Hiding your certification level

[Walter]

As a lawyer, I can tell you that I'd have a field day with a defendant who was hiding his true cert level.

So tell us how that would work.

 

[japan-diver]

I'd also be very interested in hearing how his explanation of that?

 

[H2O Gal]

H2O gal, both are the issue. Usually on a liveaboard, I am shooting photographs. I will not be being a goog buddy. They could be eaten by the Kraken, and I would not notice if I am setting up a Macro shot.

DiverDoug, thanks for your explanation--it makes perfect sense! I had to laugh when I read this.... my husband and "buddy" is also a photographer and I've often thought I'd be Kraken meat and he'd never notice, or it would make a great shot! Recently we were doing a liveaboard in the Bahamas, and I got the feeling something was watching me....I turned around to look for him, and there was a big reef shark swimming right behind me. Guess what my "buddy" was doing? Taking a picture of us, of course! :crazyeye:

 

[ItsBruce]

So tell us how that would work.

I'd use it as the foundation for two concepts. First, by hiding your true cert level, you are not being truthful and if you are not truthful to the dive op, then you won't be truthful in a lawsuit where you have something to lose. Second, you hid your true cert level because you didn't want to shoulder your responsibility as a diver of that level and in fact didn't shoulder it.

One of the ideas for a lines of questioning was that if I asked you your age and you gave me a number that was less than your real, current age, that would not be true, even though you had once been that age and had advanced past it. So how is it different if I ask you your cert level and you tell me something that you have already advanced past:

Q. What is your age?
A. 52.
Q. If you said 42, that would not be true, right?
A. <insert answer>
Q. It would not be true even though you were once 42, right?
A. <insert answer>
Q. At a minimum, saying 42 because you were once 42, would be misleading?
A. <insert answer>
Q. In fact, it would be intentionally misleading?
A. <insert answer>
Q. So, how is saying you are AOW, when you are actually an instructor any different?

The beauty of this is that the answers are not really relevant, though a very well prepared witness could probably come up with answers that might downplay the issue.

As far as avoiding responsibility, I'd go after the reasons one might have for not disclosing their true cert level:

Q. Why didn't you disclose that you were an instructor?
A. I did not want to get buddied up with an inexperienced diver because it would take away from my enjoyment of the dive.
Q. Did you think that if the op knew you were an instructor you'd be buddied up with an inexperienced diver?
A. I was concerned about it.
Q. Do you think it is more or less likely that you'd be buddied up with an inexperienced diver if the op knew you were an experienced diver compared to an inexperienced one?
A. I was concerned about it.
Q. What would you have done if the op had said: "You two dive together because you are both inexperienced?"
A. I'd have asked for a more experienced buddy.
Q. You'd have said: "I want an experienced buddy even though I'm inexperienced"? Or would you have said "I'm really an instructor and want to dive with someone my level"?
A. <insert answer>
Q. So, if you had initially disclosed your cert level, and you'd been buddied with an inexperienced diver why couldn't you have said the you want someone your own level?
A <insert answer>
Q. Isn't it true that you did not disclose your true level because you were worried that if something went wrong, people might be looking at you?
A. <insert answer>
Q. In your mind, you thought that as an instructor you had supervision duties beyond what an AOW diver would have?
A. <insert answer>
Q. You were on vacation and had paid a lot of money for this dive?
A. Yes.
Q. And, you didn't want to waste it by having to be responsible for anyone -- isn't that why you lied about your cert level?

It is important to remember that even of the lawyer is not a diver, it is an easy matter for a lawyer with a significant case to engage the services of experts (some of whom are found on SB) to help them figure out their cases and angles of attack.

I hope this helps somewhat.

