Caught by the scamera

[Stemar]

The other scenario is the magistrate is a yottie....and he hates RIBs

Or he's a yottie who's had issues with dangerous speeding boats in the water.

If it had been a car, it would have been a dangerous speed offence (nowhere is is not dangerous to be doing 3 times the limit), plus the offence of using a phone while driving. No kill cord or life jackets? not so different from not wearing seatbelts in a car. He'd have got a ban as well as a big fine.

It was fortunate that no in a small dinghy got in his way, or that his wake didn't tip someone into the water. Yes, it was a big fine, but it sends a big message "pour encourager les autres"

 

[lustyd]

plus the offence of using a phone while driving. No kill cord or life jackets? not so different from not wearing seatbelts in a car.

Completely different. It’s not an offence to do any of those things, and even if he’d been drunk it would only be harbour bylaws used against him. Boats aren’t cars and overreacting to an incident where nobody was even remotely harmed isn’t good and will lead to ever increasing legislation and cost for boaters.

Three times the speed limit here is 18kt assuming that’s not an exaggeration and that ride wasn’t with him. Hardly a crazy speed where he couldn’t react by turning either direction or throttling back. Even the Welsh are ok with 20mph!

 

[johnalison]

It is the rib’s helm’s responsibility to know what regulations are in force, and the fact that he proceeded at a speed that was considered potentially dangerous shows a reckless and presumably deliberate disregard for the law. The reference to the kill-cord and LJs were presumably just a by-the-way included in the report, but they do suggest that the man concerned needs putting in his place. High-powered boats, like aggressive dogs, appear to be attractive to a certain type, and around my part of the coast it has been found that many jet-ski miscreants are part of the London criminal scene. I’ve no idea if the bloke involved leads an otherwise blameless life, but neither do I see him as part of our community who just made a mistake, and nor apparently did the court.

 

[fisherman]

Completely different. It’s not an offence to do any of those things, and even if he’d been drunk it would only be harbour bylaws used against him.

Was it harbour byelaws in this one?
WILTSHIRE SKIPPER BACK IN COURT OVER TOTLAND BAY BOAT CRASH

 

[lustyd]

Was it harbour byelaws in this one?
WILTSHIRE SKIPPER BACK IN COURT OVER TOTLAND BAY BOAT CRASH

No, but he wasn't up for drink boating so kind of irrelevant. Drinking was a contributory factor but the charges were endangering lives etc.

 

[davidej]

I can’t believe how many forumites seen to condone such reckless behavior!

 

[oldmanofthehills]

I can’t believe how many forumites seen to condone such reckless behavior!

Some probably equate recklessness with freedom. One can only hope they dont hurt or inconvenience others - including the poor RNL/Coatguards/Police who have to attend idiot driven disasters

 

[Bouba]

Is the RIB that got fined a commercial boat ?....it does have a lot of seats....just saying because in my experience, commercial boats, water taxis, dive boats etc, often come into port a lot quicker that pleasure craft. Time is money, commercial endorsements etc

 

[Geoff Wode]

Stupid and thoughtless.

Getting a small rib underway is so easy it takes a matter of seconds. I think it leads some folk to become casual about it all. Shame, as they’re lethal when things go wrong as several MAIB reports have shown.

No PFD/ LJ? Your business. Cold water shock can take anyone by surprise, but crack on if you really must.

Inappropriate speed, while on the phone (phone hand is probably throttle hand!), and no kill cord? That’s plain reckless. Stupid. Pay the fine and stay off the water.

 

[penberth3]

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

Magistrates normally sit in panels of three and have a legal clerk to give any advice that's required. There's little scope for personal prejudice.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Magistrates normally sit in panels of three and have a legal clerk to give any advice that's required. There's little scope for personal prejudice.

Also, having known a magistrate quite well, I think most would recuse themselves if they had any kind of personal interest; if they didn't their judgment could be overturned. And as @penberth3 says, they have expert legal advice; despite the lowly title, the clerk is an important part of the process, and although not responsible for the guilty/not guilty decision IS responsible for the correct interpretation of the law and sentencing guidelines.

 

[lustyd]

I can’t believe how many forumites seen to condone such reckless behavior!

I don’t condone breaking the speed limit, but I’m also not virtue signalling about how outraged I am that someone was doing 18mph and how dangerous that was. In reality there is very little danger in any of what was done and this is born out in the statistics where almost nobody is injured every year. Of course we need speed limits, and of course driving through moorings is daft but the outrage here is comical.

 

[Bouba]

Also, having known a magistrate quite well, I think most would recuse themselves if they had any kind of personal interest; if they didn't their judgment could be overturned. And as @penberth3 says, they have expert legal advice; despite the lowly title, the clerk is an important part of the process, and although not responsible for the guilty/not guilty decision IS responsible for the correct interpretation of the law and sentencing guidelines.

Since most of their work is traffic court....are they all non drivers ?

 

[WannabePirate]

I don’t condone breaking the speed limit, but I’m also not virtue signalling about how outraged I am that someone was doing 18mph and how dangerous that was. In reality there is very little danger in any of what was done and this is born out in the statistics where almost nobody is injured every year. Of course we need speed limits, and of course driving through moorings is daft but the outrage here is comical.

As a newer sailor...about 10,000 miles in the last year....I don't have much of an opinion based in fact. But I do got a bit of a story and maybe a bit of an opinion from it.

