Lawsuit Filed In Hotel Pool Drowning

6 On Your Cell	RSS Feeds
Desktop Alert	Text Alerts
Daily E-News	What’s on 6
Children's Programming Changes
YouCast - Submit Pics and Video
Watch NBC Shows Online

The Weather Authority
Currents
Doppler Radar
7-Day

Your Home, Your Investment

Martha's Tip of the Day

Advertise With WOWT

Contacts	Bios
WOWT Jobs	Scholarship
Gray Television Stations

6 For the Heartland

Be Aware

Our Heartland Children

Prevention and Preparedness

DTV FAQs

O! What a Duck Race

Omaha Royals Baseball

Parent Accused Of Assaulting Ump Banned
75 Comments

Mother Denied Custody Of Daughter
71 Comments

Will Fahey Seek Re-Election?
63 Comments

Robbers Threaten Residents With Pit Bull
59 Comments

Sexual Assault, Blackmail Case Involves Teacher, Students
51 Comments

Mom Denied Request To Donate Son's Organs
50 Comments

Lawsuit Filed In Hotel Pool Drowning

Save

Parents claim murky water hindered rescue attempt
Posted: 9:44 PM May 4, 2008
Last Updated: 12:26 AM May 6, 2008
Email Address: sixonline@wowt.com

72 comments

A | A | A

A wronful death lawsuit was filed Monday against the Omaha hotel where a 5-year-old boy drowned in 2006. A similar incident happened in the same swimming pool a decade ago.

The Guevara family of Marshalltown, Iowa was vacationing in Omaha and staying at the Howard Johnson at 72nd and Grover. Brian Guevara drowned in the hotel pool on June 19, 2006.

“There should be more light," says father Rafael Guevara. "It should be clear water." Brian's parents and their lawyer contend the boy could have been saved if he could have been seen on the bottom of the pool.

The lawsuit alleges the condition of the water was to blame. "Totally murky, you couldn't see the bottom,” says James Martin Davis, the Guevara’s attorney. “It was not just cloudy, it was filthy and we have video of that."

A major piece of evidence in this lawsuit is security camera videotape from that day showing the mother anxiously looking for her son. What the tape clearly shows is cloudy water.

The mother couldn't find her son, but just a few feet from where she was looking, several boys helping search located Brian’s lifeless body. "It's not just sad, it's just heart-wrenching," says Davis.

A few weeks after closing the pool in June 2006, health inspectors allowed Howard Johnson to reopen it. Channel 6 News video shot in July 2006 showed clearer water than when the youngster drowned.

The boy's family says that came too late and their lawsuit will be a warning to all pool operators that if you can't see bottom, don't let anyone swim. “It's not the money," says Rafael.

"The unfortunate thing is this is the second time in 10 years that this has happened at the same Howard Johnson in the same pool," says Davis. "They were sued about 10 years ago for the same thing and a large judgment was rendered against them. You would hope they would learn."

In that case, the victim was 10 years old. Davis says the courts ruled in the family's favor, awarding them a half-million dollars.

Wyndham Hotels & Resorts tells Channel 6 News it's unaware of the lawsuit filed Monday.

All Howard Johnson hotels are independently owned and operated. A Channel 6 News call to the manager of the Howard Johnson at 72nd and Grover has not been returned.

More Stories
Apartment Fire Investigated

Shooting Victim Identified

A Woman on a Mission

Driver Critically Hurt in Crash

Vet Checks Out Rescued Cats

The House That Jack Built

Auction Gets Home Sold

TB Case Investigated

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.

Posted by: d Location: O on May 9, 2008 at 12:07 PM
I guess being responsible for your own children now days is asking too much of parents. They will be able to get over their grief with a nice big settlement from the hotel. It should be a no brainer since they've hired the bigest shyster in Omaha to get them what they feel they deserve.

Posted by: S Location: Omaha on May 8, 2008 at 09:35 PM
Watch your children. 2 years later... HELLO. Remember James Martin Davis is like and ex. he gets 1/2. It is the American way!

