Camera from stricken diver found?

[wreckedinri]

OK,

Lemee see if I got this right:

Someone finds a camera near a wreck, obviously lost there. By chance another diver met his end on the wreck last year, who was known to be using a video camera, and the conclusion is reached that it was his. Did that poor soul lose the camera? Was it recovered with him and his gear? Many videographers tether the unit to their rig.

It seems that the "Court of TSB" has the shmuck that brought the object up convicted of Grand Theft. Calling the Coast Guard? Hiring a PI?

Geez people, how about we default to the position that most of us would do the right thing.

Just one more thought; maybe the family would rather not be reminded of the day they received that dreadful call.

Be Safe All,
Capt. D

 

[dbg40]

OK,

Lemee see if I got this right:

Someone finds a camera near a wreck, obviously lost there. By chance another diver met his end on the wreck last year, who was known to be using a video camera, and the conclusion is reached that it was his. Did that poor soul lose the camera? Was it recovered with him and his gear? Many videographers tether the unit to their rig.

It seems that the "Court of TSB" has the shmuck that brought the object up convicted of Grand Theft. Calling the Coast Guard? Hiring a PI?

Geez people, how about we default to the position that most of us would do the right thing.

Just one more thought; maybe the family would rather not be reminded of the day they received that dreadful call.

Be Safe All,
Capt. D

Besides you,,no one has jumped to any conclusions. The camera was lost during the ascent, and rdopped off of the wreck. This camera was found, off the wreck. The camera found, matches the discription of the camera lost by the deceased diver. The growth on the camera is consistant with what one would expect to find on an object left in the waters for the same period of time. The conclusion reached, is that a responsible decent person, having been TOLD this on the boat, would have contacted the proper athourities, and left the camera with them. It is NOT a wreck relic, and has little if any value to anyone, save the people invoved with the accident. If it is found not to be the camera in question, then he would be intitled to have it back, to display in his garage, where it most likely sits now. And I have no idea how the family would feel, having this returned to them, but it is not his decision, nor yours. It should be given to the investigating officials to decide that. If it were a bag full of cash that was lost, do you think the family would be upset if it were returned to them? It may be junk to you, it may be a lost memory to them. Only they can make that determination. not us. I mistrust those with this attitude, they will decide what's best, if it means keeping somthing that dosent belong to them. It was the wrong thing to do.

 

[RIOceanographer]

It seems that the "Court of TSB" has the shmuck that brought the object up convicted of Grand Theft. Calling the Coast Guard? Hiring a PI?

Geez people, how about we default to the position that most of us would do the right thing.

For the record, in case anyone misunderstood me, I wasn't suggesting calling the Coast Guard to go after the guy that found it. I was suggesting calling them because:

1. They might know more about the fate of the victim's camera and whether this might be it.
2. They should know how to reach the victim's family so that someone could make the effort to return the camera to them.

That's all, I was not passing any judgments on the guy that found it. I was not on the boat, didn't see what happened with the camera and don't know the finder's intent or what he did with the camera afterward so I hardly have enough info to judge anyone.

I do, however, believe that if this is the camera it should be returned so I think the concerned individuals from the charter are justified in trying to gather more information.

 

[wreckedinri]

Besides you,,no one has jumped to any conclusions. The camera was lost during the ascent, and rdopped off of the wreck. This camera was found, off the wreck. The camera found, matches the discription of the camera lost by the deceased diver. The growth on the camera is consistant with what one would expect to find on an object left in the waters for the same period of time. The conclusion reached, is that a responsible decent person, having been TOLD this on the boat, would have contacted the proper athourities, and left the camera with them. It is NOT a wreck relic, and has little if any value to anyone, save the people invoved with the accident. If it is found not to be the camera in question, then he would be intitled to have it back, to display in his garage, where it most likely sits now. And I have no idea how the family would feel, having this returned to them, but it is not his decision, nor yours. It should be given to the investigating officials to decide that. If it were a bag full of cash that was lost, do you think the family would be upset if it were returned to them? It may be junk to you, it may be a lost memory to them. Only they can make that determination. not us. I mistrust those with this attitude, they will decide what's best, if it means keeping somthing that dosent belong to them. It was the wrong thing to do.

