Diver in California Sues for Being Left

[Robert Phillips]

Just because this diver did not die he was left behind he may have been dead. I think he was talking about the procedure if that did happen and how that just does not matter because he would have been left behind even if he was dead. Its not the divers fault is the point.
The fact also that he did not swim for the rig does not matter maybe he wanted to conserve on energy who knows what he was thinking under the stress of doing the bob in a huge ocean alone. He probaly just watched open water and did not want to attract G/W with his kicking. That is his right of self defence.

I can't find anywhere in any posts made by anyone where it was said that it was okay that he was left behind. That is not what is being discussed. We are talking about where the majority of the responsibility lies.
By the way, Open Water had not been released when this incident occured. Not that it matters.
If it were me and I allowed things to go as wrong as Dan did up to that point. I would have started swimming while deploying my SMB, instead of "waiting for the boat to come get me."

 

[Night Diver]

However, I disagree with the idea that assigning fault to the captain won't influence changes to procedures and behaviors on charter boats. It may be just the opposite. I'm willing to bet that most charter boat captains who learned of this incident spent some thought on their own procedures for checking in and checking out divers. If there is a judgment against the captain, probably even more will do so.
QUOTE]

You may be right. I certainly can't prove you wrong. I suspect though that a lot of us sympathize to a certain extent with the captain, whose responsibility is a legal construct rather than a clear failure to do something right. It's just a fact that boat captains and divers rely heavily, usually exclusively, on the DM to supervise the offloading and onloading (for lackof a better term) of divers. The problem I see with relying on the imposition of legal liability on the captain to bring about change is that his options are limited, and most will translate into some detriment to divers. Longer travel times (while the captain personally double-checks diver count), higher costs (if he hires an additional DM to handle the count), etc.

And it only addresses some of the concerns. My own opinion runs heavily against the DM, but I understand some of the reasoning of those who blame the diver for drifting so far in the first place -- it certainly contributed to the series of events. Given the fog and the fact that he drifted out of visual range, we can't know for sure that if the DM did his job properly, the diver could have been recovered at the scene, although of course that is what should have happened.

This is a tough one, I suppose that's why it's been beat to death on the boards and will now be mashed to pulp in the court.

 

[wolf eel]

[Robert Phillips I can't find anywhere in any posts made by anyone where it was said that it was okay that he was left behind. That is not what is being discussed. We are talking about where the majority of the responsibility lies.]

Thats the point it was not OK to leave him any where. His actions after the fact are mute. I have no idea why he acted the way he did. But the point is how the DM acted on role call and why the boat left is the point. Even if he had not done anything and had a heart attack at the bottom in the first three seconds he still was left behind.
Only because he was not properly check in or out of the boat thats the only reason he was left behind.

 

[ironpaw2000]

Here's why you're wrong: Imagine seventeen things all go wrong at once causing the diver to lose buoyancy and be unable to correct it or do anything but sink like a stone. Now he's dead on the bottom of the ocean -- and the DM checks him back on board and the boat leaves without him.

Is he at fault for not surfacing? How? The end result is the same.

IF he is in the situation that he cannot correct any of the hypothetical situations you have discussed, then in my opinion he should not be in the water. He was, if I remember correctly diving in water that is deeper than recreational limits, so he should be more than aware of the potential hazards, as per your hypothetical scenario. However, it did not come to that and he is alive.

He should also, as I have said, be taking some of the responsibility for not following what I beleive is a standard procedure. Even if he could see the bubbles of his so called buddies, it would be prudent to suggest that he should have surfaced and stayed near the rig.

IMHO he should be looking at himself, his diving skills and his confidence in his abilities.

I do not solely blame him for the FUBAR. The crew does have responsibilities for the divers they have on their boat. The DM should have had a better procedure for checking in the divers at the end of the first dive.

Finally, and probably just as importantly, no matter what level of skill you are at, would you want to dive with the buddies he had been teamed up with, after what we have learned???

Graham Wardell PADI SDI DM

 

[wolf eel]

[ironpaw2000
He should also, as I have said, be taking some of the responsibility for not following what I beleive is a standard procedure. Even if he could see the bubbles of his so called buddies, it would be prudent to suggest that he should have surfaced and stayed near the rig.]

Maybe he was afraid of using his energy in the current.

[IMHO he should be looking at himself, his diving skills and his confidence in his abilities.]

so should the DM

[I do not solely blame him for the FUBAR.]

It would be more of a snafu

.[The DM should have had a better procedure for checking in the divers at the end of the first dive.]

All it takes is a eye to eye yes or no.

[Finally, and probably just as importantly, no matter what level of skill you are at, would you want to dive with the buddies he had been teamed up with, after what we have learned???]

That falls in why we love to solo dive.

 

[ironpaw2000]

. That falls in why we love to solo dive.

This is true, and so do I, but it would seem to me that this was not an option for our lost diver...

Graham Wardell PADI SDI DM

 

[wolf eel]

[ironpaw2000 This is true, and so do I, but it would seem to me that this was not an option for our lost diver...

Graham Wardell PADI SDI DM]

It was a comment about the same thing kinda where others where talking about solo certs due to the vacation boat dive buddy system and how it in its self could get you killed. It was ment as a joke.
Cheers

 

[CHUD]

IF he is in the situation that he cannot correct any of the hypothetical situations you have discussed, then in my opinion he should not be in the water.

You know, it's baffling to me how people who seem otherwise reasonable and intelligent can consistently miss and/or ignore the point sometimes. Here's my last attempt to illuminate my position. If this doesn't get through, then I'll just stifle.

A department store mannequin is thrown overboard and checked out along with real live divers, despite the fact that it is A) not human, B) cannot swim, and C) is not certified. When all divers come back on board, the DM checks them all in ... and also checks in the mannequin, which is currently drifting 100 yards to port because nobody hauled it back in. Captain lifts anchor, moves to the 2nd dive location, DM checks everyone back into the water ... including the mannequin, currently drifting about 3 miles east.

If you can assign responsibility to the mannequin for this chain of events, then I give up.

 

[jbd]

A department store mannequin is thrown overboard and checked out along with real live divers, despite the fact that it is A) not human, B) cannot swim, and C) is not certified. When all divers come back on board, the DM checks them all in ... and also checks in the mannequin, which is currently drifting 100 yards to port because nobody hauled it back in. Captain lifts anchor, moves to the 2nd dive location, DM checks everyone back into the water ... including the mannequin, currently drifting about 3 miles east.

If you can assign responsibility to the mannequin for this chain of events, then I give up.

Seems like mannequins shouldn't be diving If there is a correlation between Mr. Carlock's diving skills and a mannequin, then so be it.

Although I do think that the DM should be removed from the list of active DM's as well as bear the majority of the financial burden.

 

[pilot fish]

Seems like mannequins shouldn't be diving If there is a correlation between Mr. Carlock's diving skills and a mannequin, then so be it.

Although I do think that the DM should be removed from the list of active DM's as well as bear the majority of the financial burden.

You're right Jim, but as you might know, they go after the deep pocket and that would be the owner who hired the DM and Capt.