inquests.
So this story is disturbing on several levels.
Last year Rev. Kyle Lake of University Baptist Church in Waco was electrocuted in the baptism tank (font) when he reached for a microphone while standing in the water.
He was electrocuted in front of his family and 800 church members. There were medical people present at the service, he died a few hours later.
Now his family is suing for wrongful death. His widow Jennifer and her three children as well as his parents, are bringing the suit against MP Electric Inc.
Rev. Kyle Lake was 33 and died October 30, 2005.
The suit alleges the company was negligent in design, assembly and installation of the tank water heaters. The allegations are the company:
• Performed electrical work on the baptistry in 2003 without getting a city permit, without following National Electric Code requirements and without having the work inspected by city crews as required by law.
• Designed, assembled and installed the heater assemblies without a “thermal cutoff switch” to prevent overheating.
• Installed the heaters without warning or making provisions to prevent the most likely cause of overheating — activation of the heaters without enough water in the baptistry.
• Installed heaters without properly grounding them.
• Installed heaters without including a ground fault circuit interrupter, which the lawsuit contends would have cut the current to the heaters and prevented Lake from being electrocuted.
There is nothing in the article to indicate whether the church is being sued for not having the proper permits.
Or whether the good samaritans will face a suit. (unlikely - medical people have latitude)
Or the audio crew.
If the suit is successful the family could be awarded millions.
My question is this:
Where is the church?
Why is it okay for followers of Jesus Christ to launch multi-million dollar law suits?
Rev. Lake hasn’t been dead a year yet, and the grief and trauma for family would still be raw, even though we don’t grieve as those who have no hope.
Does University Baptist believe it has a responsibility to care for widows and orphans?
If the members and staff do and they are, why isn’t that enough?
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
The Jewish tradition of Yarzheit seems wise, and I wonder if the Lake family has been given good counsel. (remembering the anniversary date of the death)
Shiva (the first week of the death) is when the community cares for the family in practical ways and sits in mourning with them. For the first month, the family mourns and does not attend celebratory functions (weddings, bar mitzvahs)
Another tradition is the gravestone unveiling which varies according to custom and ranges from a month to a year.
Yizkor (remember) prayers said in memory of the dead are done by the community on behalf of the family.
The grieving process is treated respectfully and is understood as a process and series of steps for the living.
Are we sure of the family’s motives? Are we sure it’s all about the money?
There could be other very good and moral motivations:
- Punative financial measures to discourage *this* company’s criminal and tragic negligence
- Punative financial measures to discourage *more* companies from cutting corners and putting people in danger
- Publicly exposing the company, bringing their practices to light to prevent others from being hurt, and “shaming” the company into positive change
We aren’t sure of anything here, bear with me, I’m not condemning, I’m trying to understand why a widow and parents would bring a wrongful death suit, less than a year after a death.
If your points are reasonable motives for going to court, (I think you’ve outlined what the lawyer says he wants) why is a lawsuit the way to accomplish those goals?
In bringing this to court, can a family sue for wrongful death and win without making money? What do they win?
I’m not understanding where the church is.
By suing, it appears a statement being made the denomination isn’t meeting the families needs. And it appears it’s okay for believers to sue for gain. From the article it appears the lawyer certainly is aiming for financial recompense.
Does this case have the potential to change workplace safety laws by the state?
Bene D says:
>Does this case have the potential to change workplace safety laws by the state?
I am not a lawyer, and have only an uninformed guess, but probably not. Good point.
But what I do know is that besides force (governmental regulation), the only thing it seems companies listen to is money. If it costs them enough, they will change their practices. And others will follow suit if they think there is enough chance that they too will be financially impacted.
I have no way of knowing what that family might do with the money; I doubt anyone reading this does either.
However, here’s something else to think about…even if the church does financially support the surviving family, how long will they be willing to do that? This year? Next? Until the little ones are through college?
Is it a sin to hold someone to the standard of the law and use legal recompense as a remedy when that law is broken?
Is it better for the family to use these means rather than to rely on the charity of the church - when there are so many needs and so few resources?
I am really asking here - not trying to be rude or difficult. I do not know what the Christian worldview is for situations like this.
I just recently returned to Christ (and by recently, I mean a month ago!), and I am trying to learn so much at once. I know we are not to store treasures in on earth, and we are also to trust in Him to provide. But surely, the laws to ensure fair treatment here on earth are part of the way He provides for us?
-kellen
I have a bit of difficulty with some of the concepts of Christian world view myself. Some of them get quite long.:^) This is going to be, sorry.
I don’t know - in Canada there would be a coronors inquest. The parties involved - hydro, regulatory bodies, companies would be required to follow the recommendations. This is done in the interest of public safety, and hopefully some answers for the family.
In this case is there a need for justice or a need for retribution?
We don’t know.
*Is it a sin to hold someone to the standard of the law and use legal recompense if the law is broken?*
The State of Texas can lay criminal charges - they haven’t.