Posted by: D Location: Sarpy on May 8, 2008 at 09:23 AM
If you've never had a child critically injured (whether they recover or not) you have no idea what the system can do to you (experience speaking here). Ok, yes, the parents lost sight of this child and it cost him his life. Give them a chance. They have lost a young life, they have everyone from their family, friends, neighbors, lawyers, etc telling them for the past 2 years that it's someone else's fault & the responsible party should pay ($$$) for their loss. Scenario: If someone tells you daily for "x" number of days or time that the sky is red instead of blue, at some point in time you just may believe them! Is it possible that this family finally believes what people have been telling them? If the murky water caused a delay in finding the child, then maybe there is fault on the part of the hotel; but if it was murky why were people swimming in the first place. Ultimately, you are responsible for yourself, no one made them swim that day. Bless this young soul mistakenly lost.

Posted by: B Location: Omaha on May 7, 2008 at 10:46 PM
So sorry to hear about this little boy loosing his life. What I want to know is don't the parents share in some of the blame. Can you say CHA CHING $$$

Posted by: Anonymous on May 7, 2008 at 08:50 PM
I am not taking the hotels' side in any way, but I would not go into a public pool that had odd looking water. Where was the judgement of all these swimmers?

Posted by: shanon Location: omaha on May 7, 2008 at 06:54 PM
Maybe the parents could not have saved him but the other people who were in that very same pool at that very same time could have maybe saved him if they could have been able to see him.Therefore the hotel is responsible for the conditions of that pool.

Posted by: Marie Location: Omaha on May 7, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Cletus and Anonymous: Whether or not parents are watching their children while they are on the computer is irrelevant... We are not filing lawsuits to blame the computer for our negligence and death of our children. Anyway, many of us are probably at work, or the children are in school. I'm sorry this happened, but yes, the parents are definitely responsible. You have to watch your children and especially in a pool area or any crowded place, ie shopping malls, museums, grocery stores - yes, they get away fast, but the parents need to watch their children and not blame others when things go wrong. The fact that the child got away from them, got into the pool and drowned has nothing to do with murky water. Mabye they might have found him sooner, if the water weren't cloudy (if that is true) but it still may have been too late. The child getting away and drowning was not due to cloudy water, that was due to parents not paying attention.

Posted by: Keith Location: Papillion on May 7, 2008 at 07:43 AM
Cletus, thank you for your holier-than-thou rant against holier-than-thou parents. I'm sure you'll tell us all of your children live with their mothers, so there's no chance of you being irresponsible (by loosing track of a child). I'm sure if something did happen, and there was a lawsuit, you'd be right there to comfort your child's mother.

Posted by: Keith Location: Bellevue on May 6, 2008 at 08:46 PM
As a former journalist, I used to have to practically twist attorneys' arms to get them to comment about any case whether it be a drug deal or shoplifting case. While I never dealt with JMD, I shake my head and roll my eyes about how this guy holds a frickin' press conference every time he takes on a case. I'm just waiting till JMD blames the case on the Latino kid who ran off with the Lexington school teacher!!

Posted by: Anonymous on May 6, 2008 at 07:54 PM
Cletus, you hit the nail on the head! I wonder what these peoples children are doing while they are on here bashing other people? Do they have one eye on the monitor and one eye on their kids? I guess if it makes them feel better about themselves, so be it. It's sad that this is what our world has come to.

Posted by: Brittney Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 06:29 PM
It is a tragedy that this family lost a child, but I don't see how the Hotel is responsible, I believe that parents need to watch their children more closely, that child is only five years old, he shouldn't of been in the pool alone anyways. I give my blessing and I am truly sorry. but that is the way I look at this situation.

Posted by: Mom on May 6, 2008 at 06:18 PM
We stayed at a motel with my daughter's soccer team. One of the reason's we chose the motel was because it had a pool. They were having filter problems and the pool was closed often during our stay as the water was murky. Even if it had been open I would never have left my child unattended by the pool, nor allowed them to swim. Yes, the pool should have probably been closed in this case, but ultimately it is up to us as parents. I am truly sorry for their loss.

Posted by: DJ Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 05:34 PM
According to the news story, the death occurred in June 2006, why is the family now filing a wrongful death lawsuit - almost 2 years later?

Posted by: concerned Location: omaha on May 6, 2008 at 04:23 PM
how do you lose a 5yr old.this is just ridiculous.you have to accept responsibility for losing your child.i'm very sorry for the loss.but it's just too many things occuring with children these days.i'm sorry but the parents are just as responsible as the hotel.

