"Drifting Dan" Carlock wins $1.68 million after being left at sea

[doctormike]

nowhere does it say a single sunburn will cause cancer. if you read your quote it says a sun exposure pattern of brief intense exposure is associated with melanoma.

i am all for sun protection but to claim one day of sun exposure as the cause of your skin cancer and then to use this as a basis for claiming damages in a law suit is just laughable.

Actually, two of the three citations do refer to a single episode:


"a history of severe sunburn at any time in life"

"The sun exposure pattern believed to result in melanoma is that of brief, intense exposure — a blistering sunburn"

I will give you that the second quote could be read to be referring to more than one sunburns. And while my other response to you should better address the question of cause and effect, I think that you may be missing the point.

EVERY malignancy starts with a single mutation in a single cell at a single time resulting in a line of cells that divides without the normal controls on growth. So just because you don't get lung cancer from the first cigarette you smoke, that has more to do with the statistics of cell injury than anything else.

So the bottom line is that of I could never in a court of law testify that without a doubt this sunburn resulted in that melanoma - no one could. That is an impossible bar to pass. But the law doesn't require that sort of proof. It just requires demonstration of probable proximate cause. And for that discussion, you will need to hear from the legal moderator..

 

[MaxBottomtime]

6. MaxBottomtime says: “None of these problems would have occurred [sic] if he had followed even one procedure correctly.” Maybe, but not following them does not mean he was negligent. Why is it negligent to do a safety stop? Why is it negligent to spend 1 minute looking for a missing buddy? It is fine to say, after the fact, that you should surface immediately if you lose a buddy. But, at the time, unless there is a specific instruction to the contrary or an agreement to the contrary, isn’t the training to search for 1 minute and then surface safely?

He actually spent 18 minutes underwater, not one. I would not think it prudent to spend an additional three minutes on a safety stop when he knew before he dropped that there was a current and fog. I agree that the DM should bear most of the blame, but Dan should not be rewarded without a reduction for his own role.

 

[iztok]

He actually spent 18 minutes underwater, not one. I would not think it prudent to spend an additional three minutes on a safety stop when he knew before he dropped that there was a current and fog. I agree that the DM should bear most of the blame, but Dan should not be rewarded without a reduction for his own role.

At what depth did he deploy his SMB? Before his ascent from 100+ft or at his safety stop or?

 

[Ken Kurtis]

Earlier in the thread, someone had commented something to the effect that the ink on the check mark for Dan returning from the first dive was not as dry as the check marks for the other divers.

I don't know who made that comment but it's wrong.

I've seen the actual slate used. The marks are in pencil, not pen. No ink.

Also the slate in question was sequestered by Ray when Dan was reported missing and then locked in the lawayer's office until recently. Not sure how anyone could be doing a test/observation of this nature on the slate.

- Ken

 

[Ken Kurtis]

depending on the vessel, the captain most likely is required to have at least one actual approved crew member on boat whilst the vessel is underway (even if not making way)...

Don't forget that SoCal boats (and specifically the Sundiver) may be larger than what many of you are used to thinking about. Generally in SoCal, the larger boats are 55-80 feet long, and carry as passenger load of up to 35 divers. They're not the same as many tpyical resort-style dive boats. I think Sundiver specifically is 54 feet and carries 25-28 divers.

That all being said, there ARE crew members in addition to the cpatian. But they're not DMs. By the same token, the DMs are not crew. They're part of the passenger load from the charterer.

- Ken

 

[Ken Kurtis]

At what depth did he deploy his SMB? Before his ascent from 100+ft or at his safety stop or?

By his testimony, it was after he had been on the surface for some unspecified amount of time.

- Ken

 

[mitsuguy]

Don't forget that SoCal boats (and specifically the Sundiver) may be larger than what many of you are used to thinking about. Generally in SoCal, the larger boats are 55-80 feet long, and carry as passenger load of up to 35 divers. They're not the same as many tpyical resort-style dive boats. I think Sundiver specifically is 54 feet and carries 25-28 divers.

That all being said, there ARE crew members in addition to the cpatian. But they're not DMs. By the same token, the DMs are not crew. They're part of the passenger load from the charterer.

- Ken

Yah, that was what I had assumed...

When my crew is on board, even though the DM's for the group may be doing roll call, mine are doing a secondary check... Even though they are DM's, they are not assuming that role, they are assuming the role of a deck hand, and I place them responsible for making sure everyone is aboard - IMO, you can never leave it up to someone who ultimately can't be blamed for anything, because they aren't really responsible for it...

As a captain myself (and responsible for up to 23 divers plus crew), its my opinion that this is where the problem lies - someone not working for the boat was put in a position that should be assumed by the boat crew... forgive me if there is something I have missed...

I originally wanted to side with being lenient to the captain, but, if the roll call was only done by "passengers," then this is unforgivable, IMO.

P.S. sounds like he was almost asking to get lost however, which should definitely go against his credibility... for all we know, he planned the whole thing...

last edit (I promise): the captain and crew could not have prevented him from getting away from the boat... although you can post lookouts, you can never expect full coverage of the entire ocean within visible range of the vessel... sounds like bad organization on the DM / divers part as well obviously which led to this issue to start... the captain and crew are guilty (IMO) of not noticing he was missing after everyone was back on the boat after the first dive.... as many people say that it was the DM's fault, well, had the DM noted it correctly it could have been avoided, but ultimate responsibility for at least noticing they had a missing diver falls to the captain and crew, and ultimately, the captain alone... he is definitely guilty of this... lots of things contributed, but it still falls to him...

 

[drbill]

Ken, thanks again for taking the time to post the facts of the case in detail. Looks like my understanding that he was diving in a three some was all in his (Dan's, not Ken's) mind since the DM and student he was reportedly diving with had stated they could not accept him as a buddy due to the teaching situation.

 

[drbill]

Mitsuguy, as Ken stated it is a fine legal point re: the DMs being in the employ of the boat charterer rather than the dive boat operator. Here in SoCal, as Ken pointed out, DMs are rarely in the water with divers unless divers arrange that in advance. Then additional DMs are usually added so topside coverage is intact.

This is quite different from the Caribbean dive boats I've dived from... and those in many other parts of the globe.

 

[drbill]

Actually, two of the three citations do refer to a single episode:


"a history of severe sunburn at any time in life"

"The sun exposure pattern believed to result in melanoma is that of brief, intense exposure — a blistering sunburn"

Yikes... I'm toast (as a long time lifeguard earlier in life).

So a single intense exposure can cause skin cancer. How long would it take from the time of exposure to manifest itself?