 

[Walter]

Q. What is your age?
A. 53.
Q. If you said 42, that would not be true, right?
A. That would not be true.
Q. It would not be true even though you were once 42, right?
A. It would not be true.
Q. At a minimum, saying 42 because you were once 42, would be misleading?
A. It would be misleading.
Q. In fact, it would be intentionally misleading?
A. It would be intentionally misleading.
Q. So, how is saying you are AOW, when you are actually an instructor any different?
A. Because aging is not the same as education. While I was once 42, I ceased to be 42 when I became 43. As I've continued to age, I've gotten farther and farther from being 42. I am a high school graduate. I have a diploma to show I am a high school graduate. I also have a 4 year college degree. Having the college degree does not mean I am no longer a high school graduate. In this case, I have a Silver Advanced certification, not AOW, I also happen to have an instructor certification. I have other certifications as well. You seem to be making the case one certification negates all previous certifications. It doesn't work that way.
Q. Why didn't you disclose that you were an instructor?
A. No one asked if I were an instructor. They asked to see a c-card, I showed them one.
Q. Did you think that if the op knew you were an instructor you'd be buddied up with an inexperienced diver?
A. I never gave it any thought, but it wouldn't matter, I like diving with inexperienced divers.
Q. Do you think it is more or less likely that you'd be buddied up with an inexperienced diver if the op knew you were an experienced diver compared to an inexperienced one?
A. I never gave it any thought.
Q. What would you have done if the op had said: "You two dive together because you are both inexperienced?"
A. I would have discussed the dive with my buddy and agrred upon a dive plan.
Q. You'd have said: "I want an experienced buddy even though I'm inexperienced"? Or would you have said "I'm really an instructor and want to dive with someone my level"?
A. Neither.
Q. So, if you had initially disclosed your cert level, and you'd been buddied with an inexperienced diver why couldn't you have said the you want someone your own level?
A I can always accept or refuse any buddy.
Q. Isn't it true that you did not disclose your true level because you were worried that if something went wrong, people might be looking at you?
A. I was never asked about my certification level. I was asked to show a c-card.
Q. In your mind, you thought that as an instructor you had supervision duties beyond what an AOW diver would have?
A. An instructor has supervision duties only when teaching.
Q. You were on vacation and had paid a lot of money for this dive?
A. Yes.
Q. And, you didn't want to waste it by having to be responsible for anyone -- isn't that why you lied about your cert level?
A. I did not lie about my cert level.

 

[Zieg]

Man, I would love to sit in on this court session.

 

[ItsBruce]

Walter

As I expected, you handled the questions very well. Needless to say, your answers would have forced me to adjust my questions somewhat and I might have gone in a slightly different direction at points.

Could I crush YOU? Probably not. Nor could I crush many of the others on this board. But, I could have given the jury a lot to think about and there are any number of DMs and instructors who would not have fared as well as you.

I guess that the next question in my examination would be: "So, why didn't you show your instructor's card?"

There is no need to answer. The point is that I think I could have gotten mileage out of the fact someone showed a c-card with less than their top cert.

BTW: In a day or 2, go back and read the examination with your answers and ask yourself what you would think of your answers if you were a juror in a case in which the family of a dead diver was suing.

 

[Walter]

Q So, why didn't you show your instructor's card?
A I wasn't teaching.

In a day or 2, go back and read the examination with your answers and ask yourself what you would think of your answers if you were a juror in a case in which the family of a dead diver was suing.

I can tell you now that I would think the lawyer is trying to make a case out of nothing. An inexperienced diver died who wasn't diving with the instructor being questioned. They simply happened to be diving off the same boat. There's no reason for this person to be in court. You've shown nothing except he was asked to show a c-card and he produced one.

 

[adurso]

Q So, why didn't you show your instructor's card?
A I wasn't teaching.



I can tell you now that I would think the lawyer is trying to make a case out of nothing. An inexperienced diver died who wasn't diving with the instructor being questioned. They simply happened to be diving off the same boat. There's no reason for this person to be in court. You've shown nothing except he was asked to show a c-card and he produced one.

What Bruce has not mentioned is that he would not allow you the luxury of explanation......

Lawyers are very careful to ask only questions they know the answers to, they orchestrate the testimony as best they can.

They couch questions for a "yes/no" answer as best they can.

A witness who attempts an explanation becomes "hostile" or "argumentative" and god forbid you sound like you are arguing law....because they ask for your law license....

 

[Teamcasa]

The relevancy of your Cert level would have come out in the original investigation or subsequent depositions anyway.