Posted by: Anonymous Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 04:09 PM
The parents are responsible for his death. If you lose sight of your child, the joke is on you....

Posted by: T Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 03:14 PM
To "Get the story right!" - if the 5-year old snuck out of their room, the parents are still responsible for him. Most hotel rooms have a lock on their room doors - why was't the door locked?? Most hotels require a room key to even open the pool doors - maybe this hotel isn't that way. Anyhow, no matter how much money this hotel has to pay these people it WILL NOT bring their son back. It is unfortunate for the Guevara’s family that they ARE sounding like money-hungry-let's-blame-anyone-but-us in the media. (maybe it's true)

Posted by: K Location: E on May 6, 2008 at 02:13 PM
It is an assumption to say that if they had been able to see the child, he would have been saved. Even in crystal clear water it may have been too late for the boy by the time mom noticed he was gone. While I agree that the pool should have been closed, the ultimate cause of death is drowning (no matter how murky or clear the water) because the parents weren't watching. They will probably win, though, given the previous lawsuit that Davis can use in his arguments.

Posted by: Amy Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 01:02 PM
To Michael, you are correct that not ALL hotel employees are pool experts. However, by law they MUST employ a licensed pool operator(s) and one MUST be on the premesis during ALL pool hours. Those are the people who are experts on pools.

Posted by: GET THE STORY RIGHT! on May 6, 2008 at 12:38 PM
The parent's didn't LET the child go swimming on his own in the dirty pool, he snuck out of the room on his own, probably to go swimming. I'm sure they were watching him, but kids do slip away unnoticed sometimes. I try to keep an eye on my child at all times, but sometimes you do have to do something like use the restroom, put something away, etc and that's how they get away. I feel really bad for the family and I hope everything turns out fair and just. God bless!

Posted by: Me Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Just a warning parents...if the drain in the bottom of the deep end cannot be seen, to NOT allow your children swim in the pool. It is a sign the pool is not being properly cared for or there have been chemicals added recently. Besides, if the pool is so cloudy, it is the responsibility of the operator to close the pool.

Posted by: Operator Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 12:26 PM
As a licensed Pool Operator, it interests me that the pool was even open that day. RULE #1 is that if you can't see the drain, the pool is to be CLOSED, no questions. As a parent, I 100% agree with most of the posts that say the parents should NEVER have let the child swim with the pool in such poor condition. However, the pool operator in charge of the pool should have closed the pool. Unfortunately, establishments are so interested in keeping their clients happy, they hesitate to close attractions like a pool. This tragic accident could have and should have been prevented had the pool operator done their job...it what we are trained for.

Posted by: $$$ on May 6, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Sad that it happened. But take some responsibility. The enormous cost to defend themselves against such a lawsuit just gets passed on to you and me. Unfortunately with lawsuits becoming so norm it is cheaper for businesses to make huge settlement payouts rather than risk paying big bucks for a defense team and then trying to predict how a jury/judge will feel.

Posted by: Cletus Location: Jackson on May 6, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Once again, you ppl never cease to amaze...everyone is all of a sudden holier than thou and want to chastise this family because of their loss...even the greatest parents can be distracted in a millisecond...is that being irresponsible? Now I know that for the sake of arugument most of u will say that u have ur eyes on ur children at ALL times (which we know truthfully is not possible) but u will say it 2 feel better about yourselves...at least u can rejoice in the fact that u & ur families have been blessed. And Im sure money is an issue...money won't bring their child back but there is no need 4 finacial stress on top of the pain of dealing with their loss...& it's pretty obvious that the hotel knew something was wrong with the water if they immediately shut it down for weeks

Posted by: Anonymous on May 6, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Let me guess...James Martin Davis was the lawyer in the lawsuit filed 10 years ago too right???

Posted by: Krissy on May 6, 2008 at 10:16 AM
if the water was gross, dont swim in it. watch ur kids. thats ur responsibilty. poor boy, but i dont think the hotel has blame for it

Posted by: T Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 09:59 AM
To Shanon - I really don't think your story is helping anyone (especially yourself). If your child almost drowned "just feet from you" and you "never saw anything" then you must not have been even looking at (WATCHING) your child. You are lucky that some teenage boy was doing your job for you and saved your son's life. Too bad you didn't notice your child choking in water just a few feet from you. Your story is just another way to prove that parents who don't pay attention always want to blame someone else for their negligence.

