BREAKING NEWS: Swiss ski resort bar owner arrested after New Years fire resulting in 40+ deaths

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g0mq520zeo?at_format=link&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_id=9337ABB6-ED6B-11F0-8AD4-AD5F7583131D&at_link_type=web_link&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_link_origin=BBCBreaking&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_medium=social

Posted by Sleepy_C

25 Comments

  1. Some legal background: He is currently (likely) not on remand / investigative detention (“Untersuchungshaft”), but “only” temporarily arrested by the prosecutor until the coercive measures court (“Zwangsmassnahmengericht”) decides within the next 48 hours whether putting him on remand / investigative detention (“Untersuchungshaft”) is justified or not.

    The coercive measures court (“Zwangsmassnahmengericht”) can also decide that instead of keeping him in jail (or letting him go until the actual criminal trial) “measures in lieu of detention” (“Ersatzmassnahmen”) could be justified, like:

    * security deposit
    * the restriction on issuing identification documents and other documents;
    * requirement to remain only or not in a specific place or house;
    * requirement to report regularly to an official authority;
    * requirement to pursue regular employment;
    * requirement to undergo medical treatment or an examination;
    * prohibition against maintaining contact with certain persons.

  2. Maleficent_Agent4846 on

    They speak of a risk of flight, I am curious to know what new elements make them believe that a risk which previously was excluded, it is now real.

  3. take_my_upvote1 on

    If he flees he will never come back to Switzerland. If he stays he will do some years prison and can open a new business. Don‘t know what‘s worse.

  4. Elric_the_seafarer on

    I would have instead punt in jail the Swiss system (and everyone content with it) for letting a criminal involved in prostitution and illegal confinement run a club full of teens with 0 safety measures.

  5. lawless_the_real_one on

    The cellar’s ceiling of the object was fitted with acoustic foam, which is flammable by definition. The oldest picture I found with this foam already fitted was from 2017. In 2019 the last official inspection was performed, so at least 2 years prior the foam was already on the ceiling.

    If and how the foam would have been sprayed by fire deterrents can only be determined by papertrails. And even if there is invoices to be found, they don’t mean the deterrents actually had to be used.

    Now for indoor sparklers – they are not a problem for fire safety. If. There. Is. No. Flammable. Foam. Ceiling.

    Judging from videos, from fire start to flashover it took about 10 seconds. Which in retrospect defines that there has been no fire deterrent left over in, on or above the foam.

    I do not think this was in any case deliberate. I do however think, that the owners / managers did not think when buying and applying the foam ceiling. I do also think that no one else working in the establishment did ever think of any scenario where a foam ceiling would cause havoc.

    Even if the bar / restaurant would have been inspected every year, the foam would probably not have been an issue raising safety issue questions.

    That being said, all of us judging other people for their mistakes should question ourselves where we could prevent such tragedy. But then again, isn’t it just human to not think of any repercussions?

  6. Good. I hope he goes to prison, for getting dozens of people killed with his gross negliegence.

  7. Legal-Newt-1891 on

    I wonder if its true they didnt inspect it for 5 years, essier to say this than “we did inspect and found nothing”

  8. > [Sie erschienen heute Morgen mit drei Anwälten beim Staatsanwalt in Sitten – unter grossem Medieninteresse.](https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/katastrophe-in-crans-montana-bar-betreiberin-bittet-um-entschuldigung-ehemann-in-u-haft-1)

    Why three lawyers? I am sure he would not be in custody if the public prosecutor’s office were not under such enormous international pressure. In general, I have the feeling that such a case would be very much in the interest of the bar owners if there were not so much public interest in it.

  9. Why are they arresting the owner and not the heads of the agencies which previously inspected and signed off the safety of the place? 😡😡😡

  10. According to a [paywalled interview](https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/on-n-est-pas-des-voyous-en-corse-le-pere-de-jacques-moretti-patron-du-constellation-a-crans-montana-sort-de-l-ombre-20260109) (but available via the usual archive sites) with the male bar owners father, the 24yr old staff member of the bar (which apparently died in front of the allegedly locked 2nd emergency exit) was the girlfriend of the male bar owners “step-son”.

    The “step-son” is the (now) 33y old son of a former girlfriend of the bar owner. The “step-son” worked at one of the other restaurant of the owners and apparently has lived with the bar owner (who it seems like he is the father figure for that kid) since he was 12 years old.

  11. This is almost EXACTLY the same situation as Colectiv in 2015 in Bucharest. That ended with the entire government resigning, because investigations showed a blatant lack of following safety procedures, which originated from corruption at all levels.

    The story being pushed is that the owner hasn’t gone through safety vetting of the venue in more than 5 years. In this case, the owner is partly to blame. But what about the authorities that have to do those safety checks every year? Where were they every year for the last five years? What about the city council who dispatches these people to do the checks? Where were they in the last 5 years?

    They were all either completely incompetent, in which case, their heads should at least be arrested; or they were paid off, in which case MORE of them should be arrested.