Judge rules-Abandoned diver can sue charter company

[Charlie99]

I have to admit that I would not be surprised if in fact it was staged.Kind of sad, but what some people will do for money makes me feel that way.

Please explain your reasoning for this outrageous statement.

If the boat had noticed he was missing and had called out search and rescue, he wouldn't have had any sort of claim and little chance of compensation.

The only way he for him to have a good shot at a lawsuit would be for him to conspire with the DM to not have him discovered to be missing until after the 2nd dive. That scenario requires us to believe that the DM would do that, and that the diver was willing to take the risk of never being found in the fog.

In one case (discovered immediately) he doesn't have a reasonable chance of compensation. In the other case (boat goes on to the next divesite), he has a very good chance of dieing. Or do you have some other scenario in mind that causes you to say " I would not be surprised if in fact it was staged."

 

[Geoff_H]

I have to admit that I would not be surprised if in fact it was staged.Kind of sad, but what some people will do for money makes me feel that way.None of us will ever know the whole/true story.

Like Charlie, I am staggered how you can think it is plausible that this was staged.

Too many variables needed to line up, too great a risk of death and too little point.

 

[Beachlover]

I was replying to two posts prior to mine that were made by"Riger". Did you read that post? In any event, I did NOT say that it WAS planned,I merely said that I would not be surprised if it was.

 

[Rick Murchison]

The only way he for him to have a good shot at a lawsuit would be for him to conspire with the DM to not have him discovered to be missing until after the 2nd dive. That scenario requires us to believe that the DM would do that, and that the diver was willing to take the risk of never being found in the fog.

For the conspiracy theorists out there, the DM needn't be in on it at all... only the "victim" and his buddy/buddies. Milling around and answering for him during a roll call, which they apparently did do - at least twice - does sound at least more than a little fishy, eh?
--
Personally, I don't believe anyone intended to deceive anyone, and I don't believe anyone intended to be sloppy with a roll call, and I don't believe anyone wanted anyone to be left behind, and I don't believe anyone was casual about their perceived efficacy of their in-place procedure. I do believe there was a monumental screwup on the part of the diver, his buddy/buddies, the DM, and the boat crew - it took a team effort!
I also believe that boats worldwide took notice at the time, and that this incident helped improve procedures to assure it doesn't happen again (though it surely will - no policy or procedure can protect an adequately talented idiot from managing to accomplish his own demise).
The lawsuit is a different matter. Surely the victim in this case deserves some compensation, even though he was apparently contributory to his own situation. The preponderance of the fault lies with those who left, not the one who got left.
However... a lawsuit is not needed to motivate boats to assure they don't leave folks behind - they really don't want to do that; an exhorbitant award will kill the whole industry, and that's my main concern at this point.
Rick

 

[Geoff_H]

For the conspiracy theorists out there, the DM needn't be in on it at all... only the "victim" and his buddy/buddies. Milling around and answering for him during a roll call, which they apparently did do - at least twice - does sound at least more than a little fishy, eh?

The DM should not accept answers from anyone but the guy he is calling - this is a pretty basic rule of doing roll calls on boats. I don't believe anyone perpetrating a deception would leave the DM being sloppy to chance.

 

[Jim Kerr]

OK .... (Here comes the skeptic in me)

How do 2 dive buddies answer for their buddy when they know he was not at the Safety Stop and did not surface with them?

Is it possible that the $4m is to cover Attorney Costs and then split 3 ways?
Is it possible that this was a planned 'setup'?

Just a thought..

Best Regards
Richard (Riger)

That would be pretty gutsy. Almost as gutsy as the scam I read about where some "geniuses" decided to pull an insurance scam where they would speed ahead in their "compact" vehicle and then cut off a commercial (big rig) truck and then slam on the brakes causing a rear end collision and collect the insurance money. Their story came to light when a big rig they cut off was not able to stop and ran completely over them. End of story.

 

[Beachlover]

That's called "karma", right?

 

[Oside Jimc]

Some are quick to talk about the Captain not paying attention and turn around and talk about him NOT losing his ticket? Well if you would have read the posts you would know he did and you would know that at the rigs you have to station keep and all your attention must be on the helm! This is the fault of the DM and The TWO buddies he was diving with! I can't find any fault with the captain even if the Law does! Sue the DM and be done with it! But the system allows for deep pockets to be sued and who do you think has more assets and insurance?

I find 100% fault on the Captain, under maritime law the Capt is responsible for all aspects of the operation of his vessel, including the training of his crew (which the DM is an integral part of). He can be asleep in his bunk and he alone bears ultimate responsibility, this has been the law of the sea for centuires and is part of the responsibility you accept when you take the ticket.

Fair? Yes, the sea isn't kind to the stupid or unprepared and it only has one goal, to kill you (I'm not saying the Capt/Crew was stupid, but they were clearly unprepared).

In addition while the Capt might have been at the helm holding station on the dive, he was also at the helm leaving a diver behind, yes this was done based on the incorrect information provided by the DM, but in the end it was his hand on the helm. And again this gets back to the Captians responsibility for training his crew and maintaining proper procedures to insure passenger safety, clearly he did neither.

 

[Hetland]

For the conspiracy theorists out there, the DM needn't be in on it at all... only the "victim" and his buddy/buddies. Milling around and answering for him during a roll call, which they apparently did do - at least twice - does sound at least more than a little fishy, eh?
--
Personally, I don't believe anyone intended to deceive anyone, and I don't believe anyone intended to be sloppy with a roll call, and I don't believe anyone wanted anyone to be left behind, and I don't believe anyone was casual about their perceived efficacy of their in-place procedure. I do believe there was a monumental screwup on the part of the diver, his buddy/buddies, the DM, and the boat crew - it took a team effort!
I also believe that boats worldwide took notice at the time, and that this incident helped improve procedures to assure it doesn't happen again (though it surely will - no policy or procedure can protect an adequately talented idiot from managing to accomplish his own demise).
The lawsuit is a different matter. Surely the victim in this case deserves some compensation, even though he was apparently contributory to his own situation. The preponderance of the fault lies with those who left, not the one who got left.
However... a lawsuit is not needed to motivate boats to assure they don't leave folks behind - they really don't want to do that; an exhorbitant award will kill the whole industry, and that's my main concern at this point.
Rick

Sadly, this has proven to be untrue throughout history. There will always be operations that do the least possible in the fastest time, and/or hire people who do the same. I agree that there are plenty of folks that do the opposite, but if it were not for laws, unions, and yes, even lawsuits, then we would still have 9 year olds working 100 hour weeks getting their hands chopped off in industrial machery for .07 a day.

On any charter boat operation, what you are really paying for is the ride back home. If your insurance rates go up because of this incident, then I will be happy to pay more on my next trip in order to offset this cost. There is no excuse for leaving a diver behind, and whatever mistakes the diver may have made in this incident, it is clear that the decision makers on the boat dropped the ball, and should be held accountable.

Win, lose or draw, your insurance rates will (and likely already have) go up because of this incident, simply because there is a possibility that it could happen in the future.

 

[Papa_Bear]

In the eyes of the law the captain did pay! But the DM was not a member of the crew! How hard is that to understand? It has been posted 100 times! The shop provided the DM! The Captain has no reason to challenge or retrain the DM who comes with credentials! In the end it bites him the rear, but morally I don't fault him at all! How far would a bout or army get if the top of command checked all the down line? He might as well do it all himself? How do you think that would work? What is the more important mission of the captain to keep the boat safe or one diver? His overall mission was station keeping and the lives of all on the boat and around it! So what you put the DM in charge of the helm and go double check the work they were trained for? Please! Not one person would do it any other way!