Posted by: mother who lost 3 boys Location: omaha on May 6, 2008 at 08:57 AM
i feel the pain of the family and i am sorry for their loss BUT when my oldest son was killed in a car/semi accident in 2001 did i go sue???NO Money will not bring your son back...IF that was the case i would of sued the 2 hospitals my youngest boys died in and I WOULD have sued the trucking company or at the driver of that semi...if you need help coping with the pain i know a real good psychiatrist that helped me cope with my losses....Drop the suit you lost him due to negligence...This should be a lesson to ALL parents who stay at hotels or go anywhere with swimming pools. btw I lost my other two to medical conditions...The lawsuit is ridiculous...I know it hurts but ALL hotels i stay at DO have signs posted to swim at your own risk

Posted by: Michael Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 08:56 AM
Shanon, Your logic doesn't make any sense. First of all, if it was "difficult" for this kid's parents to see the pool was murky, why would the hotel be able to tell? The hotel employees aren't experts on pools, so therefore, by your logic, they would not be able to tell the pool was murky. Maybe the hotel should go after the company who made the pool chemicals, because clearly they are to blame here (sarcasm intended). But we all know JMD and the parents have clearly stated that it was "obviously murky" and no one could "see to the bottom". Again, if it was so obvious, why would they let their kid swim in it? Like I hinted at before, the parents need to take responsibility for their mistake and not try to blame everyone else, otherwise they won't learn anything. You can't just go blaming everyone for your mistakes. That's a horrible way to go through life, but there are so many in this world that do it. One last time: it's the parents' fault!!!

Posted by: Mom Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 06:43 AM
Why would you let your child swim in dirty pool water that you could not see the bottum I would have never allowed my children in the pool if the water was that murky

Posted by: JLL Location: Omaha on May 6, 2008 at 03:28 AM
where is the parental resposability here folks. I guess it's just easier to blame the hotel than to realize your a bad parent. Hopefully a lawsuit will help them sleep better at night.

Posted by: Mom2 Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 11:48 PM
This is terrible!!! It is a parents responsibility to watch thier own kids!! We travel alot and I know that I would not let my kids swim in murky water, why did they? The parents should be charged with neglect. I understand accidents but this was not one they let the child swim in there when they even thought it was not safe. "ITS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY" yeah right who are they kidding? Sorry for your loss but you should of been paying attention. It is not anyones fault but your own!!!

Posted by: shanon Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 10:04 PM
Bottom line the Hotel is responsible for the conditions of that pool and it should have been closed.In the adventure of traveling with your child you should not lose sight of them expecially in a pool.However if you are not a expert on pools and you are only at the eye level how would you or anyone have known your child was in the murky water. and if any of you other parents had gone through this kinda loss you aswell would.Thankfully this has not happened to me but I will remember it and really look at the water in our hotels from here on out much more carefully.My son told me that when we had a room at a hotel across from Rosenblatt he almost drowned there and I was right there just feet from him and I never saw anything. He came up and was upset and said I want to go back to the room. He said afterward there was so much splashing aroung and other things that when he was choking in the water no one noticed but a teen boy who pulled him up.

Posted by: Mel Location: Bellevue on May 5, 2008 at 09:41 PM
This certainly is a tragic accident and the grief must be overwelming. However, if I were a juror on this case, I would wonder why in the world a parent would allow their 5 year old even near a pool that was dirty and dimmly lit at night? I could understand a lawsuit if the child was able to just wander in on his own, but to let your child near the water under those conditions is negligent. The DA should consider filing charges against the parents if they want to cry foul here. And to even say that it isn't about the money is a lie that they are telling themselves to make them feel better and lift the blame off of them. Should they get a verdict of negligence against the hotel they'll have "proof" that they were not in the wrong. Whatever you can live with I guess. I'm wondering if this will end up backfiring on them once evidence is presented regarding their negligence.

Posted by: JMD wants his 1/3rd of the payout Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 09:20 PM
Rest in peace, this unfortunate child, with parents who did not watch him - AND RIP personal responsibliity of parents - so sad that's gone too. Hopefully the jury will separate emotion from facts. Signed - an Omaha lawyer.

