Recent boat accident

Anybody care to guess which flavor of 'cigarette boat' the 29' boat is???

I stand 'surprised'. I do see the ladder is down. Maybe he just put it reverse to help the swimmer get back to the boat. Alcohol influenced judgement is not too good.

Not defending his actions at all, but why the heck would anyone in their right mind, jump off the boat to recover a cushion?

And why would you swim back toward a spinning prop?

Then again, I'll bet I can answer my own questions...

Drunks and boats

Boy, I was hoping the boat wasn't a Bayliner. It was a Chapparal. Doesn't matter what the brand was. All it takes to drive a boat is enough money for the down payment. Lots of alcohol and some teenage kids with an adult lawyer and a couple of his pals. Bad combination..

Amen! ^^^^

Look out, here come the political "nannies" callin' for propeller guards again.

This attorney's main practice was defending DUI's. It'll be interesting to see what he does with his DUI. According to an article I read this morning he also owns a bar. That bar was cited by the alcohol inspectors for having 13 underage people in the bar who had consumed intoxicants. This was found during a surprise inspection.

Given that his bar apparently doesn't have a problem with serving minors, and the young lady who was injured was 19 years old, I wonder how many of the passengers on his boat were underage and had been drinking?

Being slight of build, it only takes a couple of beers and I'm at .08 He was at the very edge of the legal limit. Had his alcohol level been only .01 lower he couldn't be charged with anything except possibly negligence or stupidity for not taking the motor out of gear as the young lady approached the stern. The fact he had 12 people aboard that little boat favors stupidity. In my opinion this is a case of an irresponsible, inexperienced boater resulting in a tragic accident. I don't condone excessive drinking and boating but I highly doubt even a zero alcohol reading would have prevented this tragedy.

Capt Kangeroo said:

Being slight of build, it only takes a couple of beers and I'm at .08 He was at the very edge of the legal limit. Had his alcohol level been only .01 lower he couldn't be charged with anything except possibly negligence or stupidity for not taking the motor out of gear as the young lady approached the stern. The fact he had 12 people aboard that little boat favors stupidity. In my opinion this is a case of an irresponsible, inexperienced boater resulting in a tragic accident. I don't condone excessive drinking and boating but I highly doubt even a zero alcohol reading would have prevented this tragedy.

Click to expand...

Don't forget there was a 4 hour delay after the accident before he took the breath analyzer. The liver metabolizes alcohol at a rate of about 0.015 per hour. At the time of the accident, he was probably closer to 0.14. In other words - very drunk.

There are so many charges that can be made and I hope the prosecutor makes them all. Even without the alcohol, you have reckless endangerment. You turn the engines off. Now we can speculate based on his history that she was drinking. If he supplied her with alcohol another charge there plus makes him have responsibility for her actions. Why she dove in I guess will come out in the case.

I would guess he'll win the criminal case or plead it way down. But that brings to the civil case and I think if his insurer doesn't settle with the victim before that case, he's very likely to lose.

Obviously we don't know all the facts. But he was definitely drunk and operating a boat. .09 four hours later is evidence enough unless he claims he had a drink while in custody.

As to doubting whether a zero reading would have prevented the accident, that's saying you believe he was too stupid to turn the engines off sober and too stupid to allow a passenger to dive in with the boat under power.

I certainly see some fault with the victim, but if she was served alcohol on the boat, then the percentage for which she's held accountable drops rapidly. I would also say the fact he is a bar owner and his profession as fighting DUI's could very much work against him.

Which brings us to where the alcohol came from. If it came from the bar, then add some more trouble. Means he was serving her as bar owner, an extension of the bar. Not the case if he bought it at retail somewhere.

Sad they couldn't find her arm. Painful to think about. However, I did work with a young girl who lost most of an arm and she adapted incredibly well.

The guy screwed up on many levels.

But for the anti-alcohol crowd.....similar accidents do occur regularly to the sober.

Was alcohol a factor in this accident? Probably, but that is what investigations are for.

psneeld said:

The guy screwed up on many levels.

But for the anti-alcohol crowd.....similar accidents do occur regularly to the sober.
.

Click to expand...

But more frequently and far too often to the intoxicated.

We'll likely conclude and agree that poor judgement on the part of more than one person took place. Whether that judgement was caused by alcohol impairment, people will probably be arguing for the duration with no way to absolutely know. And the legal answer may not be the same as the world famous court of public opinion.

Any stats on the intoxicated accidents?

When I worked in Wash, DC.....many accident statistics were included in alcohol related even if the operator was 100 % sober....just if any occupants were.

For all we know no matter how drunk he was...chances are good that he was texting which phone related accidents are overtaking or have already surpassed alcohol.

Let's ban all distracted boating which should include chartplotters too!

Now that I have ridiculous out of the way...let the investigators do their jobs...from my experience...TF is a lousy jury...look at our anchor record.

psneeld said:

Let's ban all distracted boating
Now that I have ridiculous out of the way...let the investigators do their jobs...from my experience...TF is a lousy jury...look at our anchor record.

Click to expand...

Wifey B: Ooohh....and female distractions....if I recall there was such on the Concordia. And you'd make us cover up more....no no no no

Oh TF resolves anchors, each in their own mind. TF juries always hung. (That was decidedly not intended as a pun so don't even go there. Strictly legal term). Frankly, I'm sort of amazed juries agree on a verdict as often as they do.

Seriously just for a moment though, there can really be no argument that he blew a 0.9 four hours later. So, by law, had too much to drink to drive.

No argument there...at least the last sentence...but there isn't enough facts in that article to conclude alcohol played a part in the actual accident.

Just sticking to the facts.....as I understand them.