Scantlings

Goodness! What a mess. What thinks you, medical fellows? Bad mix of Scope and other pharma?

I feel sorry for the skipper, but it sounds a bit like he gave up a little too soon....was probably glad to rid of the guy!

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/12/09/ ... sponsible/

It seems strange that after the United States Coast Guard cleared the Captain, the local prosecutor would pursue it.

I would think the USCG would be viewed as more expert on such matters than the prosecutor or grand jury.

Hope he gets a fair trial.

Reminds me of the Clear Lake, CA incident where a sailor was prosecuted for the death of a passenger on his boat that was hit by a Sherriff deputy’s speedboat at night. That whole case stunk but the sailor was ultimately found innocent while the speedboat operator was never charged. Very strange. (Full disclosure: I contributed financially to the defense of the sailor.)

From that web story it really does sound like the skipper didn't even bother to turn the boat around, let alone really try to help the guy who jumped overboard. I don't think the skipper showed "due care" which is required by the Jones Act (if I remember correctly). From the article, it seems Smith didn't even bother to try to turn the boat around, find the guy, or alert the USCG.

I think this is quite different from the Penfield case on Clearlake.

Story HERE

His feet were so swollen that they wouldn’t fit in his shoes.

Pro tip: Never let anyone like that on your boat.

As someone who knows the captain distantly, and knows a number of people that know him well, I'll offer a few things. I don't know any facts other than what I've read. I'm sympathetic to the captain not because I know him, but because I'm of the opinion that he can't be fairly judged after the fact for what took place. I think the position he is in is a position that any of us who goes offshore could be in, that of having our actions judged by people that weren't there, and having a "duty of care" imposed after the fact. The prosecutor is offering that he can be blamed for not having a radio other than VHF and not having a satellite phone, neither of which are legal requirements. I know a number of people that have crossed oceans, even recently, without working long range communications. He did not trigger his EPIRB, but I know several incidents where an EPIRB was not triggered after a man overboard drowning because it would have triggered a massive response with no possibility of success, and there was no suggestion afterwards of culpability. This was not a Jones act paid crew situation but rather someone delivering his private boat south who picked up last minute crew at the dock as many have done. I've never taken casual crew offshore, but have been part of last minute crew situations, and know a number of people that have taken last minute pickup crew south from Maine in the fall- it is quite common. Stupid sometimes, but not legally prohibited.

I guess there is enough libertarian in me to believe that the person that had a duty of care was the crew to himself, and I'm not willing to judge the severity of the threat the Captain felt for himself and his other crew after being attacked when he chose to let the person that jumped over face the consequence of his own behavior. Sailing the ocean in small private boats is one of the last places where we choose our equipment and our companions and are responsible for ourselves. I'm very uncomfortable with the after the fact legal prosecution being offered in this case, and don't think that the existence of government offers to try and rescue imposes requirements that we call for them.

Orestes Munn wrote:

His feet were so swollen that they wouldn’t fit in his shoes.

Pro tip: Never let anyone like that on your boat.

Tucky wrote:As someone who knows the captain distantly, and knows a number of people that know him well, I'll offer a few things. I don't know any facts other than what I've read. I'm sympathetic to the captain not because I know him, but because I'm of the opinion that he can't be fairly judged after the fact for what took place. I think the position he is in is a position that any of us who goes offshore could be in, that of having our actions judged by people that weren't there, and having a "duty of care" imposed after the fact. The prosecutor is offering that he can be blamed for not having a radio other than VHF and not having a satellite phone, neither of which are legal requirements. I know a number of people that have crossed oceans, even recently, without working long range communications. He did not trigger his EPIRB, but I know several incidents where an EPIRB was not triggered after a man overboard drowning because it would have triggered a massive response with no possibility of success, and there was no suggestion afterwards of culpability. This was not a Jones act paid crew situation but rather someone delivering his private boat south who picked up last minute crew at the dock as many have done. I've never taken casual crew offshore, but have been part of last minute crew situations, and know a number of people that have taken last minute pickup crew south from Maine in the fall- it is quite common. Stupid sometimes, but not legally prohibited.

