Felixstowe yacht collision: Seaman on dredger sentenced

sailorman

sailorman

Well-Known Member
Joined
21 May 2003
Messages
79,001
Location
temp ashore, i expect to be back🤞
Visit site
A chief mate on a 5,000-tonne dredger has been given a suspended jail sentence after his vessel hit a yacht on which a woman drowned.
Bernadine Ingram, 57, was found in the water a day after the accident near Felixstowe, Suffolk in June.
At Ipswich Crown Court Gerardus Chapel, from the Netherlands, admittedfailing to discharge his duties properly as officer of the watch.
The 37-year-old was sentenced to six months, suspended for 18 months


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-31647173
 
Without due care and attention - quite probably, killing while driving dangerously (a fine line) almost certainly custodial.
 
tillergirl said:
I suppose the Court will have taken into consideration that the yacht as not keeping proper watch either.
Click to expand...

Courts should also take into account that a 38 ton juggernaut driver has more responsibility than a middle-aged lady wobbling on her bicycle.
He walked out of court a free man (unless he does it again in the next 18 months..).
No punishment, that can't be right surely?
 
Is it possible that his Maritime Authority might rescind or impose limitations on his ticket?

If so that might be further punishment.
 
I didn't really join in to defend the courts but they would not regard a suspended sentence as 'no punishment'. Trouble is one would need to be in court to hear the mitigation to make a fair judgement. It does seem to be soft though.
 
I don't suppose sending the bloke to jail will bring the victim back, and has been said the loss of his career is quite a significant punishment. That just leaves deterrent to try and encourage others not to make the same mistake. Incidents like this do raise awareness and encourage others to re-examine their own practices to see if they are vulnerable, would a jail sentence have made them do this any more enthusiastically?
 
tillergirl said:
I suppose the Court will have taken into consideration that the yacht as not keeping proper watch either.
Click to expand...


Mr Ingram was at the helm and saw the Shoreway in the distance, the court heard.

It appeared to be in the deep water channel. Mr Ingram’s yacht was not bearing a course towards the deep water channel, but was parallel to it.

Magistrates were told he went below deck to go the toilet for no longer than a couple of minutes leaving his wife on deck at the rear of the yacht.
[/I]



from Ipswich Star report of first court hearing[I


it will be illuminating to see what the MAIB says about this, I recorded local BBC news from satellite as it is not my area and the reporter seems to indicate that the judge said there was fault on both sides
 
dogleg said:
[/I]Mr Ingram was at the helm and saw the Shoreway in the distance, the court heard.

It appeared to be in the deep water channel. Mr Ingram’s yacht was not bearing a course towards the deep water channel, but was parallel to it.

Magistrates were told he went below deck to go the toilet for no longer than a couple of minutes leaving his wife on deck at the rear of the yacht.
[/I]



from Ipswich Star report of first court hearing[I


it will be illuminating to see what the MAIB says about this, I recorded local BBC news from satellite as it is not my area and the reporter seems to indicate that the judge said there was fault on both sides
Click to expand...


Two things strike me as 'strange':
1. The man who was down below survived & the woman who was supposedly on deck didn't.
2. If the woman was on deck, why did she not take any avoiding action.

No doubt, the MAIB rapport will make interesting reading.
 
Through my career I was always surprised by how things turned out - a woman macheted by her husband survived the most grevious injuries I have ever seen and yet you go to a post mortem where there is the tiniest of wounds that was pretty instantly fatal. Here we had the perfect day if I recall accurately. It was sunny, calm with good visibility with people on both vessels who were experienced at what they were doing. I suppose that makes it worse. On a rotten day with poor visibility and people struggling with the conditions it is easier to understand something going wrong. If I am with SWMBO I always make sure I tell her to keep a lookout if I am going below for a few minutes. And I shall certainly do so in the future. If I am single handed I invariably heave-to rather than leave the tillerpilot on if there is anything close at hand. But then I am a notorious scaredicat. I am sure I read something (but it may have been speculation) that she went below - to save one of the dogs? I believe she was found inside the wreck?

Another bit of my experience if you will all permit. Over 38 years at work I met a number of people who I would truly describe as evil. Not many fortunately. I met a number of utterly dishonest but equally utterly charming thieves with whom you could (but for common sense) be friendly. I met a number of people who just couldn't give a damn about their victims and were totally self centred. And you met people who have committed a criminal act and are truely contrite; indeed you know that the event has seared itself into their soul and they are changed people. (That has just reminded me of an awful road traffic accident where the driver of the car and the minder of the child would probably never ever forget the events even though they did nothing culpable). The courts do have a go at trying to match sentences to circumstances, not just of the incident but the offenders themselves. That is why we have a criminal record system and Judges get Social Reports before sentencing. 'Tis a complicated business and of course they don't always get it right. We have no way of knowing into which category the watchkeeper in this case falls. I suspect from the sentence, the last category.
 
pvb said:
I imagine the CPS thought the yachtsman had been punished enough for his errors, which is why he wasn't prosecuted too.
Click to expand...

Humm, the findings and recommendations are now published, and as some have stated, inadequate lookout by 'both' parties (Skippers) involved. A thought provoking outcome, indeed.
 
Ever since reading an article by Libby Purves a few years ago, SWMBO and I always hand over to each other, one of us is always consciously on watch. Even a two minute loo break we don't asume the other will be watching; a simple pattern of you're on watch, that's the course, autopilot is on/off and that's the thing I'm most concerned about over there. In a sailboat things generally go wrong quite slowly and that can lull us into a false sense of security.
 
Colvic Watson said:
Ever since reading an article by Libby Purves a few years ago, SWMBO and I always hand over to each other, one of us is always consciously on watch. Even a two minute loo break we don't asume the other will be watching; a simple pattern of you're on watch, that's the course, autopilot is on/off and that's the thing I'm most concerned about over there. In a sailboat things generally go wrong quite slowly and that can lull us into a false sense of security.
Click to expand...
i do feel that Mr Ingram`s was protecting his wife`smemory, by taking sole responsibility for his actions. all family crews have a system when the skipper nips below, even to check nav ect.
a very sad affair indeed,especially given the prvailing conditions on the day.
 
sailorman said:
......... all family crews have a system when the skipper nips below, even to check nav etc.
Click to expand...

We certainly have, but there is an informality about it....... when we acquired our first boat (Galion 22) about 5 years ago, my wife didn't know a cardinal from a vicar, a sheet from a blanket, or a pulpit from a font..... but after a gradual education on both sides and an upgrade to a bigger boat, I am confident to leave her on deck alone. She soon shouts if she feels she can't cope or there is something she doesn't understand.

Even so I have to say in this case, there but for the grace of God......go I
 
sailorman said:
all family crews have a system when the skipper nips below,
Click to expand...

That's a very broad assumption and an incorrect one too

Mr Ingram stated that his wife was a non-sailor and took no part in the handling or navigation of the boat. She was, in effect, a passenger.

Until fairly recently I would have said exactly the same and would have neither asked nor expected Jane to keep a lookout or take over the watch

To all intents and purposes Mr Ingram, I (in the past) and I'm sure many other sailors with non-sailing partners were/are sailing single handed

(Happily for me, since we bought Erbas Jane has, of her own volition, become increasingly active and interested in the "on deck" side of things which I'm delighted about but would never have attempted to push her into doing)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top