Movie World cleared of wrongdoing after scalping injury on carousel

[Naazon]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-21/movie-world-cleared-carousel-child-descalping-injury/105317156

 

Quote

In short:

A 12-year-old boy suffered a scalping injury and fractures when his head went into moving parts in the ceiling of the Looney Tunes carousel at Movie World in April 2022.

Queensland's Workplace Health and Safety Prosecutor accused Movie World operator Village Roadshow Theme Parks of failing in its duty of care to the child, but withdrew from the case after two days of evidence.

What's next?

Village Roadshow Theme Parks will make an application for legal costs after the charge was dismissed in Southport Magistrates Court on Wednesday. 

Quote

Movie World has been cleared of any wrongdoing in a carousel accident that left a 12-year-old boy with severe head injuries.

After two days of evidence at a judge-only trial in the Southport Magistrates Court, Work Health Safety Queensland (WHSQ) withdrew its prosecution of Movie World's operator, Village Roadshow Theme Parks.

WHSQ had accused Village Roadshow of failing in its duty of care after the 12-year-old suffered an "ear-to-ear de-scalping injury" and several fractures on Movie World's Looney Tunes carousel in April 2022.

Magistrate Lisa O'Neill was told the boy was standing on the back of the carousel's Wile E. Coyote character, instead of sitting on it, when his head went through an open aperture in the ceiling.

The court heard the boy's injuries were caused when his head was pinned between the edge of the aperture and machinery that drives the character up and down on a pole as the carousel turns.

Brushes not installed

Barrister for WHSQ, Clare O'Connor, told the court an independent safety report, provided to the theme park eight months before the accident, had identified the ceiling aperture as presenting a risk of crush injury and recommended rigid plastic brushes be installed on the opening.

"Such brushes are considered best practice and are in use at carousels at Sea World and Dream World," Ms O'Connor said.

The court heard the 12-year-old boy was standing on one of the carousel characters. (ABC News)

She said the report found the ride complied with safety requirements, was in "excellent operational condition" and a recommendation to install plastic brushes was being considered by the theme park before the incident.

By not installing the brushes, Village Roadshow had exposed carousel riders to a risk of injury or death, Ms O'Connor told the court.

Village Roadshow's barrister, Saul Holt, told the court the boy's actions on the carousel and his resulting injuries were "not reasonably foreseeable".

"This 12-year-old boy was described by one witness as surfing the character when his head, either deliberately or inadvertently, entered the hole in the ceiling of the ride," Mr Holt said.

"The steps the prosecution say were absent … would not have prevented this from happening."

Mr Holt said the carousel was immediately shut down after the incident and underwent a "hardcore engineering solution" before it was re-opened several months later.

"Once the risk was reasonably foreseeable, Village Roadshow Theme Parks made it impossible for it to occur," he said.

'Haven't wanted to go back'

Movie World attraction attendant Ruby Piakura, who was operating the carousel on the day of the incident, told the court she had worked on the ride for more than six months at the time.

Ms Piakura said she had never seen a rider stand on a character before that day and had hit the emergency stop as soon as she realised something was wrong.

Mr Randall says Queensland's theme park safety regulations are the most stringent in Australia. (ABC News: Steve Keen)

Asked if she had seen a rider stand on a character since, she told the court that, while she continued to work at Movie World, she no longer operated the carousel.

"I haven't wanted to go back to working on that ride," she said.

'Extremely surprised'

Theme park ride safety consultant David Randall wrote the report that recommended plastic brushes be installed on the carousel.

He told the court he had made the recommendation as an opportunity for improvement on the ride, not as a requirement for it to operate.

He said plastic brushes were a tactile deterrent rather than a physical barrier, meaning even if they were installed on the ride, the boy's head could still have gone through them and into the machinery above.

Movie World on the Gold Coast officially opened in June 1991. (ABC Archives)

"I recommended the plastic brush be installed so that if a child reaches up into that area, they touch the brushes and pull their hand away," he said.

Mr Randall said that, even with decades of experience in safety management, he did not identify a person standing on a carousel character as a foreseeable risk.

"I was extremely surprised after the event, which is unusual for me, as I'd never considered that as an issue," he told the court.

"I see lots of different things, lots of problems that haven't occurred before. This was one I never anticipated."

Movie World's Looney Tunes characters are popular with young visitors. (ABC Gold Coast: Dominic Cansdale)

On the third day of the trial, Ms O'Connor told Ms O'Neill the prosecution had no further evidence to offer, and asked to withdraw from the case.

"I think that is a responsible decision, given the evidence we have heard," Ms O'Neill said before she dismissed the charge against Village Roadshow Theme Parks.

The theme park operator will now make an application for WHSQ to pay its legal costs in the case.

 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

sensible decision. 

[Narra]

18 hours ago, Naazon said:

Mr Randall said that, even with decades of experience in safety management, he did not identify a person standing on a carousel character as a foreseeable risk.

"I was extremely surprised after the event, which is unusual for me, as I'd never considered that as an issue," he told the court.

I would love to see what risks they did identify, because someone standing up on a character seems like an obvious one to me?

[Naazon]

Probably your standard falling off, sticking arms out into the moving ride, tripping, slipping off the raised platform ect ect

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Also probably down to it being a kids ride in a kids area, and assuming children would follow instructions and adults would be mature enough to take responsibility for their own actions (and their progeny). 

[New display name]

Who's play do you run here?

DW - Fence it all off because kids and adults can't be trusted.

MW - Trust kids and adults will do the right thing.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

2 hours ago, New display name said:

Who's play do you run here?

DW - Fence it all off because kids and adults can't be trusted.

MW - Trust kids and adults will do the right thing.

Well now - be sure to read things properly to understand what's happening before looking silly - you're incorrect here for two reasons

1. a ride envelope with a supervising operator is a bit different to a static display with no staff on duty in any nearby capacity
2. I was answering the question posed by Narra about what risks they did identify, and I was postulating what logic MW's consultancy firm may have used - rather than stating my own opinion.

[New display name]

Got it.  You can trust kids/parents once inside a fenced area but when they're on the outside of a fenced area they can't be trusted.

In fact, what DW should do now, is install a gate to their newly fenced areas and place signage out the front asking people not to climb the vehicles because it is safe to assume the people within the fenced envelope and will obey the instructions they received.   //s (this is a joke) //s (a ha-ha joke) //s  (please don't kill me).