'Hold your wee for a Wii' audio recording
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Jan 23rd 2007 at 11:00PM }
Audio recordings are now available of the radio station sponsored water drinking contest for a Wii, which caused the death of a woman due to water intoxication. Jennifer Strange, 28, died after drinking over two gallons of water in Sacramento radio station 107.9 The End's "Hold your wee for a Wii" contest. The clips above are highlights of the best-of-the-worst moments when 20/20 hindsight is applied.
Caller: "I want to say that, um, that those people that are drinking all that water can get sick and possibly die of water intoxication."
DJ 1: "Yeah, we're aware of that."
DJ 2:"They signed releases, so we're not responsible. It's OK."
After some more witty banter about people dying, they figure they're golden as long as they, "MAKE SURE SHE SIGNS THE RELEASE!"
The attorney retained by the Strange family looks to be going after everyone involved in the contest, even possibly Nintendo, to get one hefty, hefty, hefty pay day. After listening to that audio, we can't imagine how any jury is going to let those involved in this contest go without making a sizable contribution to Strange's three children's college fund.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
icemorebutts @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:10PM
Idiot drank the water too quickly and ignored the results of her actions before she started. Natural selection if you ask me.
Otsego @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:13PM
very sad.. knowing the results.
Kyouryuu @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:15PM
May God have mercy on their souls.
Petrie @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:17PM
They weren't right, but what happened to personal responsibility?
Dan K @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:20PM
So, in a food-eating contest, if someone dies, is it the contest holders fault? This is just like any other food/liquid consumption competition, this girl just happend to die. Also, she signed a release. True the DJ's made ignorat comments and it's too bad the girl died, but a mom with 3 children shouldn't participate in a risky contest and and the DJ's shouldn't be sued. Those DJ's have already lost the respect/rights/reputation to join any other radio station.
schlomo @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:18PM
umm... this audio has been out since about 2 days after the entire fiasco. but yeah, that's what I base my decision on... I think the DJs (especially the intern) should be guilty of criminal negligence, and involuntary manslaughter might even be possible. the station owners could get something along the lines of accessory to manslaughter (if that's an actual charge) and definitely criminal negligence as well for letting the contest even start.
Petrie @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:18PM
Darwinism at its finest.
Chris @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:20PM
Wikipedia.org.
"Consuming as little as 0.48 gal in a single sitting may prove fatal for a person adhering to a low-sodium diet, or 3 litres 0.79 gallons for a person on a normal diet."
If i was a radio DJ, it took me two seconds just now to see how fatal 2 gallons could be.
Wow.
Huzzah!! @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:22PM
This contest was in no way recognized by Nintendo (Nintendo did not even know it was occurring), so they have no grounds for suing them. Even so, Nintendo has plenty of money to go around. :)
GalacticAE @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:25PM
# 7:
Even if the disclaimer attempted to excuse the radio station and the Djs of liability it will not hold up in court. You can not attempt to limit or excuse liability for personal injury or death where the party imposing the clause has acted negligently.
Also in terms of a criminal case, you can not write a disclaimer that attempts to allow you to break the law. Thats common sense. Or else there would be no legal problem when it comes to euthanasia, you could just have the patient sign a disclaimer saying they allow you to murder them.
wako @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:24PM
Next contest...
Hold your Wii for a Wii with Gatorade! Death will be caused by exploded kidneys!
Slaziman @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:25PM
Guys, darwinism? Are you retarded? The DJ's thought that the contestants would throw up the water and not die, possibly told that to the woman as well, water intoxication is not widely known, nor why it causes death (throwing up wouldn't do you any good as the sodium is already diluted in the water, you'd still throw up the sodium and have a low level of sodium).
whosmav @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:33PM
This whole event is totally depressing. Its speaks volumes about public ignorance. And the DJs are sick sick sick. The station was totally irresponsible.
Its not hard to look this shit up. The whole idea is deadly.
Having someone drink 2 gallons of water and hold their pee as long as they can is equivalent to serving cyanide.
That woman didn't sign a release, she signed a death warrant. Its awful, she obviously didn't understand what was happening to her.
Criminal charges should ABSOLUTELY be filed.
MartinG. @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:33PM
I forgot to mention that from what I've read, the release they signed said nothing about the risk of death or any possible harm at all. Rather, it only stated that they couldn't win anything from the station within 30 days of the contest.
