unsafe and dangerous

M

MrTrat

New Member
Joined
28 Feb 2006
Messages
13
Visit site
Unsafe and Dangerous Life Jackets Still on Sale

Wife 'destroyed' after seeing husband drown
Court told man died after lifejacket malfunctioned

By Ralph Riegel


Wednesday April 23 2008

'There are times when I just can't stop crying. I feel very angry'

Ralph Riegel

AN AVID sailor died in front of his horrified wife when the brand-new lifejacket that should have saved him malfunctioned and dragged him under the waves where he drowned.

Grandmother Ella Sweeney (69) sobbed yesterday as she told the High Court that the faulty lifejacket, which cost her beloved husband, Jack (64), his life, had also destroyed her existence.

Mrs Sweeney stood helpless on the shore at Blackrock in Cork harbour as she watched her husband battle in vain to keep his head above water -- and she still has nightmares about his agonised cries for help as he was swept away on the tide to his death.

The impact of the tragedy on the grandmother -- who comes from five generations of fishermen -- has been deepened by the fact that she also lost two brothers to drownings.

Overbalanced

Jack Sweeney, an artist and musician, had only bought the lifejacket three weeks before his death on August 18, 2003, when he overbalanced on a punt and fell into Cork harbour just feet from the shore on a beautiful summer evening.

The plaintiff's counsel told the High Court that: "It (the lifejacket) was supposed to save his life, but tragically it ended up killing him."

When the grandfather fell into the water, he activated his gas-triggered life-jacket. However, a faulty valve resulted in air escaping from one half of the jacket and it quickly filling with water. The half-inflated jacket then effectively turned the 64-year old over in the water and forced his head under water.

Sailors

Mr Sweeney drowned by the time two local sailors were able to drag him out of the water.

The tragic retelling came on the opening day of a case before Mr Justice Paul Butler in the High Court, sitting in Cork, between Mrs Sweeney and CH Marine and Baltic Safety.

Irish firm CH Marine sold the lifejacket in question while Baltic Safety AB of Sweden manufactured it.

A third defendant, Halkey Roberts of Florida, manufactured the air valve at the centre of the claim. The US firm is expected to be the focus of a third-party action.

Mrs Sweeney of Castle Road, Blackrock, Cork, is seeking damages for trauma and suffering she endured because of the tragedy. Liability has been admitted by the defendants, but they are contesting the claim for aggravated damages.

The High Court yesterday heard evidence from consulting engineer Joseph O'Sullivan that in his opinion the valve was dangerous and did not comply with EU safety standards.

He revealed that in 20 safety tests conducted on the lifejacket in Ireland and the UK, the air valve malfunctioned 13 times. "It is unsafe and dangerous," he said. The court heard that the same jacket and valve is still available on the market.

Mrs Sweeney said the tragedy had destroyed her life. "I cannot concentrate any more since I saw Jack drown. I wish to God it had never happened," she said. "I'm totally destroyed by it -- there are times when I just can't stop crying. I feel very, very angry over what was done to my life and Jack's life."

The court heard the grandmother has developed a serious psychiatric condition and, if left by herself, was described as being at a very high suicide risk. Her sisters are now providing 24-hour care for her.

The case continues today.

- Ralph Riegel
 
Does anyone know which Baltic models are affected and whether there is a date or serial number range, or description of the dangerous valves?
 
Whoa, the half-inflated lifejacket didn't cause him to drown. Neither did it 'drag him under'.

Falling in the water and drowning was the cause of death. A malfunction of safety equipment meant he might have survived had it functioned properly.
 
if the lifejacket filled with water (which itself seems unlikely - why should it?) then it would still be no less buoyant than the water in which he was immersed. but it sounds better for the plaintiff who is sueing than 'he fell into the water and unfortunately drowned'.
 
None of the info adds up though does it. Can't see why an uninflated LJ would take on water. Anyway water is as heavy as, er, water. So can't really drag you down can it? Do they have valves? I thought a pin just pierced the seal on the bottle?

Amazing the number of recalls on these things. It's only a bladder, a gas bottle and a trigger. Hardly rocket science... Why are there so many designs?

Shopped for two new LJ for the kids at the w/e. They chose the Crewsaver all foam ones. One less thing to service! Looking to flog the old babe and small child ones if anyones interested....
 
However, if it was a 2 compartment lifejacket with one side holding him up whilst the otherside giving no support as it failed to inflate then I can see that it was contributory to his drowning - the defendants have acknowledged this too by pleading guilty ... now it is a matter of how much it will cost them.
 
My best guess would be though that a full bladder would encourage you to float face down rather than face up...

Though I also agree... it is difficult to see how an uniflated bladder could fill with water....

I am however, not in posession of the facts, so can only speculate....

I guess, as before, the jury will provide the truth...
 
[ QUOTE ]
Its the one bit of the current legal system I do trust (although noted that this case in the US)....

[/ QUOTE ]

That's probably because there is a better chance of getting punitive damages in the US and the level of damages is decided by the jury. This may also be why the evidence is being given such an emotional twist. Unlucky for all 3 defendants that one of them happened to be an American.

Interesting that the design is still on sale despite the defendants accepting that it was faulty. That implies that they feel they can prove it was an unusual event, when the plaintif seems to have demonstrated otherwise.

Dreadfully sad situation, I wonder why he didn't try to take it off & hold onto it instead? It might have kept him alive then.
 
Any malfunction of a LJ is extremely serious - after all we are all urged to wear them at all times - to do otherwise is considered to be foolhardy.
 
In Ireland your not only encouraged ,wearing LJs in boats less than 7meters is compulsory.

I think that a lifejacket inflated on one side only would make it extremely difficult to keep your face out of the water.
 
Surely this adds fuel to the debate about NOT wearing lifejackets. I have been to a couple of lectures about heavy weather sailing in the past couple of years where the speakers were against the wearing of lifejackets. Harnesses yes, buoyancy aids yes, but not LJs. Having recently done an RYA sea survival course I found getting into the liferaft extremely difficult in the simulated conditions of the swimming pool. Not so when dinghy sailing and righting capsizes, even total inversions, or escaping from a kayak. As to the suggestion that the deceased should hav tried to remove it..not as easy as it sounds.
 
As to the suggestion that the deceased should hav tried to remove it..not as easy as it sounds.
========================================

Err, undo the clip, in the water it will slip off. Might be a bit harder with a thigh strap, but they are generally plastic clips too.

I suspect the key issue may not be the lifejacket as much as the age of the wearer. I suspect he will have lost body heat very quickly and may have gone into hypothermia very early.

Finally, how does "Half a lifejacket" deflate? None of my inflatable ones have ever been compartmentalised. Nor have I ever seen one like that, they are always a single chamber design.
 
Something else to consider here is the fact that out of 20 of these life jackets tested in Ireland and UK, 13 of them failed to work properly, which is quite frightening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top