Sacto 9-1-1

From Andy Furillo

The lawyer for Entercom Communication Corp. and its Sacramento subsidiary said today that Jennifer Lea Strange's death was not foreseeable in a radio station water-drinking contest and that his clients should not be held liable.

But defense attorney Donald W. Carlson told the seven-man, five-woman jury that if they do find either Philadelphia-based Entercom or Entercom Sacramento LLC at fault, that it should award Strange's survivors only $2.7 million in damages for the loss of her love and companionship and $1.819,643 for the loss of her past and present economic support, for a total award of a little over $4.5 million.

The two plaintiffs' attorneys on behalf of Jennifer Strange's husband and three children asked for an award of between an estimated $34 million and $44.3 million.

"I know each and every one of you will do the right thing," Carlson told the jury at the conclusion of his closing argument.

Plaintiffs' lawyer Roger A. Dreyer followed Carlson with a rebuttal argument urging the jury to find the defendants responsible for Strange's death and to not let any possible antipathy it might have for attorneys in general to influence its decision.

He flashed a picture of Jennifer Strange on the courthouse screen with her family, then had her image removed to depict the loss that her family has had to endure.

"If the numbers on the losses are significant," Dreyer said, recounting his figuring from Tuesday's session on the non-economic damages he said are due to the plaintiffs, "it's because of who she was, not some greedy lawyers... or what others would have you believe."

Earlier, in his closing argument in Sacramento Superior Court., Carlson admitted today that top officials in Entercom Sacramento LLC made "serious, tragic mistakes," but that they shouldn't necessarily make Entercom Communications Corp. liable for Strange's death.

The Philadelphia-based parent corporation and its Sacramento subsidiary are defendants in a wrongful death trial brought by survivors of Strange, who died on Jan. 12, 2007, in the "Hold Your Wee for a Wii" contest put on by Entercom-owned KDND "The End" 107.9. The contest promised the Nintendo video game for whoever could drink the most water without urinating.

Carlson told the jury that "knowing what we know now, listening to the broadcasts, some of the comments by the disc jockeys, it sounds horrible." But even though the station's "Morning Rave" DJs joked on the air about the possibility of somebody dying in the contest, Carlson said "the truth is that no one understood the harm at that time."

The attorney blamed KDND station manager Steve Weed and promotions director Robin Pechota for allowing the contest to go forward, in violation of what he said were clear and reasonable guidelines laid down by the corporation's legal team in Boston.

The company barred any such event, Carlson said, that could put a participant in danger or were of themselves in bad taste. Moreover, Carlson said, any contest that was anything other than a simple, low-budget call-in type situation needed to first be approved by Entercom's attorneys, and neither Weed nor Pechota attempted to do that.

"It wasn't as if these people were right off the street," Carlson said, noting that Weed had 40 years in the business and 30 years in management and that Pechota had a 20-year career of her own. "Both of them had experience, and both of them made serious, tragic mistakes."

As for the contest that killed Strange, Pechota "didn't send it in" to the legal team for approval, Carlson said. "I don't know why."

Still, Carlson said, the transgressions of Weed and Pechota shouldn't make Philadelphia-based Entercom liable for Strange's death.

He said the instructions that will be read to the jury by Judge Lloyd A. Phillips following the conclusion of the closing arguments will spell out that the parent company isn't by definition responsible if its Sacramento subsidiary is held liable.

He said the Entercom Communications Corp. and Entercom Sacramento have to be viewed separately by the jury. The instructions, he said, say that the parent company isn't liable for the negligence of the subsidiary by reason of its ownership or control.

The corporation, he said, was not involved in either the approval or the performance of the contest.

Before Carlson began his arguments, the second plaintiffs' attorney in the case, Harvey R. Levine, who is representing Jennifer Strange's oldest son, Keegan Sims, asked the jury to award the 13-year-old boy $7.5 million to $9 million in non-economic damages for his loss of love, companionship and support.

"Jennifer Strange loved this little boy," Levine told the jury, displaying a picture on the courtroom's video screen of a younger Keegan looking up at his mother on her wedding day to Billy Strange. "She loved him with all her heart and soul. And this is a tragic death because it could have been prevented so easily."

Levine's request followed Tuesday's closing argument where plaintiffs' attorney Roger A. Dreyer asked the jury for $24.6 million to $33.4 million in non-economic damages for Billy Strange and the two children he had with Jennifer Strange.

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.

hide comments
blog comments powered by Disqus


About Sacto 9-1-1

Sacto 9-1-1 is a blog on crime and emergency services news in the Sacramento region.

Send feedback on Sacto 9-1-1 to Assistant Metro Editor Anthony Sorci at asorci@sacbee.com

Subscribe to Breaking News Alerts

FOLLOW US | Get more from sacbee.com | Follow us on Twitter | Become a fan on Facebook | Get news in your inbox | View our mobile versions | e-edition: Print edition online | What our bloggers are saying

Sacto 9-1-1 Q&A

Q: What happened with the case regarding Marc McCormick? He was accused of videotaping a woman in her home and was arrested. He lives in my neighborhood and I see him all the time. Were charges dropped?


A: According to Sacramento Superior Court online records, misdemeanor charges have been filed against Mark William McCormick, alleging that he used a camcorder or other instrument to view an individual in a place where there was an expectation of privacy, trespassing and peeping.

His next court date is June 4.

According to Sacramento police logs, McCormick, 40, was arrested March 8 after the victim reported that a friend had entered her home without her knowledge to secretly videotape her.


715 questions answered | Submit a question

May 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Monthly Archives


Kim Minugh on Twitter

Follow "Kim_Minugh" on Twitter

Local Agencies on Twitter

Categories