Posted by: Joy W. Location: Douglas County on May 5, 2008 at 08:02 PM
It's mind boggling that it took the parents 2 years (!) to file a wrongful death suit. I agree with many people. If the water was that murky, WHY did they let their kid swim in it? Also, why did they let a 5 year old in the water ALONE?! Besides, it's posted that there is no lifeguard on duty and you swim at your own risk. I mean, if some of my coworkers couldn't get their apartment complex to pay for medical bills resulting from a skin infection they got while swimming in the pool at their apartment complex because of this sign, why would the parents be "allowed" to sue? Just mind blowing. Tragic that the boy died, though. They probably should consider themselves lucky they didn't get neglect charges filed on them for not supervising their child when it happened (think the drowning in CB last summer).

Posted by: sean Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 07:19 PM
ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH A POOL KNOWS THAT THE WATER CAN BE CLEAR, CLOUDY, OPAQUE AT DIFFERENT TIMES DUE TO CHEMICALS....SUING IS BULLPUCKEY. PARENTS, RECOVER YOUR DIGNITY, FESS UP TO YOUR OWN LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY DISASSOCIATED YOURSELF WITH JAMES MARTIN BOTTOMFEEDER.

Posted by: reality check on May 5, 2008 at 04:44 PM
Where were the parents? Not watching their child!

Posted by: tim Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 04:12 PM
Last time I looked there is a sign at pools at hotels that say swim at your own risk lifeguard not on duty and its a parents job to supervise your children. This needs to get thrown out. This nothing more than trying to get money while its sad a child died this lawsuit needs to be dropped.

Posted by: West O on May 5, 2008 at 03:43 PM
I can't begin to imagine the pain and loss these parents have experienced, but at most motel pools there are signs that say "swim at your own risk, no lifeguard on duty". If the water was that murky what would make you think it was even ok to be in? God bless their son, but I think this is the wrong choice.

Posted by: Scott Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 03:28 PM
Here we go again..another lawsuit. Parents not taking responsibility for their own misdeeds!!!

Posted by: Suzanne Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Interesting that the parents waited two years to file a lawsuit. Did JMD hound them for two years looking for a buck? It is indeed tragic that this accident happened but the blame should be where it belongs and that is an unattended child in a pool. Who was responsible for that?

Posted by: Dee Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 01:57 PM
My thoughts and prayers are with the family that lost their child. I can't even imagine how a person could recover emotionally. I don't understand why people are up in arms because JMD is handling this case. People, the man is doing his job. He's gotten an education to practice law and that is what he is doing. If any of us found ourselves in some of these precarious situations, we would want counsel with experience and he definitely has that. Granted he has represented some shady characters, but someone has to. It's a job.

Posted by: Michael Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 01:56 PM
I feel sorry for the parents, but kind of annoyed by them at the same time. The point has already been hammered home, but why would you let your son swim in an obviously dirty pool? The money is not important? That's a line you usually hear when the money IS important. If it wasn't truly important, then don't keep the money.

Posted by: Deb on May 5, 2008 at 01:47 PM
It may not have been a dirty pool at all. If new chemicals were recently added (the night before) it makes the water cloudy. I do feel for the parents because they lost their child, but on the other hand I've been to way too many hotel pools where the parents are letting their children run wild and not watching them. I hope the motel wins and that these people are only given enough to pay for the funeral.

Posted by: Mom of 2 Location: Nebraska on May 5, 2008 at 01:41 PM
My heart does go out to the family...what a tragic event. HOWEVER, I NEVER would have let my children swim in that disgust of a so-called-pool to begin with. Just think of what else was in the water. The parents obviously didn't care the water was murky at the time. They are just as much to blame as the hotel.

Posted by: K Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 01:08 PM
Unreal....like the previous poster said why would you swim in the water if it was that murky....its a pool not the Missouri River im sure you could see the bottom of it. And Im sure there was a sign stating swim at your own risk life guard not on duty. Im sure all of the facts will eventually leak out. What if the child drown in a lake would you get Ernie Chambers to sue god because the lake was muddy or murky? What if it would have been at the family's home? Would they sue MUD because the water wasnt clear enough get a life people. Losing a child is tragic but common

Posted by: marcie Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 01:08 PM
if "its not about the money" why do it? what a line. Sorry for your loss but you need to drop the lawsuit and go on with you life.