I've been rafted up at Lymington in calm conditions when a RIB going fast came through with a huge wake and bent some of our stanchions and the rafted boats when it hit us. I'm pretty sure the rib wasn't doing 18knots. Possibly we could have rafted up better, but I was on a school boat and the other boat was present. There were a lot of concerned eyes, and an instructor, watching how we rafted up and all agreed it was suitable. After, the instructor and the other boat decided to fix their own stanchions.

So that's a few hundred quid and an afternoons work that I know of, as a newbie, to fix the damage from a speeding boater. I imagine if I have a story like this already some of the forum users on here may have more. I would hazard a guess there is a fair bit of damage done to boats by speeding boaters expecting calm mooring every year.

Must be honest, they quite upset me when I see them in person too. In addition to what I said above, I also get annoyed because the flouting of those kind of simple rules often indicates unawareness/unwillingness to follow more important safety rules.

 

[lustyd]

RIB going fast came through with a huge wake and bent some of our stanchions and the rafted boats when it hit us

RIBs have more wake when slow. At 18kt it would be planing and would have done no damage. Not that that’s a good idea, but thought you should know.
The ferry at Lymington produces considerable wake, as do the large power boats at low speed.
Inconsiderate isn’t dangerous though, that was my point.

 

[WannabePirate]

Since most of their work is traffic court....are they all non drivers ?

I'm definitely not a lawyer...I'm sure someone who is will be along soon. I have been a successful LIP before though and jurisprudence is an area of philosophy I'm quite interested in.

I do not think this, or things like being a boater, class as personal interest.

This is a bit more like having something in common I think. For example; I shave my hair. If I turned up for jury duty and the defendant for the trial also had a shaved head; I wouldn't by virtue of that fact be thought to have a personal interest in the outcome of the case one way or another. We just have the same haircut. Same as if we were both boaters, or both drivers.

However, I think this may be where bias makes an entrance. If we had a judge who could not act according to law in the case of a motorbiker because of their intense dislike for motorcyclists; then the judge has bias on the case and has to recluse themselves..maybe there is other specific legislation here...but the point is it's bias rather than a personal interest. So if the magistrates in this case were yachties who'd had many dangerous run ins with boats and were using this to influence their decision on the case; I think that would be classed as a bias.

A personal interest could be something like the magistrate was set to receive the fine, or otherwise benefit, through a guilty or not guilty plea. For example, the boats skipper could be a friend or family member the magistrate did not want to punish. This would be a personal interest to my understanding.

This conversation probably gets really interesting philosophically if we talk about judges setting precedent...but like I said...a lawyer will be along soon and they'll be boring about that.

 

[Geoff Wode]

I don’t condone breaking the speed limit, but I’m also not virtue signalling about how outraged I am that someone was doing 18mph and how dangerous that was. In reality there is very little danger in any of what was done and this is born out in the statistics where almost nobody is injured every year. Of course we need speed limits, and of course driving through moorings is daft but the outrage here is comical.

“Virtue signalling”? Well, I’m just sick of all this wake culture. Wakeism has no place in any harbour. It’s ruining the youth

The speeding might have got him the fine but it also showed him not in control of the boat and not wearing a kill cord. It’s totally fair game to openly call that out, here or anywhere.

 

[Seven Spades]

There is a pattern with fines for boating misdemeanours, they are really heavy far in excess of the fines that a motorist would receive and frankly usually of far less of a hazard to other people than most speeding cars.

A few years ago a motorboat was fined in excess of £10,000 for entering a south coast harbour without permission or in the wrong fairway, I can't remember the exact details. But part of this huge fine was levied because he had his radio switched off and so when the harbour tried to call him he "ignored them". Sounds mad but I am not making this up.

In another instance a yacht was sailing west between the shipping lanes in the middle of the channel in the Dover Straights between the TSS. he strayed into one of the shipping lanes and he too was fined more than £10,000. Whilst the offence was serious I strongly believe that the fine was unjust, the skipper was not a wealthy owner but a professional engaged for a delivery trip. This happened more than 20 years ago so the fine was huge and would have caused considerable hardship, for a stupid infraction and loss of concentration.

I don't condone speeding and I wish that the authorities would do more to protect swimmers and boats at anchor from idiots in ribs and jet skiis along our beaches and in anchorages such as Studland. However I think that the fine in this case was probably high because of the accusation of him drinking. You can imagine the picture of a bunch of yobs or hooray Henry's, drunkenly driving their rib at reckless speeds with no regards to their own or anyone else's saftey? What choice did the courts have? The reality is that he may have been proceeding under control generating little wake and in full command of his faculties but his problem is there is a 6knt limit. The limit is a blunt instrument because it may be perfectly safe for some boats and completely inconsiderate for a displacmetn motorboat and highly dangerous for one drunken rib driver and perfectly safe for another.

The only thing is I have a small tender and I have no idea what speed I am going at so there for the grace... but I am sure my tender(a 3.2m Avon rib) does not do 18knts, well not with my 8hp outboard.

 

[Bouba]

Looks like the issue of privacy has long ago been lost...the court was praising the quality of the hi definition film. Make sure that whatever you are doing on your boat it’s something that you won’t mind being published

 

[lustyd]

“Virtue signalling”? Well, I’m just sick of all this wake culture. Wakeism has no place in any harbour. It’s ruining the youth

The speeding might have got him the fine but it also showed him not in control of the boat and not wearing a kill cord. It’s totally fair game to openly call that out, here or anywhere.

Not in control of the boat? Really?