A Jet Skier Skis Up To A Container Ship

Smart guy

1 Like

Common sense is not always that common.

1 Like

tenor (17)

1 Like

Yup. Got the brains of a bag of hammers. Keep it up! Crabs need to eat, too.


Someone who is practicing for the Darwin Award. Just give him a bit more time…

Many years ago a HSC (High Speed Craft), in this case an 86 metre catamaran, was proceeding slowly along the approach channel to the home port when a jet ski decide to proceed at speed between the hulls.
The company prosecuted the driver but the judge dismissed the case as a jet ski is not considered to be a vessel therefore does not need to abide by the ROTR.
Unfortunately there is no law against stupidity.

That’s interesting. I remember reading a news paper article a few years ago about a kid getting killed in a jet ski accident on a senior trip and the operator of the other jet ski was being charged in admiralty court for violating the COLREGS.

1 USC 3:
“Vessel: Every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water.” i.e.paddle board, amphibious ATV, kite board, float tube, kayak.
“The term “power driven vessel” means any vessel propelled by machinery.”

A jet ski definitely qualifies as a power driven vessel.

The judge erred.I rest my case.

Lee_Shore, I agree, obviously this was outside of the scope of this particular Judges knowledge. If the company really wants to prosecute him they need to go to a higher court or perhaps have better attorneys.

And whoever said it earlier…this is Darwinism at its best.

They will probably treat is however the best lawyer involved wants them to treat it.

Judges don’t make decisions on “knowledge.” No one can be expected to know all laws, and keep up to date on how they may have changed by Court decisions. They have staffs that do research, and both sides in the case will submit and make researched legal arguments.

Companies can’t “prosecute” that’s for criminal cases that have to brought by a governmental agency. They can file civil suits, but to get past initial pleadings they are going to have to allege (and later prove) that they incurred some damages.

Do you have a cite for this case? It sounds questionable. Giving it the most favorable benefit of a doubt, the vessel operator might have filed a civil suit and had it dismissed because they did not suffer damages. But it would be hard to imagine any attorney filing a suit when the client didn’t suffer damages.

I have nothing I can cite. Earlier in the tread Hornblower, stated that the company prosecuted.

And from the video I saw no sign of damage to the ship.
I am no legal expert but as frivolous as many law suits are I can definitely see that a person or company could try to sue for mental distress of its people if they witnessed the event and they were navigating. Or perhaps the company frivolously trying to prosecute for time lost if the ship stopped and lost any time in transit or man-hours filling out paperwork or having to fill out any forms required by local authority or their company. As I said people will sue for anything.

What Hornblower was talking about was another incident where a jet ski went under a catamaran between the hulls. There’s no video of that that I’m aware of.

Not sure about what Nautical Wheeler is referring to. Without a case citation to establish facts on the ruling Hornblower mentioned, his report is hearsay. Hard to believe that even a half-assed municipal civil court judge would not have a clerk look up the definition of vessel in a case featuring vessels.

This happened many years ago and the only costs involved were a new set of underwear for the bridge team!

As jdcavo mentioned in his post, no damage or injury = no claim. Unfortunately for the bridge team the COLREGS do not address the issue of emotional distress.

Years ago I had a kid on a jet ski run into me while I was stopped in a 22 foot runabout. Luckily, not much damage as he was going slow. From what I have seen, people seem to leave their brains on shore when on a jet ski (a.k.a. water lice).

I have had recreational boaters pass between our unit and the dock while we are running wires ashore, kayakers/SUPs get inside of the quarter while we are swinging toward them in a narrow river, and even a sailboat try and sail out of a canal on our lee side; stupidity knows no bounds. We won’t even discuss guys drifting down river and fishing with zero situational awareness of the big boat approaching them and having to stay in the channel…Darwinism for sure. This past summer was the absolute worst I have witnessed in 24 years on a license.

Here are a couple of Videos of Idiots on Jet Ski’s.