Lost crew captain charged

[Metal Boat]

These days you can get a Personal EPIRB with the life jacket, if I was in the water or on the boat, EPIRB activated 100% no matter the location, any chance at saving a life no matter how slim.


In this case MOB may have already been unconscious when he went overboard, this a valid motive for not raising an immediate alert. Any coroner would ask this question during cross examination of witnesses in an unexplained death.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Metal Boat

These days you can get a Personal EPIRB with the life jacket, if I was in the water or on the boat, EPIRB activated 100% no matter the location, any chance at saving a life no matter how slim.

.....

An AIS MOB with DSC is far more likely to get you saved than a PLB EPRIB. At least if you are not single handing. The Eprib is likely to get the corpse recovered, if that's any concillation.

[Metal Boat]

Paul I am starting to think you have too much time on your hands mate......

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Metal Boat

Paul I am starting to think you have too much time on your hands mate......

Just sitting on a mooring watching the sun go down and browsing the interweb. But thanks for your concern.

[Metal Boat]

No Need to thank me Paul I am always here for you if you need me......

[JPA Cate]

Metal Boat,

Personal locator beacons have their limitations. Read about the loss of the Cheeky Rafiki, it is detailed in that long thread.

[Wotname]

Everyone is stating the case as a MOB - which usually infers an accidental or unintended occurrence. From what I have read, the deceased made an informed choice to depart the boat. He not fall overboard, he choose to jump overboard in order to go where he wanted to go.

Perhaps he was delusional, perhaps not - only a trained health care professional can really say - the rest of us (including the Captain and crew) are guessing. Yes, from I have read, he was delusional but I (or the Captain or the crew) can't know that for sure.

To prevent him from leaving the boat is depriving him of his liberty - literally kidnapping him.

The captain however does bear the responsibility of turning around and looking for him - knowing that he is unlikely to survive otherwise - sane or not.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Paul L

So those of you saying to setoff the EPRIB, is this to assist in rescuing the MOB or an attempt to cover your ass by appearing to do as much as possible? Would you make the same decision if instead of being 200 miles offshore you were a thousand miles offshore? If you were Master of a frieghter offshore would you also use the EPRIB?

Yes I would..
Beats the hell out of arriving in say the Azores minus one and when asked why, your reply is.. "Well there did not seem much point"
Theres just been an 80+ hr search for a guy who allegedly fell off a Caribe cruise ship.. and he was not missed till the next day.
The lunch bench attitude of "Ahh.. Blow the ******* away!!" only works at the lunch table, not a Maritime Court.. serious folk know this, the cowboys never learn.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Everyone is stating the case as a MOB - which usually infers an accidental or unintended occurrence. From what I have read, the deceased made an informed choice to depart the boat. He not fall overboard, he choose to jump overboard in order to go where he wanted to go.

Perhaps he was delusional, perhaps not - only a trained health care professional can really say - the rest of us (including the Captain and crew) are guessing. Yes, from I have read, he was delusional but I (or the Captain or the crew) can't know that for sure.

To prevent him from leaving the boat is depriving him of his liberty - literally kidnapping him.

The captain however does bear the responsibility of turning around and looking for him - knowing that he is unlikely to survive otherwise - sane or not.

Wottie.. Gonna play devils advocate..
1/ Deceased was seen to be in a bad way (allegedly) when he arrived at the boat but was still taken on board.
2/ He was then throwing up constantly after departure from the moment they set sail but the skipper chose to continue.
3/ Allegedly an assualt took place after four days of disturbed, sometimes violent behavior following which the guy allegedly jumped over the side conveniently hitting his head on the rail while doing so.
4/ He then sank instantly..??? bodies dont sink that fast to my knowledge.. trapped air in clothing and body will bring them back up for a while..
5/ Regarding restraints, marine law allows for the master to restrain mutineers or anyone else who represents a potential threat to themslves, the crew or vessel.
6/ Following the failure to manage his vessel and crew the master further compounded the situation by failing to use all means available to raise the alarm or even carry out a rudimentary search for the man.
7/ They have admitted to dumping stuff over the side before arrival at St Thomas, drugs and a weapon.. what else was not reported.

If I were a prosecutor I would be rubbing my hands with glee.. and were I one of the crew of the boat I'd be nervous to say the least.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Everyone is stating the case as a MOB - which usually infers an accidental or unintended occurrence. From what I have read, the deceased made an informed choice to depart the boat. He not fall overboard, he choose to jump overboard in order to go where he wanted to go.

Perhaps he was delusional, perhaps not - only a trained health care professional can really say - the rest of us (including the Captain and crew) are guessing. Yes, from I have read, he was delusional but I (or the Captain or the crew) can't know that for sure.

