Bounty Hearings

Professional Mariner Forum
121

[QUOTE=Topsail;99786]Another point that really surprised me is that the USCG interviewed these witnesses right after their rescue on that very same naval base ! Is that a common or a good practice ? Personally, I don’t think it is. I would request a minimum of 72 hours of rest to get my mind all together before answering any questions. Furthermore, I would not answer any inquiry without the presence of my lawyer. These officers are very clever and you could regret bitterly what you have said …[/QUOTE]

With the exception of one or two medevacs, the survivors of the Deepwater Horizon explosion were essentially in captivity for 29 hours after being rescued.

Earl

122

In front of a civil judge or jury, what is the value of a testimony made right after an incident where the witness is exhausted, hungry, bruised, frighten, in a state of shock, not counseled, etc., … :confused:

123

There are three issues in this sad affair that have been nagging at me. The first is, to what degree did the business model of the Bounty enterprise emphasize voyaging over “dockside attracting?” Evidence suggests that voyaging was really at the center of the operation, in which case the group was more or less actively evading regulatory oversight. If true, that (IMHO) is not a firm foundation on which to build a robust safety culture.

Second, to what degree was that vessel really a sailing ship? Somewhere (and I can’t find it now) somebody stated that it could only move under sail on a run or a beam reach (not surprising) in winds over 30 kt (quite surprising). If it really was a power craft being promoted as a sailing vessel, then that would also speak ill of the organization’s loyalty to the truth.

Third, what did the stability calculations for that vessel look like? Everybody seems fixated on structural issues, but what about the basics of her naval architecture? I’ve asked this over on boatdesign.net, some of whose participants did a pretty amazing job of reverse engineering the Costa Concordia design. I hope they rise to the challenge.

Fourth, where are the crew members who accompanied Walbridge on his asserted hurricane-chasing escapades? I admit to having done only a cursory search, but I can’t find any corroboration for his story to the television reporter. Most individuals who have ridden out big cyclonic storms describe it as one of the most terrifying experiences a human being can endure, and not easily forgotten. Is it possible that Sandy was actually Walbridge’s first experience with a real hurricane? That would be a truly horrifying thought.

Earl

124

[QUOTE=Capt. Lee;99737]

I have been wanting to send my boy on a summer trip, but now I am reconsidering.[/QUOTE]

Don’t let this stop what could be a valuable time for him. There are programs that are very well run and safe, like the Grays Harbor ships. Lady Washington and Hawaiian Chieftain.

125

[QUOTE=Topsail;99900]In front of a civil judge or jury, what is the value of a testimony made right after an incident where the witness is exhausted, hungry, bruised, frighten, in a state of shock, not counseled, etc., … :confused:[/QUOTE]

People tend to want to be helpful, plus memories are stronger right after. Everything said can be cross-checked later. ie “what did you mean when you said…” Why are you leaving out statements you made earlier? Lot of good stuff can be gotten right after. Later memories dim and there is more time to considered that some things are better left unsaid.

126

[QUOTE=Earl Boebert;99901]There are three issues in this sad affair that have been nagging at me. The first is, to what degree did the business model of the Bounty enterprise emphasize voyaging over “dockside attracting?” Evidence suggests that voyaging was really at the center of the operation, in which case the group was more or less actively evading regulatory oversight. If true, that (IMHO) is not a firm foundation on which to build a robust safety culture.

Second, to what degree was that vessel really a sailing ship? Somewhere (and I can’t find it now) somebody stated that it could only move under sail on a run or a beam reach (not surprising) in winds over 30 kt (quite surprising). If it really was a power craft being promoted as a sailing vessel, then that would also speak ill of the organization’s loyalty to the truth.

Earl[/QUOTE]

It wasn’t a going concern. The organization is being run on funds obtained from the neglect of the vessel. That is to say the operation is in the black as long as the deprecation of the vessel is not taken into account. (I’ve no knowledge of the books, just my guess)

Ran the old family farm the same way for years.

