Sad case of deaths at sea.....not keeping watch

[Achosenman]

I wonder if the reports finding that there was no stern light was mentioned in the trial or the most likely angle the boat would have been while drifting? It would be a bit stupid if the findings of the most expert accident investigators are also inadmissible (not just peoples statements)

That's the issue. AFAIK the skipper of the James 2 is equally at fault. He placed his passengers in a position of danger. The boat was not fit for purpose and he presumably thought it was ok to drift in the darkness, without lights just out from a harbour entrance. Perhaps he liked having a picnic in the fast lane of motorways as well, who knows.

The wind and tide made sure the James 2's unlit sector was presented to the fishing vessel. (I personally don't think they had any navigation lights on. The engine was shut down.) The fishing vessel would have been hard-pressed to see it in the darkness unless the skipper was glued to his radar set. (We all know that is frowned upon on this forum) He was negligent in that he didn't keep an adequate watch and he didn't turn unnecessary lights off to improve night vision. In aviation we never allowed crew members to take downtime in the busy part of the flight (Departure and Arrival) and I don't see a massive difference in a maritime operation.

None of this absolves the commercial fishing boat skipper. Personally, I have a very jaundiced view of their habit of blindly ploughing ahead like they own the high sea's. But the name of the game is to survive, not be right.

 

[Adios]

But if you did the exact same scenario,

Behind the wheel of a car and killed 3 innocent people in a head on collision with another vehicle whilst being distracted by a phone and then leaving then scene of an accident, I could guarantee he would get a lot more than 12 months imprisonment, And rightfully so!

Causing death by dangerous driving,

Driving without due care and attention,

leaving the scene of an accident,

Theres 3 laws he has broken with probably alot more the deeper you delve.


Marrs got off extremely lightly in my eyes, i feel for the poor family of the men that where killed at the hands of this IDIOT and his fatal mistakes!

12 months imprisonment, 6 months with good behaviour is a failure of the justice system given the circumstances and the outcome of what he had done!

If the CPS believed they had a hope of proving he was responsible for the deaths he would have been charged with that. There was no collision, he wasn't weaving dangerously all over the sea, his boat was well lit, their boat was unlit, they admit seeing his boat in plenty of time. They admit taking not action to avoid the collision which they should have as a vessel underway. They admit to drinking neat whisky while in charge of the vessel after drinking during the day, they admit the small boats skipper was in the cabin not keeping watch as the bigger boat approached, they admit he was told it was coming and dismissed the issue. They admit not wearing lifejackets or even having them to hand.

A more analogous scenario would be someone driving down the road nearly hitting an unroadworthy car with no rear lights whose occupants had been drinking all day. He didn't see it as it was unlit, he didn't feel it because there was no collision so he carried on driving. The scare of the near miss caused the unlit car to swerve and they hit a tree killing the occupants. I don't see how anyone would go to jail for nearly hitting a car with no rear lights. I expect the drinking driver of the unroadworthy, unlit car would be blamed.

 

[jordanbasset]

Looking at all the evidence on this thread it is very clear to me that the accused was failing to keep an adequate look out beyond all reasonable doubt and can understand why the Jury found him guilty
Let us remind ourselves

We know there should have been two on watch, he chose not to do that
We know it was a clear night with very good visibility and a calm sea
We know the convicted skipper was on social media during the time of the incident
We know either the radar was not turned on, he was not watching it or did not know how to use it

What the other people were or were not doing becomes almost irrelevant, the evidence points to a failure to keep keep a proper look out, he was fortunate to get away with a relatively light sentence.

 

[MystyBlue2]

If the CPS believed they had a hope of proving he was responsible for the deaths he would have been charged with that. There was no collision, he wasn't weaving dangerously all over the sea, his boat was well lit, their boat was unlit, they admit seeing his boat in plenty of time. They admit taking not action to avoid the collision which they should have as a vessel underway. They admit to drinking neat whisky while in charge of the vessel after drinking during the day, they admit the small boats skipper was in the cabin not keeping watch as the bigger boat approached, they admit he was told it was coming and dismissed the issue. They admit not wearing lifejackets or even having them to hand.