Rick Ludwig @ Jan 26th 2007 7:52AM
While I do feel bad for the family, I stop at them trying to get anything out of Nintendo (unless they stupidly sponsored the event). Those involved should have been fired, but brought up on charges? That's stretching it. People need to be responsible for their own decisions. It's not like the DJs FORCED her to drink all that water, it was a stupid (and I do mean STUPID) contest, a game, in which, at any time, she could have bowed out. YES the DJs should have taken more percautions (i.e. set the limit at a quarter of a gallon), but if these same DJs would have held a sky diving contest for a PS3 and someone's shoot didn't open would we be charging the DJs?
munn75 @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:32PM
You people blaming the victim have some real issues to work out. You seem to be asserting that this contest was so obviously dangerous that this woman should have known better. By that same logic, it should have been obvious to the radio station that this type of contest was not a good idea.
If we assume that neither the contestants nor the radio realized the risk, then the radio station should have taken the advice of the nurse that called them and warned them of the danger. Instead they turned it into a big joke and now someone is dead.
The least they could have done is paid attention to the warning signs and got the contestant some medical attention.
All of you people talking about natural selection, you better watch out. Based on the intellect shown in your comments, if natural selection is truly at work we won't be hearing much else from you in the future.
whosmav @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:33PM
Icemoor, petrie, & Dan K
Something is very wrong with all of you.
Dan K @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:44PM
:)
Kildjean @ Jan 24th 2007 12:27AM
I can only imagine how the DJ should have felt that after all him punning the poor woman she actually died.
He must feel like crap.
Slaziman @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:48PM
They were like LOL YOUR BODY IS 90% WATER WHY COULDNT YOU DRINK AS MUCH WATER AS YOU CAN? LOL? AND IF IT GETS DANGEROUS THEY'LL THROW UP LOOOOL!
Throwing up wouldn't do you any good anyway, since your sodium levels would be really low. If there was natural selection those DJ's should be dead not the woman. I bet the woman trusted that a radio station would do research before doing such contests -_-'
thebiggameover @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:54PM
did she win?
Omega2k3 @ Jan 23rd 2007 11:58PM
It just seems that both parties were negligent, and it's a terrible waste of human life.
This woman kept drinking, even though she experienced pain, light-headedness, and distention, only because she didn't want to wait upwards of a month for a console that she most likely knew almost nothing about. She wasted her life to be impatient.
The DJ's were irresponsible, also. Ignoring callers who pleaded them to stop. Callers who knew that this was very dangerous. So what, there's a release? You're not going to intentionally endanger someone's LIFE simply because they signed a release, are you? When you hear that what you're doing can cause death, you stop.
Listening to them made me kind of sick, and this is the first time in a while that I've actually taken the time to respond on a Joystiq topic.
catma @ Jan 24th 2007 12:01AM
Granted the contest was quite sick but the family of the victim is taking this way for trying to sue nintendo. The DJ's should have done a hell of a lot more research and I do hope that they are held responsible as perhaps this will just get rid of some more idiot in the world who probably shouldn't breed. This isn't so much Darwinism as it is just plain stupidity and really, really bad luck
scottyboy218 @ Jan 24th 2007 12:05AM
Signing the release doesn't make them not liable for her death. You can't sign a release form for murder. I doubt the radio station gave her a full detailed explanation of what could happen, therefore they were negligent.
Peter Davis @ Jan 24th 2007 12:09AM
seriously. make it a limit of a couple of litres of water/something with caffiene (coke maybe) over a few hours. ive done that once (its a drinking game) and the urge to wee is ungodly after probably 45mins.
thebiggameover @ Jan 24th 2007 12:14AM
http://www.kcra.com/news/10751005/detail.html
quote "Strange was the runner-up in the contest that required drinking huge amounts of water in a short amount of time.
Contest winner Lucy Davidson recalled how she and Strange both got ill after the contest.
"After it was all over ... we both went into the bathroom and we were both sick," Davidson said. "She's throwing up. I'm throwing up. I mean, we just had too much."
Davidson recovered from her illness. Strange was found dead at her Rancho Cordova home Friday afternoon."
So why didnt the winner die???
Jeff @ Jan 24th 2007 12:24AM
"So why didnt the winner die???"
