Conception Captain Found Guilty of Manslaughter

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

The fire-alert system would be insanely cheap, from a business-cost perspective. You might want something better than these off-the-shelf systems, but even still, one of these systems would have been better than nothing.


The sprinkler system would be a little more expensive, but it's absolutely insane they didn't have the integrated alert system.

I'd be curious about what it was like on the boat, from people who have been on it.

I've been hammering on this point over-and-over. While the captain certainly seems to have a strong case for neglect, in terms of whose actions can be directly traced to the deaths, only the owner could have installed the escape hatches, fire-alert, and fire-safety systems. Even the presence of safety-drill, negligent crew, and inadequate crew can be pointed back at the owner.

The captain's negligence, I'd say was the lack of safety procedures and briefings. The patrols probably wouldn't have caught the fire. The captain couldn't have put out the fire by the time it was discovered.

That's my read as well. Maybe he's a coward, etc, but once the crew discovers the fire, there's little they can do to save the passengers. Maybe if they were better trained, drilled, etc, and there was a patrol there might have been a chance. (Though I think only an actual fire-alert and escape-route could have actually saved the passengers).

A close friend and dive-buddy, had 2 close friends die on that boat. It still hits him hard.

Same with many scuba safety and redundancy procedures and training.

I'm sure some people would say that's a good thing.

I think the investments which could easily be recovered are more (a) escape-hatches (b) an integrated fire-alert system, (c) more fire-extinguishers (d) safety procedures and briefings for passengers.

I wouldn't be surprised if one of the reasons (d) safety briefings never happened, is because they (including the owner) knew in case of a fire or sinking, the lower-bunk area was a death-trap.

Fire-suppression systems or using different materials would be far more expensive
I think ive posted too many replies in a short while lol but I just saw this comment from you. To answer your question i was on the Conception recently before this. It was a very fun trip. Well run. Boylan the captain was EXTREMELY likeable. You met him you would like the guy.

Below decks at night I did not feel claustrophobic or in danger. I had no idea of the real threat. Our diveshop employees thought they had roving watches. A friend of mine an employee of the diveshop said so and thought so.

He was mistaken obviously and no fault to him as its a standard practice and hes been on dive boat liveaboards for 30 years or so.

And I was I guess mistaken in my trust of Captain Boylan in that I thought he was protecting us. Again really likeable guy you would love to have a beer with. But obviously he was not worried about fire danger it seems.

As for the dives themselves you go out in groups of two or three divers with no oversight. and none needed honestly. Zero chance of being swept out to sea etc on channel island dives.

Overall it was a liveaboard experience I was looking to do again soon . Within about a year to 18 months later I planned to do the trip again on the Conception. Before I could it sank of course.
 
Has the sentencing been delayed? It was scheduled for February?
Thanks.
 

"The captain of the dive boat Conception, which caught fire near Santa Cruz Island on Labor Day 2019, was sentenced Thursday to four years behind bars for gross negligence in the deaths of all 34 people on board.

Jerry Boylan, 70, was sentenced in downtown Los Angeles for the single charged count of misconduct or neglect of ship officer, a pre-Civil War law also known as seaman's manslaughter. The defense unsuccessfully argued for a five-year probationary sentence, with three years to be served under house arrest. ..."
 
Lithium-ion battery was also a factor.

1. They are dangerous, and unpredictable.
2. lots of people using them on board for flashlights ect. increasing the chances of malfunction.
3. Bad/old boat electrical system.
 
Very unfortunate, just doin it just like everybody else was doin it and just plain ran out of luck
no, he wasn't "just doing it like everyone else was doing it"

Not every master ignores their legal requirements, not even in the liveaboard world. The problem is that the masters that do follow all legal requirements and ensure they operate as professional mariners go out of business competing with operations that save money by running in a negligent manner.


This sentence is short, very short. I would suggest that he didn't run out of luck for him at all, the victims and their family have once again.
Oh, and not every master is the first to jump overboard and abandon his passengers and crew to own devices, in fact most don't. Dude is a coward as well.
 
Jesus. I mean, theoretically it may have been enough time to hose down the rear escape exit which is over a persons bunk. With enough water maybe they could have gotten out. The crew couldnt have gotten the hoses pointed at the stairway as its so steep you almost climb out and that is at the front of galley opposite the back of ship where the hoses were likely at.
I wish it were that simple. Enough water would have sunk Conception sooner and drowned most passengers, even if allowed some to escape (still a better outcome but horrid).

The lack of a rover, smoke alarms, invest in fire suppression systems that have become cheaper and better versus legacy stuff and being grandfathered and a craven lack of what we called "GAFF" (give a f%$k factor) in the navy on behalf of the Captain and owner in ensuring the crew followed their certificate, training etc with safety and ethics as the primary driver and then after that cost was paid putting a margin on. Instead they choose to do what they did and be cheap, the passengers and crew that died (and their families and friends in grief)got to pay for that.

Sadly, the USCG and DOT regulations, even as not followed, still enabled this in many ways.
 
As described in the other thread, these patrols are usually once per hour. Therefore, a patrol might have caught the fire anywhere between 0-to-60 minutes after it started. Lets say the patrol spots the fire 25 minutes after it started. Is that enough time to save everyone? Maybe. It's not reliable enough, because if I'm one of those passengers, I don't want a 50% (perhaps more, perhaps less) chance of getting out, I want a 99.9% chance of getting out.
Nope, any professional mariner knows that roving patrols are constant. In fact those that do roving patrols learn quickly that roving means roving if caught not doing so on a professional run vessel.

A vessel of Conceptions size a roving watch would have caught in less than 10 mins even if they had been unusually diligent and spent time doing stuff like checking the chain locker, shaft glands on every pass (that would not be common in a vessel that size. On Conception a roving watch would have been rotating between an upper deck walk around, check anchor and position, check bridge, a walk thru the main area, a look into the berthing area if not walk it in full, a look into engine room and repeat. All of that is less than 10 mins on a vessel that size
 
Lithium-ion battery was also a factor.

1. They are dangerous, and unpredictable.
2. lots of people using them on board for flashlights ect. increasing the chances of malfunction.
3. Bad/old boat electrical system.

Was it? Or was that just collective speculation? I thought the USCG report was inconclusive as to source of ignition.

No doubt a scenario can be imagined where the batteries started the fire, but there's no certainty of that to my knowledge.
 

Back
Top Bottom