Rebel Heart Lawsuit

[su2014]

Originally Posted by beneteau-500

Whilst I don't have a sat phone and don't know how they are set up ie what type of calls can be made on them from my experience when my yacht sank I originally sent out a distress call on VHF but I had hand held SH HX851 which I used to talk to Istanbul radio until battery went flat but my point in this is I had my normal every day blackberry phone which at the time had a Greek SIM card in it but out of credit but I was still able to make emergency calls on it. In which I did and they the operator redirected my calls to the Coast guard as I had drifted about 8 to 10 nm from when I sent out the distress call .

So do these sat phones have these facility's to do emergency calls or not ( if out of credit etc ) if they do I can't see how RH could sue phone company

a sat phone without a service contract isnt same as cell phone yet. have heard that a sat-phone will work in some areas{oz} with any old sim card but only for emergencies .the old/new sim card debate and the RH bill was paid is the main issue here in a service contract dispute. the rest is just trim{juicy gossip} i suppose. washing diapers in a separate 5 gal pail sounds easy to me but whatever. This should answer your question but an answer from someone with a so-called "dead sat-phone" without valid sim card could tell you for sure if it works in Australia or anywhere else. fairwinds and ggodspeed

[Bill Lee]

I was mulling over S/V Third Day's post regarding zealous/joyful criticism of RH. It may actually be the case - but I think it stems from something else. Nuisance lawsuits (which this may or may not be) do get rewarded sometimes. It ticks some people off - it feels wrong and it costs the consumer. Any lawsuit may have both positive and negative ramifications on others including cruisers. Not everyone in RH's position would be suing. I don't know what the RH crew experienced and felt. Clearly they were emotionally devastated because:
1) there was fear onboard
2) there was risk for the safety of the entire crew
3) there was no certainty of rescue
4) the decision to activate the EPIRB must have felt to Eric that that he somehow let his family down (a natural feeling and NOT necessarily justified)
5) they lost their home/dream

Later, they discovered (or had more time to think about) the sat phone SIM card issue and I can understand them getting ticked off. I can understand that the more they thought about it the more they may have thought "sheesh, if it weren't for that maybe we'd be ok....we would have been ok...we would have been totally fine..." Maybe they thought along those lines. OTOH, being mad at 'whenever' (totally justifiable) is a different matter than laying (or trying to) blame EVERYTHING (including all their distress - which ignores what was already happening) and the loss of RH on 'whenever'. I hope I have not been a zealous critic - although I think it is open not only to question crew judgement (for which previous threads have been closed) but for the lawsuit. In analyzing the legal basis and the possibility of success in a situation where the most blame could be cast elsewhere (boat integrity, weather - you can pick hundreds of things without trying to blame the crew - I'm not saying there's no blame there) it feels wrong to pick out 'whenever' and say everything is that company's fault. Ultimately the public does pay a price for such claims even if the claim completely fails. I'm not justifying zealous critics - just providing a likely explanation for the zeal. Either way, I'm intrigued by this claim and disappointed by the fact that it was filed.
Cheers,
Bill

[Spleen]

This case has many intriguing aspects-- from the technical to the emotional: The whos whats wheres whens and whys. You don't need a 50 foot sailboat to wonder if maybe it wasn't a great idea to sail across an ocean when Charlotte was "academically weighing the pros and cons of suicide" in Late February (they set sail around March 20), where someone on the blog comments actually pointed out that given all that was going on, maybe they should postpone the crossing. (Charlotte got mad the person posted anonymously and didn't address the point.)

You don't need to have sailed across an ocean to wonder if the children were indeed cleared from travel on March 20 when on March 9, Lyra was on 3 antibiotics and a steroid, battling both an upper respiratory infection and the Salmonella and Cora was also on 3 antibiotics (I believe) while fighting Proteus and an upper respiratory infection and Charlotte was diagnosed with Salmonella, even though she had no symptoms.

It's all part of the story. And the wonder of it all.

