(5/01/05) Diver missing in Florida

[KrisB]

It is more common for people to not want to get involved these days. Over the years, there have been reports of beatings, rapes and assoults taking place with plenty of bystanders and no one helped the victim(s).

Not to mention legal issues -- not everywhere has a "Good Samaritan Law" to protect those helping from lawsuits. Those that do (and I think there is a federal law in Canada) seem to have a much higher incidence of good Samaritans.

Also, most people out on the water are not trained, or if trained not proficient in water rescue.

That's correct -- and most are also told that trying to help someone in the water (when it's beyond your training) is an easy way to make two victims out of one.

As far as I know there is no legal obligation for a lay person to initiate a rescue. Some people may feel a moral obligation to try but on the other hand some people may not feel that same moral obligation.

There is usually no legal obligation for the lay person. However, there is a often a legal obligation for those trained in rescue to perform it. For instance, if I was trained in some sort of First Aid (or First Responder), even if it is just Rescue Diver, and drive by an unattended accident scene on the highway without stopping, that can be considered a criminal act here (unless I can prove there was a threat to my own safety).

Depending on your view of universal morality, there could have been an obligation to help here -- if anyone was around to perform such assistance. I don't believe it has been established if there were any people other than the captain who would have been around and available to assist... and the captain likely had concerns about endangering more people if he attempted to assist.

 

[jbd]

(unless I can prove there was a threat to my own safety).

From my experience and training, an in water rescue always presents a threat to the safety of the rescuer.

 

[mempilot]

Everyone is pointing fingers again without knowing what actually took place. Tsh Tsh.

Wait for the real story to identify itself, and I think you will realize that there was more at play here than all of our speculation allows for.

 

[KrisB]

From my experience and training, an in water rescue always presents a threat to the safety of the rescuer.

I'm not disputing that -- I think the consideration is whether the risk/threat could be mitigated. A trained rescue diver should know the procedures to take to mitigate their risk and prevent another victim.

Again, the rescue could begin by simply throwing a line -- there may or may not be any reason for the rescuer to enter the water.

I don't recall if it was established that the boat was up-current or down-current from the buoy the victim was on... obviously that would have been significant in terms of the likelihood of a thrown object reaching them.

 

[Web Monkey]

Jumping in and swimming to a buoy in and of itself does not constitute a rescue. People on the boat most likely percieved a problem that was beyond their ability to handle.

Swimming out to the bouy, ditching his weights, inflating his BC and dragging him back to the boat would have been a good start.

I would expect that given the level of difficulty, everybody on that boat had to represent themselves as an experienced diver in order to go on the dive. So now that it's time to help, then they're all suddenly "beyond their ability"?

That might be the logical perspective, however, logic doesn't always prevail and how many on the boat had SMB's?

This wasn't an entry-level dive, I would hope almost all of them had one (or two) SMBs with them.

This thread has been a real eye opener. Any of the guys I dive with would have been willing and able to swim or drag themselves on the anchor line from a boat to the buoy if I were in trouble, and I would certainly do the same for any of them.

Now I understand why a lot of divers are reluctant to dive with strangers. That's really sad.

Terry

 

[mempilot]

You all assume that there were all these people just standing around watching this take place in slow motion and that he was out there on the buoy for sometime. Are you sure you all know what the real story is before you go condeming the boat's crew and other divers for not jumping in?

Weak guys. Really weak.

 

[Web Monkey]

You all assume that there were all these people just standing around watching this take place in slow motion and that he was out there on the buoy for sometime. Are you sure you all know what the real story is before you go condeming the boat's crew and other divers for not jumping in?

Nobody has posted any more facts, however this wasn't happening in a vacuum.

There was at least one boat on the surface, and given what I've seen of popular Florida dive sites, probably at least several.

The guy was in distress. Nobody has disputed this.

Nobody helped. Nobody has disputed this either.

Maybe there was nobody available on the surface. If not, there should have been. I have no idea specifically who was there, but yes, I'd say that anybody on the surface who had the skills to go on a 100+ foot dive on an unpredictable wreck should have had the skills to go give this poor guy a hand.

Terry

 

[Island Dog]

There have been alot of speculation and finger pointing the last couple of days here. Both are non-productive and could be harmful.

Here are some basic facts of this accident that may or may not have appeared on this discussion board before:

The seas were 3-5 feet, mostly rollers. There was a light to moderate current crossing the hull in generally a stern to bow direction. Visibility was good.

The victim was on a 6 pack boat with three other divers that he did not know prior to the dive. He was diving 30% enriched air with his own bc/reg.

The boat was tied up to the #5 ball which is attached to the hull at about 50ft just forward of midship. Those of you who have dived the wreck would may refer to is the "plaque" ball. There was another commercial boat on the #3 ball (attached to the hull at about 50ft 3/4 back toward the stern) when the dive started but they departed as the divers descended. Note that the #3 and #5 ball are are 100+ feet apart. There were no other commercial boats on the wreck.

The four divers explored the stern section of the ship together and were working their way back toward the #5 ball descent/ascent line. The victim unexplicablly opted to ascend the #3 ball descent/ascent line. The three other divers communicated to him that he was going up the wrong line and "asked if he was ok?" Hi signaled ok and continued up the line. They observed him about half the way up and then continued to the #5 line. They estimated that the victims max depth was 90ft or less.

Subsequent to that...the victim surfaced on the #3 ball and yelled for assistance. The only one on the surface was the captain who told him to inflate his bc, put his regulator in his mouth and hang on to the ball. Almost immediately the victim disappeared from the surface. The captain notified the USCG as he pulled off the #5 ball and drove to the #3 ball searching for the victim. Unable to locate him he reattached to the #5 ball, collected the other three divers and then continued searching the surface. The surface search continued for several hours by several boats and aircraft until the victims body was found near the stern of the wreck in 130 feet of water.

The victim still had his weights. His tank was empty when recovered but remember that it could have had air when he dropped from sight and experienced a free flowing regulator or the body could have laid on the a purge button. We will never know.

We may never know how a rescue trained diver could go from a contolled ascent in 30ft of water when last seen to an emergency on the surface, but to imply that the captain or other divers were negligent is simply wrong.

 

[H2Andy]

Island Dog, sounds like you have some very good information on this accident.

mind if i ask how you got it?

and i agree with you 100%: without the full facts, implying that ANYONE was
negligent here is simply wrong.

we simply don't have the full picture

 

[DiveGolfSki]

...We may never know how a rescue trained diver could go from a contolled ascent in 30ft of water when last seen to an emergency on the surface, but to imply that the captain or other divers were negligent is simply wrong.

Island Dog,

Thanks for the calm, collected, non-accusory post. I haven't been following this post but I'm amazed how it's diverged AND, more importantly, the recent shouda/couda/wouda analysis (particularly from VERY experienced instructors/divemasters).

Again, we should all take what we want from this incident. Implying or assigning blame isn't one of them. Some suggestions:

For Web Monkey, never go on a dive boat with strangers (???).
For KrisB, never go on a dive boat without a rescue diver/captain.
For Tom Winters, uhhh... lecture the captain on his responsibilities (jump in the water, leave the other divers,...)???

For the rest of us, inflate your BC on surfacing, carry a SMB, jon line (maybe), don't leave your buddies or signal ok when you're not, .... feel free to add more.