Dude,

You should chill a bit man. I didn't first mention PI's and the Coast Guard:huh: , so please don't accuse me of jumping to conclusions. I'm the last person to do that.

I guess if some want to get their shorts tied into a knot over someone finding something on a wreck . . .so be it.

Later all, enjoy the day!

Dennis

PS:I guess I can't get dgb40 interested in buying one of my old tool bags!

 

[dbg40]

Dude,

You should chill a bit man. I didn't first mention PI's and the Coast Guard:huh: , so please don't accuse me of jumping to conclusions. I'm the last person to do that.

I guess if some want to get their shorts tied into a knot over someone finding something on a wreck . . .so be it.

Later all, enjoy the day!

Dennis

PS:I guess I can't get dgb40 interested in buying one of my old tool bags!

Don't need a tool bag, I have plenty. over 30+ years I have pillaged more than my share of "stuff" from lots O wrecks. This falls under a completely different catagory alltogether. I shows no respect for another diver. I don't like it. But I guess that's the way divirs are going today. hooray for me, the hell with you.

 

[wreckedinri]

Talk about jumping to conclusions:

. . .a responsible decent person, having been TOLD this on the boat, would have contacted the proper athourities, . . .

Do you know he hasn't? Or that he is not a decent person?

. . . to display in his garage, where it most likely sits now. .

How do you know where it is? You stated that you do not even know who the person is.

. . .It may be junk to you, . . .

Do you know me? How do you know what I consider junk?

. . .over 30+ years I have pillaged more than my share of "stuff" from lots O wrecks. . . .

Pillaged . . . hmmm, funny how it's those that already have their "artifact" collection use that word:06:.

I sense much anger in your posts Grasshopper . . . Relax man, your SAC rate will improveeyebrow!

Enjoy the ride!
Dennis

 

[dbg40]

Im plenty relaxed, Funny how you just don't seem to get it. It's not wreck plunder. It's a personal posession. And maybe I know more than I wish to drag out in public. You seem to be the only one to defend a poor decision.

 

[wreckedinri]

. . . I do, however, believe that if this is the camera it should be returned . . .

RIO,

Of course, I agree, any thoughtful person would also agree. It's just that when one starts at the begining of the thread and reads through to where I jumped on the bandwagon - the guy that brought the thing up seems to be getting tarred and feathered!

I was trying to make the case for NOT jumping to conclusions before I was accused of jumping to conclusions:06:. If that makes any sense.

Guess I've got a silly naive faith in my fellow man.

Dennis

 

[ctmax]

RIO,

Of course, I agree, any thoughtful person would also agree. It's just that when one starts at the begining of the thread and reads through to where I jumped on the bandwagon - the guy that brought the thing up seems to be getting tarred and feathered!

I was trying to make the case for NOT jumping to conclusions before I was accused of jumping to conclusions:06:. If that makes any sense.

Guess I've got a silly naive faith in my fellow man.

Dennis

Dennis, First - The PI thing was an inside joke that I probably shouldn't have posted. Second - We can only hope that the person that took the camera will do the right thing. I wasn't there and don't know all the details. But if there were any question about the circumstances that were surrounding the camera, I would have left it with the captain and asked if the family didn't want it or the Coast Guard didn't need the camera, that he send it to me. I think that there is a big difference between taking a gauge off a wreck and taking something that may have recorded the last few moments of a diver's life.

 

[scuba66]

did you do the right thing and return your artifacts to the wrecks you pillaged? dont point fingers when you have already done something simliar. what of the people who were onm the wrecks when they went down? are the artifacts in that case not their families or decendants personal property? removing arficats off of wrecks deminishes them for future divers. you are just as bad as the guy keeping the camera maybe worse... those that live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.