A more analogous scenario would be someone driving down the road nearly hitting an unroadworthy car with no rear lights whose occupants had been drinking all day. He didn't see it as it was unlit, he didn't feel it because there was no collision so he carried on driving. The scare of the near miss caused the unlit car to swerve and they hit a tree killing the occupants. I don't see how anyone would go to jail for nearly hitting a car with no rear lights. I expect the drinking driver of the unroadworthy, unlit car would be blamed.

They did, i read somewhere they found him guilty without reasonable doubt that means 99.999% Guilty of the incident.

But if hes not being charged for the deaths, Which is wrong because someone has to be held responsible and more so the bloke that killed them in the first place, what is he being charged for?

12 months for being on his fone? (Driving without due care and attention)

Leaving the scene of an accident? (Come on thats a big one in it's self)

They are both laws he has broken and with deaths aside they carry heavier sentences than 12 months individually,

Then lets not forget 3 people have lost their liver here? Someone needs to be held accountable?

12 months is ridiculous?

I'd get 3 years for burglary if i stole a push bike from the neighbours back shed!

12 months for the loss of 3 lives is disgusting.

 

[Achosenman]

They did, i read somewhere they found him guilty without reasonable doubt that means 99.999% Guilty of the incident.

But if hes not being charged for the deaths, Which is wrong because someone has to be held responsible and more so the bloke that killed them in the first place, what is he being charged for?

12 months for being on his fone? (Driving without due care and attention)

Leaving the scene of an accident? (Come on thats a big one in it's self)

They are both laws he has broken and with deaths aside they carry heavier sentences than 12 months individually,

Then lets not forget 3 people have lost their liver here? Someone needs to be held accountable?

12 months is ridiculous?

I'd get 3 years for burglary if i stole a push bike from the neighbours back shed!

12 months for the loss of 3 lives is disgusting.

Did the James 2’s skippers actions and decisions contribute in any way in your opinion?

 

[MystyBlue2]

Did the James 2’s skippers actions and decisions contribute in any way in your opinion?

Was he in a busy shipping lane completely unlit?

Does anybody know for a fact that the 3 deceased where infact pissed out of their brains and weren't wearing life jackets?

As far as small boats fishing at night it happens all of the time without any accidents!

Fact is huge vessels steam around like they are running from a storm and close to shore where their is possibly other traffic.

I do think they are partly at fault but cant blame them solely for their own deaths.

He needs to pay for the loss of 3 lives and he might have seen them in time if he wasn't on facebook at the time!

 

[jordanbasset]

My view, was the other skipper also at fault, possibly, but it misses the point. Regardless of what the other skipper was or was not doing (and if he did make mistakes he has paid with his life),the convicted skipper was found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt of failing to keep a proper look out.
On the basis of the evidence we have seen here that seems to me an entirely justifiable verdict

 

[Achosenman]

Was he in a busy shipping lane completely unlit? Outside a harbour at night is a busy shipping area. He was unlit because he never had a proper stern light (or any light) showing in the sector presented to the fishing vessel.

Does anybody know for a fact that the 3 deceased where infact pissed out of their brains and weren't wearing life jackets? Do you know for a fact they weren't?

As far as small boats fishing at night it happens all of the time without any accidents! So what?

Fact is huge vessels steam around like they are running from a storm and close to shore where their is possibly other traffic. True they do make way and they can catch the inattentive or untrained by surprise.

I do think they are partly at fault but cant blame them solely for their own deaths. No-one is, not even the MCA.

He needs to pay for the loss of 3 lives and he might have seen them in time if he wasn't on facebook at the time! He has.

Had the James 2 skipper had some training, it might have enabled him to see the risks he was taking and act accordingly. Of course, there are no guarantees...

 

[MystyBlue2]

Had the James 2 skipper had some training, it might have enabled him to see the risks he was taking and act accordingly. Of course, there are no guarantees...

Alright then he 100% cannot get away from the fact of leaving the scene of an accident which carries a heavy sentence on its own. Alot longer than 12 months.

Lets just forget the fact that 3 people are dead and he didnt keep a proper lookout and we push that blame on the 3 that lost their lives as they cant defend themselves. Remember there 2 sides to every story. Ofcourse Marrs is going to blame the 3 alcoholics in a small unlit boat in a busy shipping lane and no life jackets, To get a reduced sentence and guess what the judge ate his bull and gave him 12 months for loss of 3 lives.