127

[QUOTE=Topsail;99900]In front of a civil judge or jury, what is the value of a testimony made right after an incident where the witness is exhausted, hungry, bruised, frighten, in a state of shock, not counseled, etc., … :confused:[/QUOTE]

Possibly more than one made after time to fabricate. A statement then might fall into one of several exceptions to the genral rule that hearsay is inadmissible as evidence - hearsay is a statement made outside of court that is offered as evidence of the truth of the contents of the statement. Often, what follows a witness saying “He told me that…” will be hearsay that cannot be admitted as evidence. The exceptions when hearsay is admissible apply when certaion circumstances exist that increase the likelihood that the statement is true.

128

Captain Moreland - Captain of the Tall Ship Picton Castle just testified that the decision to take Bounty to sea into Sandy was “mind boggling”

129

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;99927]Captain Moreland - Captain of the Tall Ship Picton Castle just testified that the decision to take Bounty to sea into Sandy was “mind boggling”[/QUOTE]

Dam Moreland is the real deal. Certainly the most experienced and successful square rigger captain in North America. He has been running PICTON CASTLE as a sail training vessel on numerous circumnavigations over at least the last 20 years.

130

[QUOTE=tugsailor;99932]Dam Moreland is the real deal. Certainly the most experienced and successful square rigger captain in North America. He has been running PICTON CASTLE as a sail training vessel on numerous circumnavigations over at least the last 20 years.[/QUOTE]

Yes, he sound to me like a professional ship master.

He is very articulate, to be expected from working in that sector I suppose.

131

[QUOTE=jdcavo;99923]Possibly more than one made after time to fabricate [/QUOTE]

So in this present hearing which is made 4 months after the incident, what is the point to hold such an hearing if the chance that the witnesses fabricate their testimony is so unequivocally obvious ?

132

[QUOTE=Topsail;99938]So in this present hearing which is made 4 months after the incident, what is the point to hold such an hearing if the chance that the witnesses fabricate their testimony is so unequivocally obvious ?[/QUOTE]

Because the penalties for fabrication (lying to a Federal officer) are so severe. And easy to prove. Which is why most lawyers will tell you to run, not walk, from such a proceeding if you are anything other than a completely innocent, uninvolved bystander.

Cheers,

Earl

133

[QUOTE=“Earl Boebert;99901”]
Fourth, where are the crew members who accompanied Walbridge on his asserted hurricane-chasing escapades? I admit to having done only a cursory search, but I can’t find any corroboration for his story to the television reporter. Most individuals who have ridden out big cyclonic storms describe it as one of the most terrifying experiences a human being can endure, and not easily forgotten. Is it possible that Sandy was actually Walbridge’s first experience with a real hurricane? That would be a truly horrifying thought.

Earl[/QUOTE]

I think this is a valid point. Early on I often thought about big storms as a badge of honor to be worn proudly. (mid twenties). After having ridden a few out at the dock and offshore my thinking was changed. It was eye opening experiences that I will never forget. The thing is, once the poor decision is made there comes a point where turning back is not an option. This time it was at the loss of two souls. Even if the vessel was in perfect condition, the decision to leave was incorrect.

134

The purpose of getting early statements is collect evidence while it is fresh in their minds and to pin them down so that they can be challenged if they change their story.

I don’t really understand the legal posture of this USCG hearing. Especially, the way a multitude of plaintiff’s lawyers is being allowed to use it to conduct fishing expeditions to support future civil claims.

Four months after an event is incredibly fast for an American "legal"proceeding. Civil cases routinely take years to get to trial. Criminal cases have speedy trial requirements once someone is charged, but it often takes years before anyone is charged, and defendants often obtain more delays.

Of course the owner is in civil jeopardy. Maybe criminal culpability too.

For a variety of legal and practical reasons, especially the " fellow servant rule", members of the crew are unlikely to be sued at all, muchless successfully. While criminal charges may theoretically be possible against certain members of the crew, I will shocked if any criminal charges are brought against any of the crew. If Walbridge had survived, he might have been prosecuted.

The BOUNTY was in effect being operated as a private yacht that was not subject to USCG inspection or SOLAS. There was no requirement for anyone aboard to have any USCG license. Did anyone of the crew actually hold an ocean, or coastwise license, that would ocver the tonnage of the BOUNTY?

Generally, when someone just happens to hold a license, but is not " sailing on their license" on a vessel that requires that license, then action cannot usually be taken against their license. I suspect that that may be the case here for most of the licensed crew.