I guess there is enough libertarian in me to believe that the person that had a duty of care was the crew to himself, and I'm not willing to judge the severity of the threat the Captain felt for himself and his other crew after being attacked when he chose to let the person that jumped over face the consequence of his own behavior. Sailing the ocean in small private boats is one of the last places where we choose our equipment and our companions and are responsible for ourselves. I'm very uncomfortable with the after the fact legal prosecution being offered in this case, and don't think that the existence of government offers to try and rescue imposes requirements that we call for them.

One doesn’t have to be much of a libertarian to agree, but I guess we all now know to trigger the EPIRB if that happens. I don’t know anything about maritime law, but on land it’s hard to imagine a jury convicting the capt. The fact there was no mention of a civil suit also speaks to the issue of culpability.

Orestes Munn wrote:

Tucky wrote:As someone who knows the captain distantly, and knows a number of people that know him well, I'll offer a few things. I don't know any facts other than what I've read. I'm sympathetic to the captain not because I know him, but because I'm of the opinion that he can't be fairly judged after the fact for what took place. I think the position he is in is a position that any of us who goes offshore could be in, that of having our actions judged by people that weren't there, and having a "duty of care" imposed after the fact. The prosecutor is offering that he can be blamed for not having a radio other than VHF and not having a satellite phone, neither of which are legal requirements. I know a number of people that have crossed oceans, even recently, without working long range communications. He did not trigger his EPIRB, but I know several incidents where an EPIRB was not triggered after a man overboard drowning because it would have triggered a massive response with no possibility of success, and there was no suggestion afterwards of culpability. This was not a Jones act paid crew situation but rather someone delivering his private boat south who picked up last minute crew at the dock as many have done. I've never taken casual crew offshore, but have been part of last minute crew situations, and know a number of people that have taken last minute pickup crew south from Maine in the fall- it is quite common. Stupid sometimes, but not legally prohibited.

I guess there is enough libertarian in me to believe that the person that had a duty of care was the crew to himself, and I'm not willing to judge the severity of the threat the Captain felt for himself and his other crew after being attacked when he chose to let the person that jumped over face the consequence of his own behavior. Sailing the ocean in small private boats is one of the last places where we choose our equipment and our companions and are responsible for ourselves. I'm very uncomfortable with the after the fact legal prosecution being offered in this case, and don't think that the existence of government offers to try and rescue imposes requirements that we call for them.

One doesn’t have to be much of a libertarian to agree, but I guess we all now know to trigger the EPIRB if that happens. I don’t know anything about maritime law, but on land it’s hard to imagine a jury convicting the capt. The fact there was no mention of a civil suit also speaks to the issue of culpability.

I believe I read somewhere that the civil suit was filed and dismissed by the court.

I can understand an argument not to turn on the EPIRB. I can't understand not bothering to turn the boat around and look for the man overboard.

BeauV wrote:
I believe I read somewhere that the civil suit was filed and dismissed by the court.

Ah, right. That looks even worse.

A DA wanting to make a name for him/herself on an obscure point of law?

OM, is there some sort of clinical significance to having swollen feet? Is there some connection to a potential mental health issues?

After a few days at sea I notice some difficulty getting my damn boots on...

Tim Ford wrote:OM, is there some sort of clinical significance to having swollen feet? Is there some connection to a potential mental health issues?

After a few days at sea I notice some difficulty getting my damn boots on...

Uh oh.

I know. Just hoping Capt DW doesn't see any of this.

Tim Ford wrote:I know. Just hoping Capt DW doesn't see any of this.

Aren’t you allowed to take a vote on turning back when someone goes over? I know I stayed clipped in since I wasn’t sure how that might go.

Larry, that makes a good case for going 6 up instead of just 5....avoids the possibility of a tie vote if someone goes by the board.

Tim Ford wrote:Larry, that makes a good case for going 6 up instead of just 5....avoids the possibility of a tie vote if someone goes by the board.