(Ask yourself if you would choose to take a crew member across an ocean if she disclosed to you that within the previous month, she had discussed the pros and cons of suicide with herself. ---no judgment from me, but a point that needs to be considered--- and who had a medicine change within the month when it takes a good 6 weeks at least for antidepressant levels to become therapeutic)



Heck, why not restrict comments on this topic to only those who were rescued crossing an ocean with a couple of kids?

I think you would be wrong if you think none of these topics will become a part of the lawsuit. They are all related.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Spleen

Heck, why not restrict comments on this topic to only those who were rescued crossing an ocean with a couple of kids?.

Na....that would be ridiculous....we can just limit it to folks who have cruised with kids...

[Spleen]

Again, I want to make it clear that I have no judgment on Charlotte's depression. She blogged about suicidal thoughts more than once.

I question Eric's judgment as captain in setting sail to cross an ocean, especially after this post dated February 3 on Charlotte's blog:

"Two nights ago, still alone while Eric was out of town, I thought about taking my life. I sat there toying with the idea, almost as if the concept were an egg yolk and I was stringing it back and forth between my fingers, stretching the thoughts from my thumb to forefinger, waiting for the egg yolk to snap. I have no idea how long I had been sitting there contemplating it, until I realized exactly what I was doing: having a conversation with myself about how much better it would be if I weren't alive.

It would be so much easier.

I wouldn't have to deal with any more pain.

I could rest. It would be quiet.

I wouldn't have to talk about it anymore.

But how would I do it? Drowning? No. Pills? Maybe. A knife? No.

What about the girls? They couldn't find me dead; how awful.They need me. I'd have to wait until Eric was home and could take care of them.

What about Eric?

And so my mind cycled, thinking. And then it cycled in an even larger orb around those thoughts and I observed myself thinking it all, realizing that I had never ever been so low that I had such crystal-clear thoughts about just slipping quietly away from life. It was scary. I messaged Eric. I messaged Sariah. I told them what I was thinking. They talked to me until I felt better. Eric got home the next day.

But, really, feeling suicidal was also NOT an outcome we thought about when considering whether to publish the post or not."

(She is referring to the acknowledgement of sexual abuse by her father and the post she wrote about it).

She has never stated whether or not she received mental health care during these episodes in February.

I very much question whether Charlotte was mentally prepared for the journey, within 60 days of suicical thoughts with an apparent plan of treatment as: medicine, exercise and blogging.

This goes back to those who questioned why Eric went with the family instead of staying with the boat, and whether they just gave up on the boat because after two weeks in: the concept became too overwhelming, the boat quality was in question and Charlotte's mindset could have been a factor.

Can they prove the satellite phone SIM card was the one true issue here?

Of course, it remains to be seen. I go back to questioning whether Charlotte is mentally prepared for a lawsuit and trial. I very sincerely doubt Whenever is going to roll over and settle when they have so much to work with for a defense. That also depends on their legal counsel and the laws, etc.

This lawsuit has the potential to be very ugly and destructive to the Rebel Heart crew.

[Spleen]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Na....that would be crazy....we can just limit it to folks who have cruised with kids...

Well, one thing is for sure-- you all will definitely talk about how that should be

[Spleen]

One more thing: in a settlement process, I'd like one of the lawyers from a previous life to talk about this some more:

Let's suppose there is a settlement, don't we talk about fault then? (I believe this was mentioned before):


Settlement minus Eric's fault as captain minus charlotte's fault (would charlotte be on the hook for any fault?) minus lawyer's 36% of settlement fees = much less probably than they were hoping for.

As an aside, in my (defendant) settlement process for a liability claim, the plantiff wanted well over a million for a settlement and settled for significantly less than that. What my insurance company wanted to pay out, they had to go up much much less than the plantiff had to go down, and the plantiff didn't use a lawyer for their settlement claim.

Hum, maybe we should restrict this thread to only those who have been involved in liability settlements?

[JPA Cate]

With reference to Spleen's Post #170

The assumption that Charlotte was actively suicidal is incorrect. She was involved in the process of talking herself out of taking her own life. She was actually engaged in a healthy process that ended with her seeking support of two outside people.

