Missoula Avalanche investigation

I just came across this article and my initial, not definitive, thought was how could you charge the boarder as a criminal for the life claimed by the avalanche.  I figured this would be a good discussion as to should the boarder be held accountable for this fatality?

www.sportsonesource.com/news/article_hom...on=2&id=50189&Prod=4

With the trespassing aside, if a Backcountry skier/snowboarder caused an avalanche should he/she be held legally accountable for the death or injury of the victims (chances are you ski partner)?

(please note: I posted this for discussion purposes only with all due respect to the victims of this avalanche. Additionally, I did not look too much into this discussion board to see if this topic has been brought up in earlier posts)

My reading of the very short report is that someone concludes that IF someone was trespassing they COULD be charged with trepassing; convictiion might well depend on the adequacy of posting of "No Trespassing." The speaker further concluded that if criminal trespassing occurred and that resulted in an avalanche that caused severe property damage and loss of life that the trespasser COULD be charged and prosecuted for Criminal Negligence; conviction IMHO would depend upon the evidence that the situation was indeed potentially dangerous with potential negative effects on life and property--in other words, was the avalanche danger publicized, was the avalanche path down to the houses obvious, and were there signs of instability? Note that in both charges, conviction is done by a jury of peers, not the prosecutor.

Now what if there weren't houses at the bottom, but rather a city equipment storage building, water treatment plant, etc. that was damaged--would he/she be prosecuted and/or sued for damages? You bet your bottom dollar.

A more definitive report, prelim investigation by NW Montana Avalanche Center & audio interview = interesting:
Avy Ctr Prelim Rpt

seems to me the only one culpable would be the town, for not doing avi control...

More facts, less emotion, less defensiveness:

"On Sunday, March 2, avalanche specialists Dudley Improta and David Williams, from the West Central Montana Avalanche Center in Missoula were given special permission to enter the Mount Jumbo closure area to conduct a stability assessment of the avalanche path and adjacent terrain.
As they travelled to the site, they reported localized collapsing, whoompfing and fracture propagations in pockets of wind drifted snow. They were careful not to cross any snowfield that connected to steeper terrain. They were able to walk on bare ground for much of their tour.
At the crown, they found a weak snow structure (see profile) with a pencil hard wind slab overlying a fist hard layer of cold snow sandwiched between the hard surface layer and a pencil to 1 finger hard slab on top of the ice layer that formed during the sunny warm days earlier in the week. Large facets were at ground level."

The Actual Report

Involuntary Manslaughter

The act of unlawfully killing another human being unintentionally.

Most unintentional killings are not murder but involuntary manslaughter. The absence of the element of intent is the key distinguishing factor between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. In most states involuntary manslaughter results from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while performing a legal act, or while committing an act that is unlawful but not felonious.

As an armchair attorney, it would seem to me that the boarder could find himself in quite a bit of trouble. I realize an audience such as ours would likely jump to say he shouldn't be held culpable. There are reasonable points being made: the houses were built under a slope that had the potential to slide, the town didn't do any avy control, etc. On the other hand, you have to look at this from a perspective other than as a fellow snow-slider. This was a closed area. Somebody chose to not follow the closure. This action directly led to triggering an event which destroyed property and killed somebody.

At this point, obviously any action against him would just be punitive in nature, it's not going to fix anything. If charges are filed and it goes to court, his attorney will certainly argue that the slope would have slid anyway, and the town is liable for not controlling and allowing a home to be built there. It would suck if another life is ruined over this, and to me it wouldn't seem to accomplish much. I'm sure the guy feels beyond horrible.

But I do have to ask, given what happened, how could they *not* charge him? He made a poor choice, didn't consider the possible consequences and something very bad happened. Just because it was an act of nature which did the destroying, it doesn't change the fact that he caused it.

I hope something better comes from this for his sake, but should he be charged, I wouldn't call it some great shocking injustice.

P.S. In case nobody had mentioned it, the winter closure of that area is for wildlife protection, not avalanche hazard.