Abigall is riding a roller coaster at Queen's island Amusement Park when the coaster abruptly stops in the middle of the ride. The stop casses Abigail to suffer a bad neck injury. It is determined that Queen's Island had not always tested nor performed routine maintenance on the ride as required by statute but it had never had a problem before and it is not certain that the lack of maintenance is what caused the sudden stop. It was also discovered that Abigail was not wearing her seatbelt as she was warned to do at the start of the ride. Abigail is an avid fan of amusement parks and roller coasters. As Abigall was waiting for help to arrive, a Channel 12 news helicopter flying overhead trying to get a good video of the accident, hit a tree limb which falls on Abigail and causes her to suffer broken bones. Emma, a Channel 12 employee, was flying the helicopter. Who is liable for all of Abigail's injuries? What theories of liability can be argued and what must Abigail show to recover damages? Please give a full analysis and include any defenses Queen's Island \& Channel 12/ Emma may or may not have. And, include any product liability claims and defenses. Finally, Abby was so angry at Emma for her bad flying skills that while being interviewed on a rival news station she states that Emma has been found criminally guilty of assault and battery before this accident. This is not a true statement. Can Emma sue her? For what? And will she be successful, why or why not? Is there a difference if Emma was a farnous actress? (10 points)