To prevent him from leaving the boat is depriving him of his liberty - literally kidnapping him.

The captain however does bear the responsibility of turning around and looking for him - knowing that he is unlikely to survive otherwise - sane or not.

The guy was seeing portals in clouds. I dont think an MD is required to determine him at least temporarily nuts.

[jimbunyard]

Guess I'm a cowboy and assumer, cause this sounds like a good reason for lawyers' often deservedly bad reputations. Not to mention a waste of taxpayer money if the family is not the entity prosecuting.

if we can believe what is written in the article, seems to me an analogous situation would be a big jerk (psychotic or not) starting a fight with three acquaintances on a ten story rooftop, essentially threatening to throw them off, and then, unable to accomplish that, jumping himself. Unless I owned the building, I'd be hard pressed to feel any need to inform anyone of the trouble-makers' demise. Nor would I trouble myself to see if he might have survived his gravitational experiment...

As for the 'captains responsibility', at probably less than five knots, even with a calm sea, full moon and MOB pressed immediately after the fact, what are the chances of finding the guy, even if he didn't sink immediately?

And what do you do with him, alive or dead? Anyone here tried to get a 250 lb lifeless guy back on board or into a dinghy? What about one who didn't want to come?

Regarding 'fishiness', what purpose on earth could any of the 'survivors' of this sad tale have in substantially altering or fabricating facts? If they were going to lie about anything, seems the first would be that they did in fact turn around and look for him.

The only bad judgement here, if the story is accurate, regardless of the verdict, is the bringing of charges against the captain.

[hpeer]

I’m all argued out talking about this on Sailnet. I think the Capt made mistakes but so did the jumper. And, while the Capt has resoonsibility for his crew, each one of us has personal responsibility for our own care. It strikes me this guy, the jumper, was very derilict in his personal care that set things wrong. The Capt didn’t help his own case. It at this point there is no point in prosecuting the Capt because it’s just revenge. Can’t being the dead guy back.

But in any case attached is a link to an article that has the CG report attached. It image files so a PITA to read but worthwhile. New data there. The Capt did try to make contact, not 5 knot wind, lots of medical stuff. Best source of info we have.

My condolences to all on all sides of this cluster.


https://m.penbaypilot.com/article/ca...leases-/111009

[Snore]

I entered this conversation (and another on FB) hesitant to opine without the facts. After reading the USCG report - the owner/master has some big issues. And the USCG has some explaining to do.

First if the owner has a license was he drug tested? Was there a log? What was in it?

Second, the owner stated he immediately tried the SSB and got static. Was that logged? I have not tested it, but doesn't USCG monitor specific SSB frequencies?

Third, assuming a proper MOB briefing was done before departure, it should have been a reflex reaction to immediately throwing a PFD, horse collar or some other floatable. If there was a delay, given the conditions, sailing a reciprocal course, or sailing back over the track, should have put them close to the MOB/mutineer. Yes seas were 8-10, but for a competent mariner that is not unmanageable in that size boat.

Fourth, a prudent master would have strapped an EPRIB to a PFD and dropped as close as possible to the location of the MOB (see #3). If nothing else this would drift at the same rate as the MOB/mutineer and helped a SAR team. And yes this is cause for an EPIRB- probably loss of life. I would rather defend using the EPIRB than defend my license.

I will freely admit that some of this is the result of having time to think.

The first rule of disaster management is that when the s@t hits the fan is to first evaluate, then make a plan and act. For the routine, problem evaluation may be a second or two. In a case like this they could buy time by going back, throwing a bunch of floatable items, watching him, while circling and evaluating. Instead, it looks like the owner elected to leave.

There is no way my morals would let a shipmate drown.

[hpeer]

Snore;

I agree with all of what you said. I also put a fair amount of responsibility on the jumper for volunteering for the position when he was not fit, for muss-representing his capability, for hiding his medical conditions, etc.

The question is whole the Capt be prosecuted for his part? The USCG seems to say “No.”. I agree because I see no good to come from a prosecution other than revenge. It’s good the event has come to light for discussion. Not so much for punishment.

[Snore]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Snore;

I agree with all of what you said. I also put a fair amount of responsibility on the jumper for volunteering for the position when he was not fit, for muss-representing his capability, for hiding his medical conditions, etc.

The question is whole the Capt be prosecuted for his part? The USCG seems to say “No.”. I agree because I see no good to come from a prosecution other than revenge. It’s good the event has come to light for discussion. Not so much for punishment.

I come back to my earlier post— did the owner ask IN WRITING if the crew had med issues? Is the response documented?

Perhaps it is my experience in regulated environments- but if it ain’t in writing - it doesn’t exist