Because not every human being is exactly the same?
munn75 has had by far the smartest comment here so far. I second everything he said.
btw, I notice that the stars have been turned off and we've now got an Engadget-style password system here... (which would be an improvement if I didn't have to uncheck that "email me" box every friggin time)
Shane @ Jan 24th 2007 12:18AM
What happened to the winner? I assume she drank an equal amount of water as the woman that died.
scott @ Jan 24th 2007 12:18AM
different bodies react differently? some people can drink tons of alcohol and be fine, while another person can drink the same much and die from alcohol poisoning
2slick @ Jan 24th 2007 12:24AM
Darwin's Theory FTW!!!!!!!!
nick @ Jan 24th 2007 12:24AM
Darwin's Theory FTW!!!!!!!!
nick @ Jan 24th 2007 12:25AM
just inputtin the password
Ben Friesen @ Jan 24th 2007 12:42AM
That recording makes me sick.
MoonfirePewPEwPEw @ Jan 24th 2007 12:58AM
Oh look, the family and their lawyers are exploiting the death of their love one for monetary payment. Who didn't see the lust of money coming?
Shame she had kids, her gene pool is still out there polluting our society.
Slaziman @ Jan 24th 2007 1:01AM
@Jeff
I thought since you can't reply to a comment on this site, you wouldn't get an e-mail anyway? Maybe other blogs hosted on the same company that hosts Joystiq do have some sort of way to reply to a specific comment, but much like the password thing was mentioned in the e-mails but was non-existant, the "E-mail me ~blahblah~" checkbox is only there because of the way the site is coded?
Maybe I got it all wrong though.
X51 @ Jan 24th 2007 1:02AM
When you're going to run a contest where there are medical risks, and you know about these medical risks, take the 10 minutes to research the exact nature of those risks. Don't assume you know how the body reacts. That's how people get killed.
Response 1: She knew what she was getting into.
No, no she didn't. How many people actually know how much water it takes to kill you? You people going "she should have known better," did you know? Would you have entered that contest?
Response 2: Darwinian Theory.
No. Just, no. There's a special place in hell for people like you, where they put the child molesters and people who talk at the theater.
Conclusion:
Someone's going to jail, and now instead of mocking the risks of a potentialy hazardous contest, they can mockingly narrate their own anal rape.
Retrofied @ Jan 24th 2007 1:04AM
That's some sad stuff. :(
MoonfirePewPEwPEw @ Jan 24th 2007 1:09AM
I am getting real sick of people defending the victim blindly. She foolishly signed up for a contest, without using common sense, and she paid the cost of that mistake.
Anyone that got a public education knows that Water is not some magical elixir that you can drink infinite amounts of, and can cure everything. You should had learned from biology class that too much of anything is bad for you.
She should had weighted the risks vs the rewards, and came up with the decision that he life is not worth a toy (gaming system). She should had known that even if she survived the consumption of so much water, she risked permanent damage to digestive/urinary tracks that could had still resulted in death.
Yes, it was a sad thing to do. Yes, the radio station and the DJs should pay. No, blame still needs to be placed on the victim for negligence.
Ignorance is not an excuse.
X51 @ Jan 24th 2007 1:23AM
@38
You actually think that the fact you can die from drinking water is common knowledge? I don't recall a single instance in the entirety of my education learning that you could die from water intoxication. No, I learned it by overhearing another person's conversation.
Yeah, there are isolated reports in the news, but do you think people take that in given all the other news, or that they even check the news at all? Was it a smart thing to do? No.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that common sense isn't common, and just because someone isn't supremely educated doesn't mean that they had it coming.
Ben @ Jan 24th 2007 1:27AM
So first, just to preface, this whole thing is very sad. Second, if Nintendo had anything to do with this I think you would see this contests all over the country, not just in this one place, so they should be left the hell out of it. Third, again acknowledging how sad it is, she was given several outs throughout this contest (based on the audio clip) and chose to pass them up. Her words and actions (not to mention the release she undoubtedly signed) pretty clearly communicate that she was aware of both her actions and the consequences that were entailed. This station should be held responsible for its negligence, and should definitely pay out after civil litigation, but I think the the clear and undeniable knowledge that she had of her actions should eliminate any serious penalty from tort litigation and any serious criminal charges. Hopefully the jurors on the forthcoming cases will decide with their minds and not their feelings, and look at this case from all angles.
MoonfirePewPEwPEw @ Jan 24th 2007 1:32AM
"You actually think that the fact you can die from drinking water is common knowledge?"
Which comes back to my comment "Ignorance is not an excuse". I am not trying to be some heartless bastard, but damn, everyone at one time consumed too much water before at one time in their life and gotten sick. Once I drunk 3 16 ounce glasses of water, downed them quickly, and had the sensation to vomit, and I never did that before.