Posted by: kc on May 5, 2008 at 12:56 PM
I think if the pool was murky I would not have let my kids in it to begin with. It was the parents option. Most hotel pools have signs they dont have lifegaurds too. This is so sad, but possibly they figure a little money will make them feel better. It never does in the end though. These people are just understandably angry and morning their poor son. I hope they find peace.

Posted by: Kathy Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 12:32 PM
I agree with the comments listed below. It is the parent's responsibility and not the Hotel's responsibility in keeping an eye on your child. This lawsuit is not going to bring back your child. I sorry for your loss of your child. If needing help to deal with your grief over the loss, there is other means of getting help. Why the 2 year wait in filing, are you in need of money? I am so sorry for your loss, as parents it is your responsibilty to keep an eye on your children at all times.

Posted by: Kathy on May 5, 2008 at 11:40 AM
If this lawsuit saves one child, if pool operators keep their pools clean and clear enough that a child could be seen at the bottom of their pool, then I saw good for them! As a parent there is no way I am going to bash these people. My feeling is this is a diversion, they still have to deal with the death of their child.

Posted by: T Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 10:18 AM
This is a sad story no matter how you look at it. On one hand my sympathy is with the family that lost the child. I cannot imagine the trama this has caused them. On the other hand, here comes a media hungry lawyer - JMD - that is now publicizing this family's "grief"...making sure to repeatedly mention that it's "not about the money". What are people supposed to think - JMD is the biggest ambulance chasing greedy lawyer who is always in the news helping the (supposed) victims. The fact that JMD name is anywhere in this story sheds a negative light on everything. It truly is a tragedy that the boy died, but I think that 'bill in Omaha' said it best...Part of the healing process is acceptance and foregiveness. Drop the suit and deal with your problems, your son is not coming back.

Posted by: Nikki Location: Council Bluffs on May 5, 2008 at 10:18 AM
I cannot imagine losing a child and my heart goes out to this family. However, filing a lawsuit is not going to bring this child back. All it is going to do is pad the pockets of the parents and their attorney. It seems that seems to be a cure all in this country anymore and it ties up our legal system and prevents the worthy cases of being tended to. Greed does not make grief go away regardless of how much money you have. A sad situtation all the way around.

Posted by: Kristen on May 5, 2008 at 09:43 AM
I am very sorry about their child. But the fact they couldn't see what their child was doing is not the hotel's fault. If the pool is so cloudy that they can't even see what their child is doing, then they should never let that child get into that pool. I would be too disgusted to let my child swim in such a dirty pool in the first place.

Posted by: MOTHER Location: OMAHA on May 5, 2008 at 09:13 AM
Why are all of you being so harsh. What if this happened to your child would you still be so harsh. Have any of you had a child die? GOD BLESS THE FAMILY.

Posted by: Keith Location: Papillion on May 5, 2008 at 09:07 AM
The line "it's not about the money" and the name James Martin Davis can only co-exist when the line is a lie.

Posted by: Jack N Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 08:56 AM
if it was murky, then why would you even want to swim in it? Pay attention to your kids, maybe the kid could have died from the junk in the water, but you didnt think about that....

Posted by: Terry Location: Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 08:53 AM
I am sorry for the loss of your child but placing blame on the hotel is not the answer. Instead of suing the hotel because you feel cloudy water was the reason (I disagree) make sure the hotel puts up signs that say "If you feel the water is not safe for any reason swim at your own risk". Why attempt to sue, get money and buy a new car or house? Does that show justice for your son? No, selfish parents that are only out for the almighty dollar. I hope you dont' have other children because this is not the example a parent should set.

Posted by: C.B. Location: Iowa on May 5, 2008 at 08:18 AM
While this is terribly sad, it's also puzzling why the parents didn't see the child leave the room. If they were in a motel room with him, how could they not see him trying to leave the room and stop him? How can you not see this if you're in a small motel room? If he had run into the street I imagine you would be trying to sue the driver? If it's not about the money, why sue? It won't bring the child back and it's obvious that you've made a point that the water was cloudy. The fact that you let the child out of your sight and this happened is not entirely the fault of the motel. The child obviously had a good head start on the parents noticing him missing if he got to the pool unnoticed. Were they even in the room with him? Lots of blame to go around.