The question is: what did the state do to investigate this company and employees for negligent homicide?
Negligent death is not a criminal matter.
“Negligent or wrongful death: A death that is caused by the wrongful act or negligence of another and that serves as the basis for a civil action for damages on behalf of the decedent’s heirs.”
I don’t understand why the church is not named in the suit. If the allegations are true both the company and the church are negligent. But negligent isn’t always criminal.
The law makes a difference between an unforeseeable accident and one that can be foreseen. If they built to standard, this accident would have been unforeseen and they will have been found innocent.
But if it was built to standard, the accident wouldn’t have taken place, would it?
It could have.
If a wrongful death suit is the only way to feed this family then have we as the church failed?
We, the church, fail a lot. Point is we keep growing, trying, forgiving, and loving.
It is facinating to me they haven’t named the church in the suit. Why is it okay to sue a company and not the church that employed it?
I asked a friend in Texas about this. He is pragmatic and a man of deep faith. He believes it is not morally wrong to sue.
I can say sitting in Canada, I believe differently. If there is criminal culpability I expect the municipality or province to pursue the law. I would stay on their case until I knew they have fulfilled their responsibility.
But sue?
No.
I could not.
Life is not fair, the world is not just.
I don’t know where the church is, the denomination is probably under no legal obligation to do anything, there is no mention of insurance. But we don’t know.
*Is it better for the family to use these means rather than to rely on the charity of the church - when there are so many needs and so few resources?*
Christ in me calls to the church - it’s members - us -our primary law should first and foremost be one of love - doing all they can for each other: whether it be counselling, ethical choices regarding contracting, feeding and nurturing, housing and praying. Even if a family sues.
The charity of the church - the love of the church doesn’t end.
“Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance. Love never fails.”
I don’t know how that love will look through out the life of this family, they suffered a traumatic loss seven months ago.
Truth is, in the tragedies of my life, as a follower of Jesus Christ I can’t fathom suing. I live in a country with checks and balances. Even if they fail, He has cared for me.
I can’t fix everything, I can’t make companies ethical, or loved ones safe. He didn’t promise an easy or comfortable life, He promised He’d never leave or forsake me. He has kept His covenant.
If I sue, I saying you have something I need. You may have, but I don’t believe suing you might be the only way to get it.
But, we not the Lake family living in Texas.:^(
Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance. Love never fails.”
Thank you.
Hello,
I’ve enjoyed the exchange between you. A few clarifications, as I am a current member of the congregation and former member of the leadership staff at the church during the time of Kyle’s death. Let me first say, I am not generally complicit in the argument for suits, so I hope you do not take any of what I say as a defensive or irrationally combative response. With that said, I would like to add a few points for consideration:
- church responsibility and response: First, the church has no influence on the family’s decision to file suit - as you may notice, no church members are listed as plaintiffs, and, therefore, cannot determine the outcome of whether to file suit or not. What the church can do, though, is provide for the family - and it is. As our scriptures make so clear, money amounts to nothing when compared with love, support, counsel, breaking of bread together, sharing tears, friendship, etc., etc. These are the things the church is providing for Jennifer and her three children. This is what I see as most important. But for the sake of clarity, it may also help to know that this is a congregation of students who can barely keep the lights on in the church with the meager offerings & tithe available. Of the 11 members on the church staff, only 3 are on full-time salary w/ 1 part-time salary.
- suit & culpability: Serving a similar function as an inquest, the church was closed immediately after the accident for a full investigation. Both officials from the city and an independently contracted investigator conducted extensive queries into the matter of what caused the catastrophe. The electrical heat pumps were determined to the catylyst for the accident - the church was not responsible for making sure the electrical company performed the job they were reasonably expected and contracted to do. To illustrate, if you contracted an architect, designer, engineer, electrician, etc. to build a home for you, only to have an inevitable tragic accident due to some oversight of one of these parties result, would you also see yourself as culpable in the accident? Perhaps you are of a different mind than I, but I would not logically merit such a correlation. Also, seeing as the sound system was in proper working order and was merely the agent that manifested the system vulnerability, the sound crew and technicians have no reason to be considered for liability.
I do not intend to misrepresent the shortfalls of the church - as with many, many businesses and public institutions, after the full investigaton there were certainly areas that were not deemed up to standard city maintenance codes. For this, the church and its congregation took the necessary steps to amend these issues fully. In fact, it was not until a couple months ago that we returned to the church building for regular worship. For 10 months the areas was sealed by the city and maintenance crews occupied the closed premises.
I hope this enhances, rather than hinders, your conversation. Thank you for allowing the opportunity for this interchange.
LU
LU: Thank you. As someone who has been there and has grieved, and watched things unfold, my heart goes out to you.
I’m pleased to hear authorities have done their job, and that the church is able to comply with recommendations.
Bene Diction: Thank you, as well, for your kind words.
Regards,
LU