Yukon tangent thread
- Thread starter raybosd
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
why ?... am I on fire?
I personally like the rules in basic and new divers forums
I personally like the rules in basic and new divers forums
Maybe we won't scare the new(er) divers! 
- Messages
- 93,314
- Reaction score
- 91,395
- Location
- On the Fun Side of Trump's Wall
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
I'm still waiting for an answer to my question ... in response to a statement by Divemaster Dave ...
Did the Humboldt, in fact, complete the second dive before realizing they'd left a diver behind at the first dive?
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Did the Humboldt, in fact, complete the second dive before realizing they'd left a diver behind at the first dive?
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
ItsBruce
Contributor
I've been away for a week, but want to make a few observations:
As a preliminary matter, as I think I have said before: I would hesitate to dive with any DM or skipper who does not require at least a roll call. I'm pretty sure I would never dive with any DM or skipper who has left a diver behind. In fact, when I book dives in the future, I will specifically ask about roll calls and make sure the operator knows it is a condition of my booking the dive. When I sign a waiver, I will add a caveat that it is conditioned on here being a roll call at the end of every dive and that the waiver is void if the boat leaves me in the water. (I may actually get some preprinted stick-on labels.)
To the extent Dave is outraged over a diver being left behind, I'm pretty good with that.
However, in my profession, I need to be able to assess potential witnesses. I need to assess whether they are likely to be believed by a judge or jury. Any number of factors go into this. They include obvious things like consistency of story and obvious bias. Only slightly less obvious are things like demeanor. Does the way a witness presents himself or herself make it more or less likely he or she will be believed? Is the witness' delivery one that will make a judge or jury believe him or her?
While I strongly agree with Dave over his outrage at a diver being left behind, and while I have no evidence of any bias or axe to grind, based just on what I have seen Dave post here, I would be concerned about calling him as a key witness were I counsel on this case.
At the risk of having to "tell stories," I recall testifying in a trial in which my former client sued her liability insurance carrier for having settled a prior lawsuit against her. (I was defending her in that lawsuit.) I basically had to testify that while I generally believed her explanation of the events that led her to being sued, I did not think I could persuade a judge and jury of it.
The same goes here: I basically believe the information Dave has presented, but I don't know if I could persuade a judge or jury that he should be believed.
Changing topics slightly: Is there any more info as to whether the boat did a roll call before leaving the dive site?
As a preliminary matter, as I think I have said before: I would hesitate to dive with any DM or skipper who does not require at least a roll call. I'm pretty sure I would never dive with any DM or skipper who has left a diver behind. In fact, when I book dives in the future, I will specifically ask about roll calls and make sure the operator knows it is a condition of my booking the dive. When I sign a waiver, I will add a caveat that it is conditioned on here being a roll call at the end of every dive and that the waiver is void if the boat leaves me in the water. (I may actually get some preprinted stick-on labels.)
To the extent Dave is outraged over a diver being left behind, I'm pretty good with that.
However, in my profession, I need to be able to assess potential witnesses. I need to assess whether they are likely to be believed by a judge or jury. Any number of factors go into this. They include obvious things like consistency of story and obvious bias. Only slightly less obvious are things like demeanor. Does the way a witness presents himself or herself make it more or less likely he or she will be believed? Is the witness' delivery one that will make a judge or jury believe him or her?
While I strongly agree with Dave over his outrage at a diver being left behind, and while I have no evidence of any bias or axe to grind, based just on what I have seen Dave post here, I would be concerned about calling him as a key witness were I counsel on this case.
At the risk of having to "tell stories," I recall testifying in a trial in which my former client sued her liability insurance carrier for having settled a prior lawsuit against her. (I was defending her in that lawsuit.) I basically had to testify that while I generally believed her explanation of the events that led her to being sued, I did not think I could persuade a judge and jury of it.
The same goes here: I basically believe the information Dave has presented, but I don't know if I could persuade a judge or jury that he should be believed.
Changing topics slightly: Is there any more info as to whether the boat did a roll call before leaving the dive site?
To steal Cave Diver's line: invoke the first rule of SCUBA!
Similar threads
