johnalison
Well-known member
No. I'm a sheriff's man.So you have never shown any empathy for........Robin Hood
Caught by the scamera
- Thread starter fisherman
- Start date
Bouba
Well-known member
Just checking
Boathook
Well-known member
What worry's me is that the they mention no kill cord in use and not wearing a lifejacket as though it is a criminal offence.
ylop
Well-known member
The fine was ÂŁ961 and he was charged costs of ÂŁ2100 - a quirk of the English legal system where you get charged for the inefficiencies of the prosecution! I am assuming he plead guilty. Had CPS been the prosecution authority a guilty plea would have been about ÂŁ85 costs; a trial would have been about ÂŁ600-900. Moreover, fixed penalties would be considered before it even got to court.
Only using the CCTV. Presumably that means there is quite a high bar - the precision can’t be great, and the limit is supposed to be speed through water… don’t think it would be difficult to show beyond reasonable doubt that someone was exceeding 6 knots if actually doing 18 though.
I’m not sure that either LJs or Killcord should have been mentioned in court - they aren’t criminal and are clearly trying to present aggravation in the mind of a non-expert audience. That said, I’ve helmed ribs from 3 to 11m and it’s never been essential to remove a kill cord to bring an open rib alongside. A bit of planning and preparation is all you really need - but if the boat is too big for you to manage the helm and the lines without leaving the console when engine is in gear you probably need crew.
capnsensible
Well-known member
Yeah it's just stoopid
capnsensible
Well-known member
And then Neptune, Lord of the Mighty Deep bestowed upon us humble sailors the boathook
Sandy
Well-known member
Good to hear another eejitt has been fined.
I am not a violent man, but wonder if harbour masters would consider arming their vessels with Barrett 50 calibre rifles as it might act as a deterrent?
I am not a violent man, but wonder if harbour masters would consider arming their vessels with Barrett 50 calibre rifles as it might act as a deterrent?
Thistle
Well-known member
... and the ability to prepare before coming alongside.
fisherman
Well-known member
I don't really understand why the killcord and l/j were mentioned. However, the MCA has used a drone to spot fishermen donning their lifejackets just before entering Newlyn, and there are many spot checks on the pontoons and in some cases boats impounded. Many good reasons for this regime of course.
Beware, it may come to you, although I've been saying that for years.
I asked why the MCA is cracking down so much. Answer, because despite all the regulation, training and certification imposed since the 80s, the accident rate has remained the same. (Quick answer, 'well it's not working then'...........)
Lifejackets were order of the day on my FV from1998 onwards.
Beware, it may come to you, although I've been saying that for years.
I asked why the MCA is cracking down so much. Answer, because despite all the regulation, training and certification imposed since the 80s, the accident rate has remained the same. (Quick answer, 'well it's not working then'...........)
Lifejackets were order of the day on my FV from1998 onwards.
ylop
Well-known member
But PFDs are now mandatory to be worn on fishing vessels, MCA is checking fisherfolk are complying. Whilst I “always” wear a LJ it is not mandatory and so the implication (although I appreciate we are seeing it through a journalistic lens) that harbour authority CCTV is being used to spot/monitor or even enforce something that’s not law is concerning. If we want to change the law let’s have an open an honest debate about it - which types of boat, which types of crew, which types of PFD, which locations or weather conditions etc - but back door sniping about it in criminal courts is not the right way; just the same as I’d argue that criticising a cyclist for not wearing a helmet whilst prosecuting him for cycling through a red light sends a confusing message.
Bouba
Well-known member
I wonder why the boat owner (or operator) chose to go to court...which effectively tripled his fine
ylop
Well-known member
What makes you think he chose to? My understanding is he has no choice - when someone decides to prosecute you in England you have to go, and then if successful they charge you for being prosecuted (and if you are successful defending yourself you’ll be lucky to get your actual costs back).
Unless the Harbour Authority has the power to issue fixed penalties the magistrates have to deal with if.
Bouba
Well-known member
Ok...I didn’t realize. So that is actually pretty bad...because you now have to pay costs, your own costs and go to court...there should be some system where you can agree to pay a fixed (or negotiated) penalty
ylop
Well-known member
I just checked the Byelaws - looks at a glance like maximum fine is £1000. This guy had probably been fine £655 + victim surcharge* to get to the stated amount. For a first offence that is surprisingly large, because assuming he plead guilty he got 1/3rd off for that so basically got the maximum possible sentence. Whilst I don’t want to see people racing through moorings I’m not convinced that reflects the actual risk/harm. The magistrates have no guidelines for marine offences so we should all be conscious that the perception that boaters are wealthy makes us vulnerable to possibly punitive sentencing. Personally I’d appeal those - but the press reports are so vague it’s not clear if the accused even turned up or just wrote a letter, or if he was legally represented, provided details of his means etc.
The issue you describe applies to every prosecution in E&W. There are fixed penalties available for some offences but that’s a convenience for the state as much as it is for the offender. Penalties / sentences are never negotiated in the UK but sometimes the nature or combination of charges are (and of course those may limit the penalties available) but it’s quite right that the bench should have discretion to set the penalty not be party to a negotiation.
The problem is we all assume we follow the laws so it’s not really our problem that the system doesn’t treat the accused well.
* the victim surcharge is essentially a tax levied on those who are convicted to pay for victims services - even for offences like this where there appears to be no obvious victim and the “complainer” is paid £2100 directly too…
lustyd
Well-known member
I don't consider not wearing an LJ in Falmouth harbour to be stupid, it's personal choice. I would never wear one within the harbour as I feel safer being able to swim to shore and dive down if a boat comes at me.
Kill cord I'd agree with, not much of an excuse and I disagree with Bouba about removing it to dock - the whole boat is a big fender and when you leave to tie up you have about 1m to move. Cutting the engine isn't an issue here, and arguably better since you can't get a rope in the prop if it's off. Only a real issue if your engine maintenance isn't up to snuff and you're not confident it'll restart.
Snowgoose-1
Well-known member
"Timealitis" . A modern illness that is easily acquired and very difficult to shake off . Responsible for many human activities that turn out poorly . Sufferers are unlikely to know they have it as it is instinctive .
oldmanofthehills
Well-known member
Having nearly been drowed by f ing morons going past our tender on several occasions, I say sod the fine, just confiscate his outboard and his testicles.
No LJs for passengers is putting them at risk without them having the understanding to protest the crass stupidity. Publicly sink his boat
Humblebee
Well-known member
Is "Scamera" short for Speed Camera?
fisherman
Well-known member
No it's a euphemism from some motorists for speed cameras who see them as easy money makers, rather than safety measures.
Bouba
Well-known member
I think you have hit the nail on the head....the harbour master has the gravitas to really lay it on thick about how serious a crime this is...and a non boaty magistrate can do nothing but accept his expert knowledge.
The other scenario is the magistrate is a yottie....and he hates RIBs
