death by powerboat

Scillypete

Scillypete

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 Jun 2003
Messages
1,927
Location
Isles of Scilly
www.peteandspamgosailing.blogspot.com
Recent case just finished, drunk 10 to 12 pints went out in speedy boat and hit another at night with no lights on either. not guilty of manslaughter or GBH pleaded guilty to three offences of the merchant shipping act, no proper lookout, no lights and one other and get 150 hours of community service.

whats the message being sent out here then.

link here BBC
 
This is the quickest way to more lousy laws, clearly there is no natural justice here, a pity the current legislation cannot do something a bit more punchy, having said that we don't know the details here...
 
Where was that? Have you got a link?

Can anyone remember the sentance of the RIB driver that hit an unlit buoy off cowes during the fireworks? I think that was much more significant. What are the differences between the two cases?
 
Found it. here .

How is this consistency? If anything I would have said the more recent incident was much worse as it is a flagrant breach of COLREGS and involved a skipper who had been drinking.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Found it. here .

How is this consistency? If anything I would have said the more recent incident was much worse as it is a flagrant breach of COLREGS and involved a skipper who had been drinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe the Dory skipper was partly to blame for the collision (Been drinking and no lights) where as the Buoy wasn't?
 
Interesting how much harsher the law is at sea than on the land.

Over 3500 people killed on the roads, often killed by drunk or reckless drivers yet manslaughter isn't even considered as a prosecution. Drunk driving = short ban and small fine. Drunk sailing = thousands of pounds in fines (see cases on the Solent in recent years).

Equally, car insurance will cough up pretty much however badly you drive or maintain your car. Compare with marine insurance where you policy demands good seamanship and maintenance.

Personally, I think the law's better at sea. OK, in this case there wasn't a conviction but at least the law supported a reasonable prosecution.
 
[ QUOTE ]
.... we don't know the details here...

[/ QUOTE ]

Read all about them in the MAIB report synopsis (pdf file)

(I'm a bit puzzled why I can't find the full report on the MAIB site)

Andy
 
whilst I agree the messages are confused I personally don't think majoring on the drinking issue given the evidence is helpfull. '9 pints' anecodotally over a period of 10 hours could very easily see someone pass a driving breathaliser - depends on strength and activity but just trying to bring a realism to this. certainly not suggesting that passing an arbitrary test for alcohol is a measure of suitability to undertake passage!

things went wrong, people were responsible, the courts were in the best position to decide.............certainly better than we are here
 
[ QUOTE ]
things went wrong, people were responsible, the courts were in the best position to decide.............certainly better than we are here

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. The court will have spent a long time pouring over the evidence, cross examining etc. Trial by internet forum based on a couple of paras in a second hand news report is a bit pointless.
 
The message is "carry on boys, the penalty is trivial" If anyone worries that a problem might not exist, try rowing across the Helford River on a late Saturday night in August.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top