Tree Felling Negligent Homicide Trial Begins

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?...3f-233ff8d0815f

Tree Felling Negligent Homicide Trial Begins

BRENTWOOD, NH -– When the 80-foot pine tree that crushed Jon Paul LaVigueur was falling, Wayne Souther told jurors he thought he was going to be injured as well.

"I just thought to myself, this is going to hurt," Souther testified Tuesday about tripping over nearby wooden crates in his path. "But then I got up and saw Jon Paul on the ground."

Maurice Buzzell, who was LaVigueur's boss and owner of the tree removal business, went on trial Tuesday on charges of negligent homicide and reckless conduct in Rockingham County Superior Court.

LaVigueur was killed at a property on 15th Street in Kingston on Aug. 7, 2007, a day before his 23rd birthday. Prosecutors are alleging Buzzell ran an unsafe workplace, a finding that an investigator with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration made when he looked into the circumstances of LaVigueur's death.

Prosecutors say those violations led to LaVigueur's death.

LaVigueur and three of his co-workers were using a broken rope, already too short to pull down the pine tree, when the massive trunk fell, prosecutors said.

"The defendant said, 'Don't let go of the rope until the tree starts to fall,'" Assistant County Attorney Amy Connolly said during opening statements.

Souther testified that Buzzell took the shorter rope and tied it to another rope hanging from a nearby tree so the men could use it to pull down three, which was being taken down in sections.

"This rope had previously been broke," Souther, of East Hampstead, testified. "It was broken on a job site. We tied the rope to a truck and tied other end to a tree and it snapped."

The trial this week in Rockingham County Superior Court will include eyewitnesses who worked for Buzzell that day along with police and industry experts.

The defense is expected to call their own experts who say that prosecutors are citing safety standards that can't be applied to Buzzell's kind of tree-cutting business.

"The guidelines the government (is using) have been misapplied," defense lawyer Steven Colella said. "This was not a logging operation. This was arborist work and this was, in fact, a completely different animal." Colella suggested Buzzell actually made the work environment safer that day by instructing workers to lop off branches on a tree until it stood as a single pole before cutting it down.

"The process that took place that day was acceptable," he said. "It was a process that (LaVigueur) engaged in a 100 different prior occasions. This isn't something he was thrown into."

He said the only thing that didn't go as planned was the direction LaVigueuer ran to escape the falling tree's path.

Buzzell's trial is expected to last two to three days. If convicted on either charge, he faces 3 1/2 to 7 years in state prison.
 
It's great to see a company owner being held accountable for his actions. There are too many "tree cutters" running unsafe operations. A quote on that article reflects my opinions very well:

"I own a tree service and I AM a highly experienced and proficient tree faller. I just heard a talk by one of the world's leading experts in fatalities amongst tree workers, Dr John Ball, given yesterday in Lancaster PA.

It is the owner's responsibility to provide a safe work environment. "Wait to see which way the tree will fall, then run for your life", is not a safe work environment. There is no excuse for allowing ground workers (pulling on the rope) to be within the potential drop zone of the tree. This could have been easily avoided by using a longer rope, or adding a rope as an extension, or even by using a redirect pulley tied to the base of a tree in the intended drop zone, which would have alowed the workers to stand to the side of the drop zone.

It is clear from the photo that the tree was cut with a good notch and back cut by an experienced faller, and it fell very close to the intended lay. The fact that the owner states that this was a standard practice to have workers pulling from within the drop zone, and then running out of danger after the tree started falling, that they had done that a hundred times, shows a complete lack of safety awareness.. This is not an acceptable practice by any industry standard or common sense.

It just puts workers at unnecessary risk. What if they trip on uneven ground or an untied shoe lace, or get a leg cramp, or look up at a huge tree falling right at them and panic and run the wrong way, as seems to be the case here. There is just two much risk of such terrible injury to play Russian roulette like that.

I have fallen literally thousands of trees for nearly three decades and can count on one hand the number of times that there has been a need to pull and run.

The idea that such a simple safety precaution would somehow make the company uncompetitive is ridiculous..
- Daniel Murphy, Wyane PA"
 
I wrote it, but I didn't post it here... I posted it at the newspapers site... Someone took the liberty of copying and pasting it here... which is fine with me...

I was feeling angry that a bunch of posters over at the newspaper's site were blaming the deceased for not being smart enough to run the right way, and being alone at fault, and this is the kind of thing tree companies do everyday etc..

Did anyone read the comments over there?
 
Nice post Daniel.

Safety ALWAYS starts with the owner/management. It is up to management to make sure the workers are properly infomed, trained, following through, and have the proper equipment for the job at hand.

Only then do the workers have the responsibility on the jobsite to do everything in their ability, experience, and wisdom to reduce risk and follow proper procedures. But if management has not created the proper safety culture then they own the majority of the responsibility when the odds eventually catch up with them.

Thanks Paul for all of your posts as well.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom