Conception trial begins

[Wookie]

So...who sees the fire on the CCTV?

EOOW

 

[rmorgan]

Is having a night watchman on a ship the law or just "best practice"?

According to the NTSB report, “NTSB investigators found that, prior to the accident, the Conception and other Truth Aquatics vessels were regularly operating in contravention of the regulations and the vessel's Certificate of Inspection, which required a roving patrol at night and while passengers were in their bunks to guard against, and give alarm in case of, a fire, man overboard, or other dangerous situation.”

 

[drrich2]

“These people were not a lost cause,” Faerstein said. “Smoke was coming in, but they still had a chance.”

I'm surprised there's not more follow up discussion about this statement. Is it true, conjecture, probably not true, etc...? I would think the loved ones of the deceased would've grabbed onto the claim, and it could be a key point for jurors, so the credibility of the claim is important. It's stated as a fact, not a possibility.

I think you argument amounts to: ‘Well, if I wasn’t drunk I might have not noticed the train anyhow. So my being drunk had nothing to do with the death of my passengers.’ We’ll see how compelling that is to the jury.

Indeed. I imagine the demands for presumption of innocence and proof to a standard beyond a reasonable doubt, when coupled with the opportunities to cite varied hypothetical possibilities (e.g.: a roving watch might not've caught it in time), may make it seem establishing guilt to that standard seem impractical and an alleged perpetrator almost unconvictable because how can you ever eliminate the very last reasonable doubt? Very frustrating when people are understandably upset and wanting what they see as justice.

It will be very interesting to see the precise reasoning behind a guilty verdict, should one come. Public reaction to a not guilty verdict will be outrage, should that come.

Edit: From that earlier post, this quote: "“He was the first to abandon the ship, the first to jump in the water,” Asst. U.S. Atty. Brian Faerstein told jurors in his closing argument."

So the person who made the assertion the people were still savable was an attorney, not a witness on the boat. Just figured I should make that clear in my post.

 

[boulderjohn]

I'm surprised there's not more follow up discussion about this statement. Is it true, conjecture, probably not true, etc...? I would think the loved ones of the deceased would've grabbed onto the claim, and it could be a key point for jurors, so the credibility of the claim is important. It's stated as a fact, not a possibility.

You may have missed this part of the article that Ken quoted in post #91:

Families of the Conception victims have filled the courtroom in downtown Los Angeles during the eight-day trial, the testimony punctuated by the sound of their stifled weeping. For the families, one of the hardest pieces of evidence to bear was the 24-second video taken from the iPhone of Patricia Ann Beitzinger, an Arizona woman who died on the boat.​

​

She took the video at 3:17 a.m., three minutes after Boylan’s mayday call. The video, played early in the trial and again Friday, shows the dark outlines of people trapped in the bunk room as the fire approaches. The voices are muffled and difficult to hear, but prosecutors supplied a transcript to jurors:​

“There’s got to be a way out...”​

“There’s got to be more extinguishers...”​

“We’re gonna die...”​

​

EDIT: To summarize, the passengers were alive and trapped when the captain abandoned ship and while the crew was running around, not knowing how to use the fire hoses.

 

[Hoyden]

You may have missed this part of the article that Ken quoted in post #91:

Families of the Conception victims have filled the courtroom in downtown Los Angeles during the eight-day trial, the testimony punctuated by the sound of their stifled weeping. For the families, one of the hardest pieces of evidence to bear was the 24-second video taken from the iPhone of Patricia Ann Beitzinger, an Arizona woman who died on the boat.​

​

She took the video at 3:17 a.m., three minutes after Boylan’s mayday call. The video, played early in the trial and again Friday, shows the dark outlines of people trapped in the bunk room as the fire approaches. The voices are muffled and difficult to hear, but prosecutors supplied a transcript to jurors:​

“There’s got to be a way out...”​

“There’s got to be more extinguishers...”​

“We’re gonna die...”​

​

EDIT: To summarize, the passengers were alive and trapped when the captain abandoned ship and while the crew was running around, not knowing how to use the fire hoses.

I cannot imagine how the families and loved ones of the victims (I hate that word, but it is absolutely correct in this circumstance) must have felt seeing/hearing that. I cannot imagine being told that there is no recourse against the owner. I can imagine what I would want to do...