Incest is one of our prime taboos in most of Western Society. The violation of that taboo is at once titillating and horrifying. The long term effects of such behavior on the survivors can be tremendous, and can be helped by psychotherapy. If anyone here is interested, there is a book, "The Betrayal of Innocence" by Susan Froward which tells about the issues involved.

I would caution anyone reading blogs to remember that the information in them is only what someone chose to write at some time. It represents a truth to the writer, but can never be the whole truth. Lots of bits are left out, some because they're boring (like details of cleaning things), others because even though the writer wants to feel connected to their perceived friends, he or she hasn't the time to spend writing, personal censorship, and so on. Therefore any particular blog datum may not truly give the whole picture, but only a representation of it, chosen by the author.

Ann

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Oh absolutely, 100% without a doubt some comments and opinions are better than others!

(...)

The opinion of someone that has cruised offshore is "better" than an opinion of someone who has never been on a sailboat.

(...)

I hate to be the one to break this news, but in the real world all opinions are not equal, nor should we want them to be.

So, better or "better"?

And, if so, which opinions are the "better" ones? And who is to judge?

Then we can start shooting down the posters who dare to write the worse ones. ;-)

C'mon: all opinions are equal, they are opinions after all. And this is a forum, people should be encouraged, not discouraged, to speak up.

If we start labeling opinions, we may just as well close the shop and start preaching.

;-)
b.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Blogs are just like a fake "reality show" folks.
Once the characters and personalities are build on the blog, the participants become almost actors putting on a show for the readers. The best blogs do this in a way that makes the readers think they are talking real life, when the reality is just as dramatized and scripted as Kim Kardashian.

[Coops]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Blogs are just like a fake "reality show" folks.
Once the characters and personalities are build on the blog, the participants become almost actors putting on a show for the readers. The best blogs do this in a way that makes the readers think they are talking real life, when the reality is just as dramatized and scripted as Kim Kardashian.

That is exactly my thought. Having said that, I have never read one, and after all this that I have seen on here, I never will.

Coops.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

And, if so, which opinions are the "better" ones? And who is to judge?

That's easy...we make judgements every day, judgements are a good thing without Judgements people would eat at McDonalds and not at In-n-out.

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Then we can start shooting down the posters who dare to write the worse ones. ;-)

C'mon: all opinions are equal, they are opinions after all. And this is a forum, people should be encouraged, not discouraged, to speak up.

If we start labeling opinions, we may just as well close the shop and start preaching.

If they are crazy nut jobs then Absolutely.
I do that everytime I read a crazy comment or post. If some posters are always making crazy non-sensable comments and posts I learn to file their rantings accordingly. Different posters based on their experience, reputation, and post history have more weight to me and everyone else makes the same determinations. No one here or anywhere gives equal weight to all comers and comments...that would be checking your intellect at the door. It's a feel good...sounds good comment to say all posters opinions are equally viewed. When Tellie starts talking water makers I listen...when I start talking cruising the Med...I wouldn't listen to myself..why would I, I have never cruised the Med.

Of course I'm going overboard here for two reasons:
1. to make the point, sometimes going over the top helps for dramatic affect.
2. because my crazy ranting are a better read than the crazy ranting of someone who had never sailed offshore and
3. I'd rather be posting this than entering in my cc receipts into quickbooks for the last 3 months since I'm behind and my biz parter is pissed off at me playing on the internet...haha ha

[salticrak]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Blogs are just like a fake "reality show" folks.
Once the characters and personalities are build on the blog, the participants become almost actors putting on a show for the readers. The best blogs do this in a way that makes the readers think they are talking real life, when the reality is just as dramatized and scripted as Kim Kardashian.

there is wisdom here

[nimblemotors]

How does sailing offshore have one whit of relevance to lawsuits?

Also, reading CF teaches you nothing, you must have crossed an ocean.
So what I've read about watermakers from Third Day is useless crap,
I need to cross and ocean with a watermaker to have an opinion about them.

[Spleen]

Some of us work 100 hours a week and are restricted in the amount of time we can spend offshore. Oh and don't forget according to posts on CF that the Gulf of Mexico doesn't count because it isn't pretty.