Its disappeared. My guess is that it was been pulled whilst proceedings were live to prevent any sub-judice issues?
oh brother.. if you are a leader of an inexperienced group you do not push boundaries; if you want to push boundaries then do it with like minded experienced people who fully understand the risks...
I absolutely agree. However, while taking people on a trip that is not entirely risk-free, it behoves those public-spirited individuals to consider the risks and, when they are excessive, to minimise them or, where that isn't possible, to cancel the trip.
The trouble with any outdoor sport, is often the boundaries are unclear and constantly changing, what's fine one minute can become risky in the blink of an eye. Consider that nice sail with friends which quickly turns into a battle with a white squall. Or that easy hill walk route you've done a hundred times where the visibility dropped down to two meters, and the stream you were planning crossing was a river when you arrived. Every sport and pastime will have similar parallels.
It was a paid for activity with monies going to an organization that should have behaved in a professional manner, they didn't and customers died... accidents happen but this one should not have occurred.
While I think I understand your feelings with respect to the motivations of "...public spirited individuals..." when it comes to sharing the beauty and benefits of outdoor activities, I am having some difficulty with your thoughts in the following, "... life is not always risk-free, we must consider the potential consequences of attempting to eliminate all risks. I may not be an adrenaline junkie, but I believe that most worthwhile endeavours involve some degree of risk, and personal judgment regarding its magnitude. We all have to start somewhere, and there will always be accidents and pioneers pushing the boundaries of what is possible and what is not...."
Yes, and if I was relatively new to paddle boarding I would (and indeed have) paid a professional guide to lead us safely through the activity so that I could build up my own experience to help me make my own judgement.
The most basic stuff they got wrong was so far from pushing boundaries that it is impossible to comprehend why you’ve included that statement here. This wasn’t marketed as some pushing the boundaries trip, I’m sure none of them signed up believing they were in any more danger on this trip than on previous ones in benign water.
Except in the most exceptional of circumstances the minimum sentencing guideline for gross negligence manslaughter is 1yr in prison - that would require a massive heap of mitigation and zero aggravating factors. A short sentence could be suspended. The top end (unless life is deemed appropriate to protect the public) - is 18yrs. I don’t think she’ll face anything close to that, but I’m sure she will have been warned to pack a bag and expect a significant sentence. Sentences should have a purpose, but it is a legitimate purpose to send a message to anyone else running cavalier operations to think again.
Nobody is suggesting that these were the circumstances. If this was a group of friends who befell disaster and one happened to have defaulted to the group leader position and then found herself in the dock her legal advice may well have been quite different. Don’t conflate the too or imply that “we” all need to be worried. In fact even paid paddleboard guides don’t need to be worried if they are running responsible operations.
That may be true - but that’s exactly why you might engage professional guides! In this case the boundary might be ambiguous but I don’t think anyone looking at it objectively thinks they were just the wrong side of the boundary - they weren’t way out their depth and it should have been obvious to anyone with even basic paddleboard instructor training. Again if there was any hint of a grey area, presumably the defence would have found some expert witnesses who were prepared to stand in the witness box and say they would have gone out in those conditions with those client and that equipment.
I’ve been in all those situations - I wouldn’t consider doing them myself without some sort of vague contingency plan in my head and I absolutely would not take less experienced people without the capacity to mitigate those reasonably forseable scenarios.
I don’t think this is a “bit more training” - this was spectacularly stupid levels of preparation, in fact the organiser has admitted criminally poor preparation. The only way I can rationalise this having not been abandoned on the day is each instructor thinking “if it was as bad as it feels, surely my colleague would have said something”. That is not uncommon.
There’s a LOT of people using paddleboards and relatively few getting into serious trouble, almost all the fatalities I’ve heard of have been in fast moving water (like rivers), and the mitigations are well known (and ignored in this case).
True but not applicable here. A river in full spate in danger of bursting its banks is an extremely dangerous beast indeed, even for skilled and experienced paddlers. It is never a place for beginners or the inexperienced to be, without exception.
An often overlooked aspect of sentencing in cases such as this one is the deterence effect it should have on others who might be engaged in similar careless behaviour. You are right that time in prison likely wont change anything about the circumstances of this specific case or the, now criminally convicted, surviving instructor but that is not the sole intent of sentencing in any court case. Her sentence has yet to be delivered and there are many factors, including deterence of similar actions in others, for the judge to consider in determining a suitable penalty. It will be interesting to read the judge's rationale once it is delivered.
An alternative - and angrier - view is that through stupidity or arrogance this person misrepresented their qualifications, abilities and experience for financial gain and ended up killing four people. A custodial sentence might encourage them to think carefully about all the choices that got them there and not just those that went wrong with this particular trip.