I will be surprised if the USCG goes after any licenses, except maybe the mate. I won’ be surprised if they go after the mate, but I won’t be surprised if they don’t. I have no idea what the ultimate outcome of that might be.

135

Did you have the chance to watch the testimony of Captain Moreland of the Tall Ship Picton Castle and the one from Captain Miles, master of the Tall Ship Pride of Baltimore II. I was very fortunate to review both of them and to make sure I would not miss a single word, I had my headphone set on. I would like to thanks the USCG to make that hearing public. Even for a master mariner and a maritime pilot like me, I learned a lot and appreciated so much. I wrote 2 pages of notes. But it would be redundant to write it all again, because everything has already been written down by all of us on the thread ‘‘HMS Bounty and Hurricane Sandy’’.

Today’s hearing marked a pivot point …

  1. Whether or not a wooden tall ship is inspected, does that diminish the utmost responsibility of the master to assure the safety and the security of his crew ?

  2. If a wooden tall ship is properly equipped, functional, maintained, manned and so on, does that give the master the approval or the consent to steer his vessel straight into the path of a well forecasted hurricane of category II ?

Good luck !

136

Gentlemen,

I have stood in awe since the first moment I heard Bounty was foundering off Hatteras. Angry at the loss of a beautiful life. Because my farther taught me to RESPECT the water.

Thank you for your intelligent and thoughtful discussion. Here I feel at home.

137

The NTSB inspector just asked Deckhand Drew Salapatek; ‘’ Will you ever sail again into a hurricane ? ‘’, he answered; ‘’ Definitively not ‘’. A hard learning but a learning. If they would have taken a few minutes to read the Bowditch concerning hurricanes, they would not have to experience a real hurricane to understand. There is some other ways to learn, at least, less destructive …

138

Listening to the testimony of deckhand Drew Salapatek is testing my patience. The lawyer for the Christian family is asking him in very simple terms to describe a problem they were experiencing with the deckwash pump. Drew cannot seem to answer his questions in an intelligible way. At every step he seems to misunderstand what is being asked of him. I don’t know if he is just nervous, or what the problem is. What a mess.

While attempting to do a deckwash, they noticed that the electrical pumps were not capable of providing the usual pressure to the deckwash hose. They were ‘all hands’ at the time and none of the deckhands thought to mention this mechanical problem to any of the officers. They did mention it to the ‘engineer’ Chris Barksdale, whatever good that did.

The Coast Guard’s list of causes and contributing factors to this accident is going to be tremendously long.

[edit] Watching the Coast Guard/NTSB panel right now - they are of course listening carefully, but judging their body language they are getting very tired and frustrated indeed, listening to these jumbled and confusing responses.

139

Yesterday at the hearing, the question; ‘’ Is a ship safer at sea than in port ‘’ in the vicinity of an approaching hurricane, was asked to Captain Moreland of Picton Castle and to Captain Miles of the Pride of Baltimore II. They both answered without a shadow of a doubt; ‘’ [B]NO[/B] ‘’. But, they would not have necessarily stayed in New London if they had ample time to do so. New Bedford would have been a better port of refuge, since it is equipped by a hurricane dyke. Mystic Port and Lunenburg would have been chosen afterward. If they would have been already at sea in the same condition as the Bounty, they would have deviated toward the port of New York at the latest.

I repeat myself, the question is not really ‘’ Is a ship safer at sea than in port ‘’, the question is that if you decide to escape out at sea on an approaching hurricane, it as do be done in ample time and you have to have a safer alternative than staying in that port.

If you don’t bring together these conditions, a ship safer in that port than at sea !

140

[QUOTE=“Topsail;100040”]I repeat myself, the question is not really ‘’ Is a ship safer at sea than in port ‘’, the question is that if you decide to escape out at sea on an approaching hurricane, it as do be done in ample time and you have to have a safer alternative than staying in that port.

If you don’t bring together these conditions, a ship safer in that port than at sea ![/QUOTE]

I would add that if you decide to escape out to sea, make sure you are on a ship that is fast enough to out run an approaching hurricane with an ample margin of safety to cover the unexpected.