Diver Death in Cayman

[ScubaSteve]

It really is sad because there was so much potential. Even if we could only clearly distinguish the roles of a DM in the various parts of the world and situations...because that is something that there is OBVIOUSLY some confusion on.

It seems that almost without exception, 95% of the posts on this thread are either trying to lay blame or trying to cover arse. - I guess that is why the Mod demoted this to the bowels of the boat, an insightful move obviously.

Sorry PF but I am going to call bull**** on this point. Your statement "I can't tell you now how I know...." just lends credibility to the fact that you do not know. I do not care who said what, you DO NOT have the ability to answer that question....nobody but the deceased can answer that AND even they will not know for certain until the situation presented itself. So, why not cut the crap of pretending you have factual information when you do not. If you cannot or will not cite your source and allow verification, then stop presenting anything as factual.

The answer is yes. Cannot tell you how I know this with certainty now but no one would have gone to 100 ft with just a DG.

 

[pilot fish]

I respectfully disagree with you, we cannot say with any certainty that the person would have acted differently.

Get in contact with the OP and ask that question?

The (experienced) diver who was diving as the buddy to his fiancé' was obviously concerned and made (6 or 7) objections to the DM/DG, based on her "closeness" to these folk, I am sure (but it is speculation) that he must have been aware of her concerns.

Let us assume, arguendo, that statement is true, OK? Shouldn't those protestations on the boat have been another red flag to this guide/DM to perhaps pick a safer spot for the brand new diver? Since when does the newbie diver dictate an advanced dive sit for a dive ?

I am also guessing it was their first ever dive with the Diving Dancer (or was it the Dancing Diver?) and yet, amidst apparent public objections, by the experienced diver(s) in the boat, regarding the dive parameters (100') declared by the DM/DG, he (Brendan) went anyway.

It seems to me you are cutting this DG?DM ? much too much slack. Since the guide was SUPPOSED to be more experienced, don't you think that SHOULD have been clear to him that that site was not for that new diver? The deceased went on that dive, wanted to go on that dive, because he thought the guide was a DM, AND TRAINED as such, and was his buddy. The OP testified that fact to the police and stated it on this board, that the DG?DM and deceased were dive buddies. I believe her, do you?

(Before anyone thinks I am blaming the diver, I am not - I think he was a victim of a sequence of failed mechanisms, starting out with the training he received. I am also a PADI Vacation product, but my job requires that I rely on my judgement not that of others, but that is another story.)

Best Regards
Richard

Sorry, Richard, it is worse than that. The victim, that is what he was, VICTIM, was mislead as to the status and duties of the, person the Dive Op put in charerge of that fatal boat.

 

[Web Monkey]

The focus on names and job descriptions for those guys on the boat and in the water who tell you what to do - as if there were even a small likelihood that such definitions would be understood or acknowledged by more than a small percentage of divers, much less that such consensus has risen to where it would be dispositive legally - seems to be getting it backwards to me. Context, expertise, and actions (release forms too) seem likelier to define their legal responsibilities, not some wished-for circumscription of their job description.

On any of the Caribbean "lead boat dives" I've been on, I definitely got the impression that if I just waved goodbye and said "My buddy and I will be back in an hour or so", there would be a lot of problems and an angry boat guy when I returned.

If nothing else, it would be great if this incident eliminated guided boat dives unless a buddy pair specifically hired a DM for the dive that was clearly responsible only to them.

Terry

 

[pilot fish]

I beleive her, but I'm not really sure the distinction between DM/DG really matters (especially since I'm almost certain that the "DM" was at least an OWI)

If a reasonable person got on a boat with an employee of the dive shop, and the guy helped with equipment, gave a dive briefing, got everybody into the water, and then said "follow me" and lead the dive, a reasonable person would assume that the guy was some sort of professional with the skills and credentials to lead a dive and would be using an appropriate level of professional judgement.

THAT is the point. That was obviously not the case. EVEN a dive guide should have been trained NOT to take a brand new diver to a site 100 ft deep with many hundreds of feet below him. Had this Guide, as he is NOW referred to, seen the bouyancy skills of the new diver? NO! This is gross neglegence on the part of the dive guide /DM, and by extension, the Dive op, since he is thier paid agent.

That's because if the right person was leading the dive it would have been over a 60' hard bottom. Or maybe a 40' hard bottom.

This disaster really pisses me off because even a minimal amount of judgement by any of the professionals involved would have prevented a death. It's not rocket science. A guy with two dives doesn't belong on an essentially bottomless wall, and when you have a boat full of mixed skill levels, you go to the place that's safe for everybody, not the place that's cool for somebody.

Terry

Amen to that. This man should not have died, would not have died, if the DG?DM? and Dive Op perormed as they were required to do.

