Death at Dutch Springs

[Tortuga68]

I must say that I completely agree with leadership urging people not discuss the incident while an investigation is being completed. Where I work, there are only two people who are authorized to discuss any sensitive matters relating to our business with the press/community. All other staff members are to simply pass on their contact info and make no comment

That might be valid if the "people" are staff

...I have no facts and don't pretend to. I offered up a "possible scenario" and was sure to indicate that's what it was as that is what the special rules of this forum dictate. I guess I fall under #1, but I don't see how that is unfortunate. I see that done all of the time in A&I

It's unfortunate for exactly that reason

 

[ams511]

This thread is beyond ridiculous.

I agree. I have dove Dutch before and unless the moon was exceptionally bright, I can't imagine anyone doing a night dive without a light. There is nothing to see at depth.

 

[DiverGirl1972]

When DD claimed thread had become beyond ridiculous, I’m certain he was not referring to fact that it was stated the victim did not have any lights on his person when found.

Regardless, this is the information that has been shared with me and that I believe to be accurate but is all 2nd/3rd hand:
1) On the date in question, the moon was two days past the new moon phase, which indicates there was no significant moonlight present on the night in question. This information was obtained from an online source.
2) The victim did not have any lights on his person when found. Any reasonably safe diver would have at least two lights. Even if one was unsecured, a second should have been present and secured somewhere on the victim’s person.
3) Contrary to what I initially believed to be the case with his air, his tank was completely empty at the time he was found in over 50 feet of water and the valve was fully open.
4) The victim was using a scooter and it was attached to his body when he was found. The victim was also wearing a dry suit.
5) The victim was found not far from the point of entry into the water, indicating that he likely did not make it far into the dive before the incident occurred. This is speculation on my part based upon the final resting location of the victim.
6) The buddy alleged that the victim quickly disappeared after entering the water. His buddy made a brief attempt to locate him underwater, but did not see him or any lights to indicate his position, so he continued his dive with other divers present. Don’t know whether this was an intentional or unintentional separation.
7) The buddy had made arrangements to dive with the victim relatively “last minute”…I believe via an online buddy finder service. They had no previous relationship prior to that night, so he did not know what was “normal” behavior for the victim.
8) Complete hearsay, but it was noted by other divers on the scene that the victim had a history of being somewhat disorganized in his pre-dive routine and/or likely to strike out and “do his own thing” without advanced discussion with his buddy. I have no personal knowledge of the victim’s dive practices, but perhaps someone else does.

Believe it, don’t believe it, it is of no concern to me. The only reason I read these threads are to learn and based upon the information that has been shared with me, I’ll come to my own conclusions and anyone else can come up with theirs or none at all.

 

[RJP]

Your post sure makes the buddy sound negligent. The victim won't care at this point, but for the buddy's sake you better hope your story is 100% accurate and supported by witnesses on the scene. Because you can be 100% certain that if there's any legal proceedings this thread will be found by the attorneys and that guy will be in for a long, expensive haul, over several years, that - even if he bears no responsibility in any way - will likely bankrupt that person, and destroy their family's future, their kids future, etc, etc. Glad you can be so cavalier about it. (I'd actually call it irresponsible.)

Oh yeah, those lawyers will want to speak with you, and your second and third-hand sources. With a screen name that contains what is probably your year of birth, your town, and a posting hisory that should be easy to piece enough info together, their investigators should have no problem tracking you down.

If I had posted that, I'd have trouble sleeping tonight... wondering if that post was a good idea. Did I potentially ruin some poor guy's life? Will lawyers really come looking for me? Will I get a phone call next week, next month, a year from now? Can they find me? Nah, right? How many female divers born in 1972, and diving actively since being certified in August of 2010, live in Lancaster Pa, who are Mustang enthusiasts and ride a motorcycle, who did their NAUI cavern certification course February, 2011 in High Springs and then went on their first liveaboard trip on the Belize Aggressor III. Must be hundreds of folks...

But that's just me. I'm sure you'll sleep fine.

(Believe it, don't believe, it is of no concern to me.)

 

[dumpsterDiver]

When DD claimed thread had become beyond ridiculous, I’m certain he was not referring to fact that it was stated the victim did not have any lights on his person when found.

