Instructor sentenced after diver's death

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Let me put it this way. If your buddy were sinking, flapping his arms & needing help, would you just watch him, just swim up to the surface & let him drown?
That’s not what happened, for some reason the couple panicked and shot for the surface, the guide tried to help but dumped to much air and all three fell deep in a tangle, the woman got clear and headed for the surface, why did she not help she was the buddy? The guide then got clear and got to the surface, this was not a training dive, they were divers and were responsible for there own buoyancy.
 
That’s not what happened, for some reason the couple panicked and shot for the surface, the guide tried to help but dumped to much air and all three fell deep in a tangle, the woman got clear and headed for the surface, why did she not help she was the buddy? The guide then got clear and got to the surface, this was not a training dive, they were divers and were responsible for there own buoyancy.

The facts are:
1. The woman ascent & alive.
2. The man sunk.
3. The guide witnessed the man was in trouble, sinking & swam to the surface.
4. The guide is an instructor, familiar with the dive site, trained to handle such situation.
5. The man drown at 36m depth.
6. The court disagrees with you.
 
Last edited:
The facts are:
1. The woman ascent & alive.
2. The man sunk.
3. The guide witnessed the man was in trouble, sinking & swam to the surface.
4. The guide is an instructor, familiar with the dive site, trained to handle such situation.
5. The man drown at 36m depth.
6. The court disagrees with you.
That’s not what the original post says,
 
That’s not what the original post says,

You need to keep on reading the rest of the posts. At post #31, on page 4, @leadduck who dove there 2 weeks before the accident mentions “....The guide was sentenced because he left the victim at 36m. According to the expert witness the victim was overweighted but the guide could have easily inflated the victim's BC; there was no technical problem, the guide just didn't do it and went up alone.

Although they had paid the guide for the event, I don't think that it was relevant for this particular case. Any diver deserting his buddy in need for no reason would've been investigated for involuntary manslaughter. It's because team members agree to help each other and the victim accepted an elevated risk because of that agreement....”
 
You need to keep on reading the rest of the posts. At post #31, on page 4, @leadduck who dove there 2 weeks before the accident mentions “....The guide was sentenced because he left the victim at 36m. According to the expert witness the victim was overweighted but the guide could have easily inflated the victim's BC; there was no technical problem, the guide just didn't do it and went up alone.

Although they had paid the guide for the event, I don't think that it was relevant for this particular case. Any diver deserting his buddy in need for no reason would've been investigated for involuntary manslaughter. It's because team members agree to help each other and the victim accepted an elevated risk because of that agreement....”
The woman was the buddy and she wasn’t prosecuted and she was first to leave. The guide stayed and only left when he felt his life was in danger. If the diver was overweight that’s his fault and if the guide could inflate the bc why couldn’t the diver
 
The woman was the buddy and she wasn’t prosecuted and she was first to leave. The guide stayed and only left when he felt his life was in danger. If the diver was overweight that’s his fault and if the guide could inflate the bc why couldn’t the diver

The trial wasn’t about her. It’s about the guide. From the same post 31: “...The qualification and experience of the defendant raises the bar on how much you can expect from him, and an instructor will be held to higher standards than a fresh OWD...”
 
The woman was the buddy and she wasn’t prosecuted and she was first to leave. The guide stayed and only left when he felt his life was in danger. If the diver was overweight that’s his fault and if the guide could inflate the bc why couldn’t the diver
You are entitled to your opinion of the way things should be in the world. You should be aware, though, that almost no professional dive operations and courts agree with you. (I said "almost" because I don't know everyone--I am pretty sure it is actually unanimous.) If you get a job for a professional dive operation, they will expect you to take appropriate steps when leading the dive to secure the safety of their customers. If you don't do that, a fatality ensues, and you end up in court, it will be the court's beliefs that prevail, not yours.
 
Last edited:
I found this info interesting:
Cold shock response - Wikipedia

“Cold shock response is the physiological response of organisms to sudden cold, especially cold water.

In humans, cold shock response is perhaps the most common cause of death from immersion in very cold water,[1] such as by falling through thin ice. The immediate shock of the cold causes involuntary inhalation, which if underwater can result in drowning. The cold water can also cause heart attack due to vasoconstriction;[2] the heart has to work harder to pump the same volume of blood throughout the body. For people with heart disease, this additional workload can cause the heart to go into arrest. Inhalation of water (and thus drowning) may result from hyperventilation. Some people are much better able to survive swimming in very cold water due to body or mental conditioning.[1]

Hypothermia from exposure to cold water is not as sudden as is often believed. A person who survives the initial minute of trauma (after falling into icy water), can survive for at least thirty minutes provided they don't drown. However, the ability to perform useful work (for example to save oneself) declines substantially after ten minutes (as the body protectively cuts off blood flow to "non-essential" muscles).[1]

It could happen to the victim to the point of passing out or just got muscle lock & couldn’t even be able to push the power inflation button. The guide just saw him sinking to the abyss & left the scene.
 
Last edited:
You are entitled to your opinion of the way things should be in the world. You should be aware, though, that almost no professional dive operations and courts agree with you. ( said "almost" because I don't know everyone--I am pretty sure it is actually unanimous.) If you get a job for a professional dive operation, they will expect you to take appropriate steps when leading the dive and securing the safety of their customers. If you don't do that, a fatality ensues, and you end up in court, it will be the court's beliefs that prevail, not yours.
It’s the so called “professional dive operations” that are selling the lie that if people dive with them they don’t have to worry about taking responsibility for their own safety and they will keep them safe and that is the reason that man drowned.
 
So it's 100% of the dive operations in the world that are causing the problem? I wonder why none of them see the wisdom of adopting your philosophy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan

Back
Top Bottom