This is a failure of the justice system on so many levels but hey, lets pin all the blame on the dead eh?

Would you feel the same way if one of the deceased was a family member of yours? I think not

 

[Pye_End]

Do we know what he was guilty of?

If the watch leader had been keep a good watch, and almost constantly scanning the horizen (who here does that at night?), would he have seen an unlit boat? Did, beyond reasonable doubt, his apparently sporadic watch keeping, cause this accident?

If you drive along an unlit country road at night and drive into an unlit cyclist with dark clothing, did the driver cause the accident?

 

[john0740]

I don't know. I would guess most lawyers would object to Juriors who had knowledge of the subject. They might make their decision based on knowledge which is not in evidence.

This raises some interesting points.
Would lawyers / barristers / advocates have access to information about a juror's profession, certifications, hobbies, etc?
There are probably many of us here who regularly read MAIB reports. Would a juror be asked if he / she had previously read a MAIB report, or would the juror be expected to declare that information?

 

[rotrax]

Personally, I have a very jaundiced view of their habit of blindly ploughing ahead like they own the high sea's. But the name of the game is to survive, not be right.

And there you have it.

Nice to be right, but nicer to be alive and right.

 

[MystyBlue2]

And there you have it.

Nice to be right, but nicer to be alive and right.

And back to the theory of "Chest puffing and Arm flexing"

Because he's bigger, Faster and his boat is worth more.

Bit like them ARSEHOLES that drive a £45k BMW up the rear end of a ford fiesta on the motorway.

Childish behaviour and dangerous.

 

[Achosenman]

Alright then he 100% cannot get away from the fact of leaving the scene of an accident which carries a heavy sentence on its own. Alot longer than 12 months. Did you miss the bit in the MAIB whereby he was not aware of the accident?

Lets just forget the fact that 3 people are dead and he didnt keep a proper lookout and we push that blame on the 3 that lost their lives as they cant defend themselves. Remember there 2 sides to every story. Ofcourse Marrs is going to blame the 3 alcoholics in a small unlit boat in a busy shipping lane and no life jackets, To get a reduced sentence and guess what the judge ate his bull and gave him 12 months for loss of 3 lives. You cannot absolve the James 2 skipper simply because he died. He was guilty of the grossest stupidity, and he in no small way contributed to killing his friends.

This is a failure of the justice system on so many levels but hey, lets pin all the blame on the dead eh? That is not what anyone is doing...unlike you.

Would you feel the same way if one of the deceased was a family member of yours? I think not I absolutely agree with you 100%...which is why I am a Yachtmaster.

 

[MystyBlue2]

Where you Marrs's defense lawyer by any chance?

 

[Achosenman]

Where you Marrs's defense lawyer by any chance?

Perhaps if you invested less emotion you would be better able to see the bigger picture. The idea is to learn from other's mistakes, not be the one making them.

I bet now (if you didn't before) when you go night fishing, your boat will be properly lit, equipped and everyone safety briefed.

 

[Uricanejack]

Its been about 40 years, since i went on a "night fishing expedition". For mackerel
We went on dark moonless nights, when low water was in the wee small hours, with no lights, dark clothing, on a dark boat, making great effort not to be seen.
Somebody was designated to keep a pretty damn good look out.
We might not actually have been fishing for mackerel. Although that was our story.

 

[Adios]

Perhaps if you invested less emotion you would be better able to see the bigger picture. The idea is to learn from other's mistakes, not be the one making them.

I bet now (if you didn't before) when you go night fishing, your boat will be properly lit, equipped and everyone safety briefed.

and sober

 

[Adios]

Its been about 40 years, since i went on a "night fishing expedition". For mackerel
We went on dark moonless nights, when low water was in the wee small hours, with no lights, dark clothing, on a dark boat, making great effort not to be seen.
Somebody was designated to keep a pretty damn good look out.
We might not actually have been fishing for mackerel. Although that was our story.

? my mind is boggling

 

[shaunksb]

? my mind is boggling

Something fishy was going on....

____________________