Regardless, this is the information that has been shared with me and that I believe to be accurate but is all 2nd/3rd hand:
1) On the date in question, the moon was two days past the new moon phase, which indicates there was no significant moonlight present on the night in question. This information was obtained from an online source.
2) The victim did not have any lights on his person when found. Any reasonably safe diver would have at least two lights. Even if one was unsecured, a second should have been present and secured somewhere on the victim’s person.
3) Contrary to what I initially believed to be the case with his air, his tank was completely empty at the time he was found in over 50 feet of water and the valve was fully open.
4) The victim was using a scooter and it was attached to his body when he was found. The victim was also wearing a dry suit.
5) The victim was found not far from the point of entry into the water, indicating that he likely did not make it far into the dive before the incident occurred. This is speculation on my part based upon the final resting location of the victim.
6) The buddy alleged that the victim quickly disappeared after entering the water. His buddy made a brief attempt to locate him underwater, but did not see him or any lights to indicate his position, so he continued his dive with other divers present. Don’t know whether this was an intentional or unintentional separation.
7) The buddy had made arrangements to dive with the victim relatively “last minute”…I believe via an online buddy finder service. They had no previous relationship prior to that night, so he did not know what was “normal” behavior for the victim.
8) Complete hearsay, but it was noted by other divers on the scene that the victim had a history of being somewhat disorganized in his pre-dive routine and/or likely to strike out and “do his own thing” without advanced discussion with his buddy. I have no personal knowledge of the victim’s dive practices, but perhaps someone else does.

Believe it, don’t believe it, it is of no concern to me. The only reason I read these threads are to learn and based upon the information that has been shared with me, I’ll come to my own conclusions and anyone else can come up with theirs or none at all.

So the story changes a lot with some information.

But still, the time line needs to be defined in order to get an idea of what might have happened.

What time does (the third hand source) say they entered the water?

What time was the buddy separation, and depth might be nice too?

What is the light condition at those two times in the quarry at the depth where he was found?

Would it be insane to be getting in the water in near or total darkness with a scooter on a moonless night?

I have dove over 60 ft at night in clear water and could look up and see the moon and dive with zero lights (for fun), but a moonless night it would be very different.

 

[DiverGirl1972]

I’m not being cavalier about it. I would never be cavalier about the death of another and I find it irresponsible on your part to suggest it. As certified divers, we have to be responsible for our own actions. I fail to see how blame should be placed on the buddy. Sometimes, sh*t happens with bad consequences. That's why they call them accidents. God forbid, if I should die in a dive accident and my story finds its way to ScubaBoard, my demise will be likely be a direct result of my actions or inactions and I would want a robust discussion about what happened or may have happened so that others might learn.

 

[chillyinCanada]

RJP, the police already know who the buddy is and so do the other divers he stuck with. Ergo, if the family intends to follow up in the manner you've presented, it's unlikely to be on divergirl1972.

 

[TSandM]

I've only ever used scooters that sink. You do not want one floating away in the current. If it sinks, you drop it, grab the lobsters and then pick it up and go

The scooters we use are tow-behind and clip onto the diver's harness. You can let go of them and they float, generally up behind you. They are weighted to be slightly positive, but are massively negative if they flood. It usually takes a lift bag to get them back if they leak -- which is very rare.

We live in an insanely litigious society, and I suppose it's possible that the family of the dead diver might decide to sue anyone and everyone remotely attached to this story. And it's horrible to be named, because you have to hire an attorney and pay them, which is an awful experience in and of itself. But I think it would be very difficult to find any liability for the buddy, if there was no pre-dive discussion of what was expected behavior, and especially if this diver was known to hare off on his own.

One of the big problems with accident threads is that everyone is so terrified of contributing any information, either for their own protection or for the protection of someone else, that we never learn anything from them. Apart from the odd medical crisis, people don't just dive and die. We will never improve the general culture of safety of diving, if we don't pierce this veil of silence that falls over almost every fatality.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

So was it a floating scooter or a sinking scooter? I think some of the other more basic questions will be more useful to an analysis.

What's the time line?

 

[RJP]

RJP, the police already know who the buddy is and so do the other divers he stuck with. Ergo, if the family intends to follow up in the manner you've presented, it's unlikely to be on divergirl1972.

Yeah, because plaintiff's attorneys are usually a pretty easy going bunch.

(Been there, done that. Sat through the deposition... never got a tee-shirt, though.)


As as long as the story that the other diver told investigators is 100% in alignment with what's been posted here - and he and/or his lawyers don't say "well, there was confusion that night and that's not exactly what I meant/said...") shouldn't be a problem. But someone will probably want to check...