Posted by: slim Location: ralston on May 5, 2008 at 08:12 AM
When my kids were 5 last time I checked it was my responsibility to know their where abouts, not someone elses.. True you can't bring a child back but it's not the hotels responsibility.. Motels have signs on the pool doors, no one under a certain age without adult supervision. Duh.

Posted by: Here Location: Look Around on May 5, 2008 at 08:08 AM
Oh by the way before anyone says anything. I did have a daughter that drowned. Did I file a lawsuit. NO. I took responsibilty for it. Not the hotel fault. SO THERE!!!!

Posted by: Will Location: W Omaha on May 5, 2008 at 07:59 AM
"The Guevaras lost track of their 5-year-old son for just a few minutes" This sentence unfortunately summarizes the defense. Had they been keeping track of him, they would not have had to look at the bottom of the pool or otherwise. JMD.. Quit chasing ambulances, or in this case, a hearse.

Posted by: responsible on May 5, 2008 at 07:58 AM
I am so sorry for your loss, however, as responsible parents why did you allow your child to swim if it was so obviously cloudy? Why not then notify the management? Sad that we sue others for not being responsible when the parents themselves were not either. Once again, I am sorry for their loss - no one deserves that.

Posted by: Here Location: Look Around on May 5, 2008 at 07:38 AM
I do blame the hotel but I also blame the parents. Common sense says don't let your child in a dirty pool. That is like giving your child a bath in filthy water. Do you do that? No!!

Posted by: jay Location: council bluffs on May 5, 2008 at 07:36 AM
If the water was as bad as JMD said it was why were they swimming in such filth and cloudy water? I would have looked at the water and turned around and left. Or is JMD exaggerating to make a point?

Posted by: marsha Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 07:27 AM
most to all of the hotel pools that i have been to are clear and not cloudy. signs in the pool area state that you swim at your own risk. these parents dont have a leg to stand on. the parents should have not lost track of a 5 yr old in the area. what were they actually doing?

Posted by: Mom on May 5, 2008 at 06:14 AM
Children are fast, you must watch them at all times.

Posted by: bill Location: omaha on May 5, 2008 at 12:36 AM
This is truly a sad story and I feel horible for the parents. Money will not bring your children back. Even if the water was dark, it is your child. Part of the healing process is acceptance and foregiveness. Drop the suit and deal with your problems, your son is not coming back. That is not meant to cold, it's just the reality that you don't seem to be facing.

Posted by: You Failed Location: Nebraska on May 5, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Whenever someone sues and says, "It's not about the money", it's about the money. Quit trying to blame other people for what happened when you failed in your duty as a parent of young child. YOU should have kept tabs on a child that age, all the time. You failed, he died, and now you are trying to shift the blame (and make a pile of cash out of it too).

Posted by: Anonymous on May 4, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Terrible tragedy. I however am sick of people saying " I's not the money" Who believes that line???????????? An is there any more of a media wanna be that JMD??? The guys is pathetic.

Posted by: DB on May 4, 2008 at 11:18 PM
These people always say "Its not about the money". You know, I would believe them if they turned around and gave whatever they won to charity. The water was apparently clear enough for them to let their 5 year old child swim in it...totally unattended.

Posted by: Jean Location: Omaha on May 4, 2008 at 10:37 PM
I am so sorry for your loss and that you are still trying to place blame.

Posted by: J Location: Bennington on May 4, 2008 at 10:22 PM
I thought it was heartbreaking at the time that they lost their little boy. I also thought at the time - if the water was that nasty, why would they swim in it, let alone let their son in it?

Video: Hour-by-Hour Forecast Updates

Family Health

Health Check

Kids Corner

Heartland's Most Wanted

Product Recalls

WOWT.com Most Popular
1.	Couple Sentenced in Child Abuse Case
2.	Sexual Assault, Blackmail Case Involves Teacher, Students
3.	The House That Jack Built
4.	Auction Gets Home Sold
5.	Driver Critically Hurt in Crash
6.	Teens Recovering From Gunshot Wounds
7.	Mother Denied Custody Of Daughter
8.	A Woman on a Mission
9.	Accused Drunk Driver Surrenders
10.	Tax Lien Closes Cafe