 

[pilot fish]

It really is sad because there was so much potential. Even if we could only clearly distinguish the roles of a DM in the various parts of the world and situations...because that is something that there is OBVIOUSLY some confusion on.

I think there are a few things that are clear, according to the Op, A- he was presented as Dive Master but is now being called just a Dive Guide. It it up to you to determine if that consitutes fraud? To me it does. DM has one function, DG has another. Agreed? B- as stared by OP, victim was dive buddy to DM?DG, NOT the teen.



]quote]Sorry PF but I am going to call bull**** on this point. Your statement "I can't tell you now how I know...." just lends credibility to the fact that you do not know. I do not care who said what, you DO NOT have the ability to answer that question....nobody but the deceased can answer that AND even they will not know for certain until the situation presented itself. So, why not cut the crap of pretending you have factual information when you do not. If you cannot or will not cite your source and allow verification, then stop presenting anything as factual.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I hear ya. I might say the same thing to you if roles were reversed. I've been asked not to say anything other than what as already been stated on this board. As tempting as it is to answer you, I really should not. Let us just say that I know someone that knows someone that was on that boat. Yes, that is just hearsay. Sorry Steve but parties involved do not want to tip their hand to the responsible party in what is going to be a lawsuit.

 

[Riger]

Seriously Pilot Fish, you need to read the context of my post as a whole. You are taking small pieces out of context and simply arguing against them individually in order to support your original argument.

The whole context of my posting does not even begin to address the DM/DG responsibilities, but rather weather or not the diver would have reacted differently in any way if the DM had declared himself a DG.

Whilst you appear to be attempting to make a legal case against an individual that you have never met, some of us are pondering the matter of how much dependance a novice diver has on any person of diving authority, DI/DM/DG, whatever...

Do you know if the OP will also attempt to establish the credibility of Brendan's Instructor? Do you for a fact know what the OP herself may have said to the victim that may have persuaded him not to do the 100' dive or perhaps persuaded him that it was OK to do the 100' dive whilst she looked after his partner? The truth is that we do not know what exactly happened out there on that boat. I tell you what though, everyone who thinks that they may get a finger pointed at them is probably wondering how they could get the finger pointed elsewhere.

Best Regards
Richard

 

[pilot fish]

Seriously Pilot Fish, you need to read the context of my post as a whole. You are taking small pieces out of context and simply arguing against them individually in order to support your original argument.

The whole context of my posting does not even begin to address the DM/DG responsibilities, but rather weather or not the diver would have reacted differently in any way if the DM had declared himself a DG.

I sense your frustration. Welcome to my world I have asked a number of questions that you have ignored. You are now asking your questions, while ignoring mine.

Whilst you appear to be attempting to make a legal case against an individual that you have never met, some of us are pondering the matter of how much dependance a novice diver has on any person of diving authority, DI/DM/DG, whatever...

Do you know if the OP will also attempt to establish the credibility of Brendan's Instructor? Do you for a fact know what the OP herself may have said to the victim that may have persuaded him not to do the 100' dive or perhaps persuaded him that it was OK to do the 100' dive whilst she looked after his partner? The truth is that we do not know what exactly happened out there on that boat. I tell you what though, everyone who thinks that they may get a finger pointed at them is probably wondering how they could get the finger pointed elsewhere.

Best Regards
Richard

Just reread what Op has stated.

 

[ScubaSteve]

I think you are finally understanding the questins I've been asking.

No PF, this has been asked many times by many others. [-]You are claiming that you can read the mind of a dead OW diver.[/-]

Edit

so I'll just say, I assume.

Much better.

 

[pilot fish]

I had no clue what the difference was either, or that such a title existed. I think it's a term that is used ex post facto a fatality to exonerate dive ops.

I believe it does have a significant bearing on this case , DG v. DM, because the victim and his girlfriend might not have dove with just a DG, let alone go to 100 ft. I can't say how I know this fact, so I'll just say, I assume.

I can't imagine that any new or vacation diver would have a clue what the difference is between DM and DG (I didn't until just now when I looked it up on the 2009 SSI Training Standards). From what I can see, it's not actually easily searchable on Google yet.

In any case, it shouldn't have any bearing here unless the shop was doing something really bizarre. All the "DMs" I've ever met in the Caribbean were either instructors or instructor candidates.

Terry

 

[pilot fish]

You are now asking the questions I have been asking for pages. Hope you have better luck than I did getting an answer.

I'm not reading anyone's mind, especially this poor victim. God bless him. I was told certain things and I can't say what that is. yeah, I know, it sounds like horse hockey. I just have to absorb those comments.

No PF, this has been asked many times by many others. You are claiming that you can read the mind of a dead OW diver.