Ben @ Jan 24th 2007 1:41AM
For all the people that are calling this murder, there is absolutely no way under any state or federal law that this would constitute murder. At best, it's negligence (also known typically as involuntary manslaughter). She may have not known what the specific risks are, but who does? I doubt we all have actuaries following us around all day, calculating the specific risk of every decision we make or every agreement into which we enter. One party entering into a agreement with insubstantial information does not somehow magically relieve them of their role in the agreement, nor should it. If she were of unsound mind, or was deliberately deceived by the other party, then her role in the agreement could be overlooked. Unfortunately, she seemed to demonstrate fairly clearly that she was not of unsound mind, and the idiot DJs were lacking information themselves so I doubt they somehow deceived her, so part of the blame for the outcome falls on her. The station and the DJs should be held responsible to some extent, but it should not in any way fall entirely on them.
X51 @ Jan 24th 2007 1:49AM
@41
I guess I just really object to people saying anything remotely like "she had it coming" because while she was ignorant, the radio station was not. To me, the blame lies solely on the station.
As for your "everyone's done it" thing, I haven't, and I know quite a few people that haven't. Your "everyone's done it" thing just doesn't work, unfortunately.
I just don't see the logic in placing blame on her. It may have been her choice, but she didn't know, and the people that at least had some idea didn't inform her of the risks, mostly because they didn't know themselves, which all equates to one huge mistake by a radio station that may cost them quite a bit more than a few jobs and money.
Sly @ Jan 24th 2007 1:52AM
These guys are cold hearted. After listening to the
consequences of what can happen, they continue on foolishly. Her three orphan kids didn't sign a release for their mother's death. And they said "It's OK".
Matt @ Jan 24th 2007 1:56AM
Hey, look! It's the first ever completely black-and-white issue!
Or not. You can't put all blame on one side of the fence. No, it's not common knowledge that water can kill you. The woman didn't know that, but the hosts clearly aren't bastions of wisdom either. Negligence is attributed to both sides.
And yes, the comments made by the hosts are deplorable, but only with hindsight. Their job is to wake up every morning and be jackasses on public radio. That's what they think about when they drink their morning coffee. And if a concerned caller phones in, they need to maintain their radio personas.
Slaziman @ Jan 24th 2007 2:02AM
@41
It is NOT common knowledge that water can kill you, and how will common sense tell you that water can kill you? Water is commonly known as a harmless substance, isn't it?
And no, I've never drunk too much water and gotten sick, that's a stupid assumption.
MoonfirePewPEwPEw @ Jan 24th 2007 2:15AM
"As for your "everyone's done it" thing, I haven't, and I know quite a few people that haven't. "
I'm sorry that you have to flat out lie to get your point across, but most people have done similar things.
MoonfirePewPEwPEw @ Jan 24th 2007 2:18AM
"
It is NOT common knowledge that water can kill you, and how will common sense tell you that water can kill you? Water is commonly known as a harmless substance, isn't it?"
I'm sorry that you think that water is completely harmless, but anyone that use critical thinking can deduct that anything has the potential to kill you.
"And no, I've never drunk too much water and gotten sick, that's a stupid assumption."
You never had the sensation of being ill after drinking too much water? Or are you just lying?
Petrie @ Jan 24th 2007 2:41AM
It's pretty common knowledge that water can kill you in heavy doses. I can't believe people want to portray this woman as some helpless victim. As if the hosts forcer her to do this. She wanted a Wii without having to purchase one. She placed that value above that of her own health. Obviously if they made you sign a waiver there was risk involved people.
Slaziman @ Jan 24th 2007 2:45AM
@48
Maybe I've never drank too much water? I don't see why assume that everyone has drank too much water, let alone felt sick after doing it.
And I said COMMONLY KNOWN AS HARMLESS, not that *I* thought it was harmless. And what do you mean ANYTHING has the potential to kill you? Can my bed kill me? lol
Assuming you mean putting substances in your body, you could deduct that drinking lots of water could kill you, but only at high numbers at which point your bladder would burst. 1.8 liters isn't that much, yet it's enough to kill someone on a low-sodium diet. There is no way of deducting that drinking water causes sodium levels to overdilute in the blood plasma without RESEARCH.
Long story short, you are a dick that pulls every argument out of his ass, and I hope you don't have kids before you die, so no one can suffer from your genes.