Bride Drowns Tragedy

Sky news

A woman has drowned after she was pulled under water by her saturated wedding dress while having photographs taken near waterfalls in Canada.
Quebec provincial police said the unnamed woman's body was recovered four hours after she disappeared under the water at Dorwin Falls.
Police initially said she had fallen from a cliff and fallen into the waterfall, but later corrected that report.
The woman, from Montreal, was married on June 9, but was having photos taken in her dress at the picturesque location in Rawdon, near Quebec.
While she was being photographed with her feet in the water, the dress became saturated and she was unable to remain above the surface, police said.
The photographer and a bystander tried to rescue her but were unable to save her because of the weight of the dress, Sergeant Ronalid McInnis said.
She slipped under the water and her body was eventually recovered in a basin around 100ft away by a diver.
Sgt McInnis said two witnesses had to be hospitalised and treated for shock.
 
Wow, shocking, how tradgic.
 
I'm trying to think through the relevant liabilities and duties of care under UK law. I know that the incident took place in Canada but it's worth considering the implications of something similar happening here. I think that in the UK it would come under HSAWA 1973 Regulations 3 and 7. These are general "don't be a numpty" duties.
 
There are loads of trash the dress shoots taking place on beaches with brides hanging around in the sea or nearly bum deep in a lake so I wonder how long it will be before something similar happens in the UK.
 
Tragic, but it is prohibited to swim in that stretch of water due to the falls. Another Darwin Award candidate? Canadian's never fail to amaze me to how stupid they are at times!!
 
Last edited:
mindcrime said:
Tragic, but it is prohibited to swim in that stretch of water due to the falls. Another Darwin Award candidate? Canadian's never fail to amaze me to how stupid they are at times!!
Click to expand...

You can't go round tarring all them with the same brush. just not PC! :puke:


;)
 
I'm slightly supprised the husband wasn't there, in most trash the dresses they come to watch (assuming thats what was happening) it's very sad anyway.
The news report I saw said the photographer and assistant tried to pull the bride out but couldn't hold her, and the river shown looked in flood.
 
While she was being photographed with her feet in the water, the dress became saturated and she was unable to remain above the surface
Click to expand...

Some stages missed out there surely?
 
Tragic for all involved but I suspect there will be more to this than meets the eye.
 
Just to be clear, Neil, I was responding to the racism rather than the original news item. That truly is tragic.
 
simonblue said:
I adgreed just one of those tragic accident that happen.
Click to expand...

Foreseeable? Yes
Preventable? Yes

A heavy dress and a fast-flowing river.. definitely not just something that happens. In the UK the photographer has a duty towards the safety of the client/model/assistant. This is a tragedy that those doing similar shoots should be aware of.
 
Alastair said:
Foreseeable? Yes
Preventable? Yes

A heavy dress and a fast-flowing river.. definitely not just something that happens. In the UK the photographer has a duty towards the safety of the client/model/assistant. This is a tragedy that those doing similar shoots should be aware of.
Click to expand...

It's my understanding the same applies in Canada, but sadly people don't always do the safe or correct thing.

We don't know all the facts here but it sounds like the weight of the dress and slippery rocks may have been factors.
 
Alastair said:
Foreseeable? Yes
Preventable? Yes

A heavy dress and a fast-flowing river.. definitely not just something that happens. In the UK the photographer has a duty towards the safety of the client/model/assistant. This is a tragedy that those doing similar shoots should be aware of.
Click to expand...

Yes if your directing them,but can you be held reposible for the action that a client wishes to take ? :)
 
simonblue said:
Yes if your directing them,but can you be held reposible for the action that a client wishes to take ? :)
Click to expand...

Yes. Because you always have the option to stop the shoot and walk away. And you should have identified the risk before you started. And before anyone chips in with the idea of waivers.. they don't work in the UK because you can't sign away your own specific legal obligations to someone else.
 
Tragic story.
 
Last edited:
With seven deaths in twenty years it's clear to see why swimming is prohibited, sad yes but clearly avoidable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top