Sasquatch
Contributor
Maybe it was discussed earlier in the thread but the ship's captain suddenly resigning bears no relevence to the deaths?
Coast Guard Cutter Healy Deaths
- Thread starter Doubles
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
- Status
The ship's captain was relieved due to "lack of confidence" up the chain of command. Doesn't necessarily mean anything - it is common practice to relieve the captain after a particularly unpleasant incident. Whether it's the captain's fault or not, it's always the captain's fault. If the ship/crew does good and wonderful things the captain can bask in glory, even if the crew accomplished things in spite of the captain's efforts. When bad things happen the captain takes the hit, even if the bad things were done in contravention to the captain's orders and efforts. In other words, the relief of the captain doesn't mean anything other than Naval traditions are alive and well.Sasquatch:
Rick
As we know the media often do not get the facts completely straight as is due in part to a lack of education on the subject and public beliefs. Having been involved in several military Board of Inquiries (BOI's) I do not see that the CG will be any different. The military have their ways of conducting their investigations which are far different than you may have seen on the "JAG or NCIS" TV programs.
This is a tragic accident having cost the lives of two valuable members of our society. The CG is not up to putting their personnel into hazardous situations without following a S& P protocol having safety as the formost mindset. When things go wrong they will review it to the Nth degree. It is best to ignor the "stories and sensationaliasm of the media". In time they will even get the facts correct but only after a full conducted investigation by the CG and an official disclosure of findings. The families of the members will have knowledge of these findings as may be permitted by the CG and the public will only find out then following this disclosure. In the end the changes that need to be made will be made after a full review of the facts and recommendations. Until then stop speculating and let the processs take place. To the families they have are prayers. Do not harp on the misquotes of the media. The BOI will get the answers.
This is a tragic accident having cost the lives of two valuable members of our society. The CG is not up to putting their personnel into hazardous situations without following a S& P protocol having safety as the formost mindset. When things go wrong they will review it to the Nth degree. It is best to ignor the "stories and sensationaliasm of the media". In time they will even get the facts correct but only after a full conducted investigation by the CG and an official disclosure of findings. The families of the members will have knowledge of these findings as may be permitted by the CG and the public will only find out then following this disclosure. In the end the changes that need to be made will be made after a full review of the facts and recommendations. Until then stop speculating and let the processs take place. To the families they have are prayers. Do not harp on the misquotes of the media. The BOI will get the answers.
Sorry about the speculating. Just trying to make some sense of what was released. It's a liberty I have not being in a position where it would affect anyone negatively (i.e media). Just trying to have some intelligent discussion really.
chasanova
Registered
Not being experienced with either coroner's reports or militaryinvestigations, I pose a question for those of you who have experience.
Is it possible for the "cause of death" to be listed as a [artivular thing, but that things is only the last and worst thing to happen in what had become an unavoiable chain of events. e.g. after failing to get in shape and treay diabetes, a person has a heart attack and so cause of death is listed as cardoac arrest and not diabetes. I guess another example wh9ouls be the old saw that it is nt the fall that kills, but rather the sudden stop.
From this point of view, is it likely that the "barotrauma" could have been been the result of actions taken after things were already fatally out of control?
Is it possible for the "cause of death" to be listed as a [artivular thing, but that things is only the last and worst thing to happen in what had become an unavoiable chain of events. e.g. after failing to get in shape and treay diabetes, a person has a heart attack and so cause of death is listed as cardoac arrest and not diabetes. I guess another example wh9ouls be the old saw that it is nt the fall that kills, but rather the sudden stop.
From this point of view, is it likely that the "barotrauma" could have been been the result of actions taken after things were already fatally out of control?
Tigerman
Contributor
The most common cause of divorce is marriage.
The most common cause of death is birth.
It all depends on how far you want to backtrack events really..
Generally tho, its the coroners job to decide what was a factor in a specific event. If having diabetes is related to a heart attack, the coroners report should say something like "cardiac arrest triggered by diabetes". If its a murder case and the victim has diabetes, the diabetes is rather irrelevant and "blunt weapon trauma" for example would be the cause of death. If the victim was the one picking a fight, one could argue that "pissing off the 7 foot, 500 lbs maniac could be the cause of death, but thats not for the coroner to decide. The coroner only analyze the body and what happened to it..
The most common cause of death is birth.
It all depends on how far you want to backtrack events really..
Generally tho, its the coroners job to decide what was a factor in a specific event. If having diabetes is related to a heart attack, the coroners report should say something like "cardiac arrest triggered by diabetes". If its a murder case and the victim has diabetes, the diabetes is rather irrelevant and "blunt weapon trauma" for example would be the cause of death. If the victim was the one picking a fight, one could argue that "pissing off the 7 foot, 500 lbs maniac could be the cause of death, but thats not for the coroner to decide. The coroner only analyze the body and what happened to it..
tomirock
New
Tigerman:
Tigerman, on a personal and completely dive-unrelated note, your post is hilarious! I do understand that you are making a point about a few different things, but the way you said it was genius.
This style of communicating is near and dear to my heart...as it is my MO.
Thanks again...you brightened my day.
Tomirock
DiverInAk
Contributor
We'll get the "word" today and you can read about it in your local press I'm sure.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=73249
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=73249
Rainer
Contributor
As Rick said, heads role when problems occur. Justified or not, this report doesn't make clear, since no explanation is still given for what actually occured that lead to these tragic deaths.
DiverInAk
Contributor
I think they're justified. More will follow shortly as the press brief is finishing up. These stories are already filing. http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2790767&page=1
And this one summarizes some of the realities - Incident raises questions about future of diving missions
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/01/nhealysideweb070112/
And lastly - this one pretty well lays it out. While these are answers, and I know the realities of the circumstances and operations surrounding this, these answers are increadibly hard to swallow as they leave a bitter taste and make my gut tie itself into knots.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/01/ndeadlydiveweb070112/
And this one summarizes some of the realities - Incident raises questions about future of diving missions
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/01/nhealysideweb070112/
And lastly - this one pretty well lays it out. While these are answers, and I know the realities of the circumstances and operations surrounding this, these answers are increadibly hard to swallow as they leave a bitter taste and make my gut tie itself into knots.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/01/ndeadlydiveweb070112/
- Status
Similar threads