Does the "skipper" get to be the tie breaker???

I'm glad we've worked out a democratic solution to a moral problem

About the EPIRB. The decision to search, and the commitment of resources, is not the responsibility of the guy who activates the alert. To fail to activate the EPIRB because you think someone else will over commit is put too much responsibility on yourself.

OTOH, back in the day, it was reasonable for a small boat to go without a radio because the radios of the day were expensive, troublesome, required training and licenses, etc. Those excuses no longer apply for coastal navigation. I don't know the all options for a boat 350nm from anywhere but clearly a vessel unable to communicate with the outside world can no longer be considered well-found.

SatPhone Rental
HERE

$15/day
Free return shipping
Two batteries included
High gain antenna included
No minimum usage or monthly fee, pay only for what you use
etc....

See's like a pretty good argument for all of us to carry a SatPhone on a long passage.

Tim Ford wrote:OM, is there some sort of clinical significance to having swollen feet? Is there some connection to a potential mental health issues?

Only in your case.

It can mean many things from heart failure to living on the street. When it’s so bad that lay people start noticing casually, however, it’s a reliable sign of ill health.

LarryHoward wrote:

Tim Ford wrote:I know. Just hoping Capt DW doesn't see any of this.

Aren’t you allowed to take a vote on turning back when someone goes over? I know I stayed clipped in since I wasn’t sure how that might go.

Isn’t it a DSQ is you finish with crew missing?

Orestes Munn wrote:

LarryHoward wrote:

Tim Ford wrote:I know. Just hoping Capt DW doesn't see any of this.

Aren’t you allowed to take a vote on turning back when someone goes over? I know I stayed clipped in since I wasn’t sure how that might go.

Isn’t it a DSQ is you finish with crew missing?

Sometime, it might be worth it.

LarryHoward wrote:

Orestes Munn wrote:

LarryHoward wrote:

Tim Ford wrote:I know. Just hoping Capt DW doesn't see any of this.

Aren’t you allowed to take a vote on turning back when someone goes over? I know I stayed clipped in since I wasn’t sure how that might go.

Isn’t it a DSQ is you finish with crew missing?

Sometime, it might be worth it.

Been there.

The prosecutor might think that the victim was forced overboard. And hoping to rattle some cages with the capt or crew by bringing charges. All of it is strange to say the least. I can understand the reluctance to go back and save a man who was trying to kill you seconds earlier. But that boat should've turned around on day 2 and headed for port. Crazy doesn't have a place on a boat.

Just one more story affirming why I shouldn't take on crew. I never, ever pick the good people. Worst judge of character, ever.

Audrey wrote:The prosecutor might think that the victim was forced overboard. And hoping to rattle some cages with the capt or crew by bringing charges. All of it is strange to say the least. I can understand the reluctance to go back and save a man who was trying to kill you seconds earlier. But that boat should've turned around on day 2 and headed for port. Crazy doesn't have a place on a boat.

Really. Who knows what the hell went on out there? Gives me the creeps to think about it.

Did you guys read the "meanwhile over in Denmark" story of the rich guy who built a submarine? That was disturbing.

Over on SA http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/186581-meanwhile-over-in-denmark/

https://www.pressherald.com/2019/01/09/camden-charter-boat-acquitted-in-seamans-manslaughter-case/?utm_medium=webpush&utm_source=browser&utm_campaign=pushnotifications

Apparently what they were trying to charge him with wasn't applicable to the situation and the case was just thrown out.

Audrey wrote:Did you guys read the "meanwhile over in Denmark" story of the rich guy who built a submarine? That was disturbing.

Over on SA http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/186581-meanwhile-over-in-denmark/

Saw it all over the newspapers. Beyond sick.

Yah, this makes the grimmest of Stieg Laarson's stuff seem pretty tame.

Thanks for the heads-up on the Camden Cruiser, Slick. At least there's some justice somewhere on the planet.

NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE....or something like that....