 

[drrich2]

EDIT: To summarize, the passengers were alive and trapped when the captain abandoned ship and while the crew was running around, not knowing how to use the fire hoses.

Thanks. I saw it, but I didn't put it together was well as you have. One of the posts in this thread portrayed the situation as one where the captain had no practical choice but to jump when he did. The question remains, though...while the passengers were alive and trapped, were they savable at that point? If the crew had been trained via fire drills with that boat's equipment prior to the disaster, is it likely they could've saved any of the passengers, or not?

 

[Wookie]

Thanks. I saw it, but I didn't put it together was well as you have. One of the posts in this thread portrayed the situation as one where the captain had no practical choice but to jump when he did. The question remains, though...while the passengers were alive and trapped, were they savable at that point? If the crew had been trained via fire drills with that boat's equipment prior to the disaster, is it likely they could've saved any of the passengers, or not?

And that’s really what it comes down to, isn’t it?

Had the person responsible for following the regulations followed the regulations, would those 34 people have died?

 

[boulderjohn]

And that’s really what it comes down to, isn’t it?

Had the person responsible for following the regulations followed the regulations, would those 34 people have died?

And what if we decided that we cannot prove that following regulations would have saved these people? What if we decided that you have to be 100% sure (not 99%) sure that following the regulations would have saved them?

I submit that it is an unreachable standard, and it would be much like the analogy previously offered that you can excuse a drunk driving accident because you cannot prove that the accident wouldn't have happened if the driver were sober. If that is what we decide, it means there is no point in having the regulation, since the people responsible for following them will know they can never be prosecuted for not following them.

 

[boulderjohn]

I cannot imagine being told that there is no recourse against the owner.

Here is a troubling analogy.

A year or two ago I asked a question in the Instructor to Instructor forum. Every quarter PADI publishes the list of instructors who have been expelled from the organization for serious standard violations. I wanted to know why the overwhelming majority of expulsions are to Asian instructors.

I received an explanation in a direct message from someone apparently in the know. In Asia, many and perhaps most of the dive operations are not associated with any agency as an operation. They hire instructors who are certified by an agency, and that is how their instruction gets done. They then tell the instructors how they are to teach the classes, and those instructions include serious standards violations for the purpose of saving money. The instructor has to choose between insisting on following standards and being fired or violating standards and keeping their jobs.

When something goes wrong, it is the instructor who pays the price, both in being expelled from their agencies and/or being prosecuted. It was the instructor who taught the class who violated the standards, not the owner of the shop who required the violations as a condition of employment. The agency has no power over the dive operation because the dive operation is not affiliated with an agency.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

Interesting timing. From AOL this morning. Illustrates two things relevant to the Conception fire:​

(1) An exploding battery can start a serious fire,​

(2) Quick action can put the fire out before it spreads.​

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

Former 'American Idol' star Jimmy Levy's backpack exploded into a 'ball-- of fire' just as his JetBlue flight was about to take off from JFK​

LARA O'REILLY
Updated November 4, 2023 at 12:39 PM

Jimmy Levy appeared on the 2019 season of "American Idol."Eliza Morse/ABC via Getty Images

• Former 'American Idol' star Jimmy Levy's bag caught fire while his JetBlue flight sat at the gate.
• Flight crew quickly doused the flames with water and the plane was evacuated.
• Levy said he was told a portable battery inside his bag had caused the fire.

Former "American Idol" star Jimmy Levy said his carry-on backpack exploded into a "ball of fire" as he sat waiting for his JetBlue flight to take off from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, forcing an evacuation of the airplane.

JetBlue said the incident, which is still under investigation, was caused by an electronic device inside Levy's bag malfunctioning.

Levy said he suffered a minor burn to his thigh.

A video posted to Instagram by Levy, 25, shows flight attendants dousing the bag and the seating area with bottles of water to extinguish the flames while panicked passengers attempt to leave the plane.
"Right after falling asleep pre-takeoff on my flight back home to South Florida from New York, I was jolted awake by a sudden and terrifying wave of heat, seemingly shooting towards my face," Levy wrote in the Instagram post.

"I immediately opened my eyes and noticed my backpack, which was initially tucked underneath my seat, now in an exploding and floating ball of fire," he continued. "Acting quickly, I pushed it to the ground and began stomping on it frantically to prevent the blaze from spreading. With the help of the flight staff and water, the fire was contained."