yes Redshift
Malta Extradition
- Thread starter stephen.martin
- Start date
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
I have dived this site a few times before-
you enter through an inland sea, basically a weakness in the rocks has opened a crack 10ish metres wide and as such a small bay has formed where the sea has entered. You swim through and hug the reef wall on your left. The slope goes down to about 40m then plateaus down to 60m. As you go left you eventually come to the blue hole where you enter it through an arch and come up and exit through the water.
It is a very popular tourist attraction for both divers and non divers.
I cannot see how he is being held responsible at all in all honesty if the facts have been presented correctly here. BSAC is a wierd club environment and they may have him through capacity as being the highest capacity in the group as if it was a sanctioned club dive I think they have to have some chain of accountability. I have dived with BSAC divers on charters and they always have someone on the side with a clipboard doing the accounting procedures. This could be why as the highest in command he did not look after them properly? In that he should have called the dive with the conditions deteriorating which they can do there as its open to the med!
you enter through an inland sea, basically a weakness in the rocks has opened a crack 10ish metres wide and as such a small bay has formed where the sea has entered. You swim through and hug the reef wall on your left. The slope goes down to about 40m then plateaus down to 60m. As you go left you eventually come to the blue hole where you enter it through an arch and come up and exit through the water.
It is a very popular tourist attraction for both divers and non divers.
I cannot see how he is being held responsible at all in all honesty if the facts have been presented correctly here. BSAC is a wierd club environment and they may have him through capacity as being the highest capacity in the group as if it was a sanctioned club dive I think they have to have some chain of accountability. I have dived with BSAC divers on charters and they always have someone on the side with a clipboard doing the accounting procedures. This could be why as the highest in command he did not look after them properly? In that he should have called the dive with the conditions deteriorating which they can do there as its open to the med!
OP
stephen.martin
Registered
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 1
I had always been told that the BSAC insurance had some sever limitations, and as a result have always maintained my own privately, having just looked at their website insurance details I can see why Stephen is getting no joy from BSAC.
The club insurance is third party only for CIVIL liability for compensation, loss or damage, and specifically excludes any criminal acts. So whether BSAC wants to help or not, the insurance is only valid for compensation claims, and provides no cover for criminal liability or legal defence against a criminal charge. The fine print is not on the website, but I would also not be surprised if it only applied to BSAC club dives. For a dive to be classed as a club dive the dive plan has to have been checked and agreed by the club diving officer, who checks the planned dive is suitable for the level and qualifications of the divers involved and that there are suitable buddy pairs and so on in place.
Club dives also have to have things like a dive manager, surface cover and so on, hence often seeing someone recording air, times in and out etc. when a group of BSAC divers are diving together. Nothing stops a BSAC diver just jumping in like anyone else, and most BSAC divers I know often do, but if they do it is not a sanctioned club dive or according to club rules, so potentially BSAC club third party insurance would not be valid.
I do feel sorry for the trauma of the situation Stephen found himself in, and for the subsequent action being taken, but sometimes things have to take their course.
Once the European Arrest warrant was legally sworn out and presented there is nothing any EU country can legally do except comply, all EU countries agree to this process, and all will return the accused to the home jurisdiction where the warrant was issued, and not seek to prosecute in their own country, or frustrate the legal process.
Justice, and the right to a fair trial is one of the so called "pillars of EU law" and all EU countries have to comply with the standards set out in the EU Directives dealing with justice.
Incidentally people have referred to Turkey joining the EU, if they did they would have to implement all the pillars of EU law the same as every other member state as a condition of membership, and they would not get membership if they did not do so, so they would either have to accept the Eu requirements and ways, or remain outside of the EU.
I would also say I am a bit suspicious about the reported coroners outcome. I can understand one diver with immersion pulmonary oedema, and the second with a condition brought on by the stress of the rescue, perhaps a heart attack, or drowning etc. but two cases of IPO, especially after one diver had seemingly safely reached the surface, but later drifted off, that doesn't seem right surely?
Anyhow, whatever the reasons, good luck Stephen, an unenviable situation to be in - Phil.
The club insurance is third party only for CIVIL liability for compensation, loss or damage, and specifically excludes any criminal acts. So whether BSAC wants to help or not, the insurance is only valid for compensation claims, and provides no cover for criminal liability or legal defence against a criminal charge. The fine print is not on the website, but I would also not be surprised if it only applied to BSAC club dives. For a dive to be classed as a club dive the dive plan has to have been checked and agreed by the club diving officer, who checks the planned dive is suitable for the level and qualifications of the divers involved and that there are suitable buddy pairs and so on in place.
Club dives also have to have things like a dive manager, surface cover and so on, hence often seeing someone recording air, times in and out etc. when a group of BSAC divers are diving together. Nothing stops a BSAC diver just jumping in like anyone else, and most BSAC divers I know often do, but if they do it is not a sanctioned club dive or according to club rules, so potentially BSAC club third party insurance would not be valid.
I do feel sorry for the trauma of the situation Stephen found himself in, and for the subsequent action being taken, but sometimes things have to take their course.
Once the European Arrest warrant was legally sworn out and presented there is nothing any EU country can legally do except comply, all EU countries agree to this process, and all will return the accused to the home jurisdiction where the warrant was issued, and not seek to prosecute in their own country, or frustrate the legal process.
Justice, and the right to a fair trial is one of the so called "pillars of EU law" and all EU countries have to comply with the standards set out in the EU Directives dealing with justice.
Incidentally people have referred to Turkey joining the EU, if they did they would have to implement all the pillars of EU law the same as every other member state as a condition of membership, and they would not get membership if they did not do so, so they would either have to accept the Eu requirements and ways, or remain outside of the EU.
I would also say I am a bit suspicious about the reported coroners outcome. I can understand one diver with immersion pulmonary oedema, and the second with a condition brought on by the stress of the rescue, perhaps a heart attack, or drowning etc. but two cases of IPO, especially after one diver had seemingly safely reached the surface, but later drifted off, that doesn't seem right surely?
Anyhow, whatever the reasons, good luck Stephen, an unenviable situation to be in - Phil.
Last edited:
smooboy
Registered
@Stephen.martin-
I am very sorry for what you are going through. It sounds like the Maltese government agency responsible for this is both ignorant and run by lunatics. And you are a victim of red tape bureaucracy on the UK side. A collision of poor government decisions and you are caught in the middle with life altering consequences.
The biggest travesty here seems to me to be the behavior of the BSAC as regards Stephen. If you have been a long time contributing member of a major organization dedicated to the sport that is now at the center of a political clusterf***k, it is not unreasonable to expect them to have your back. In fact, it seems completely unreasonable for them to abandon you during a scuba related crisis arising from an incident that involved several of their members.
Does anyone here know how to start an online petition to the BSAC to get them to reinstate Stephen as a member and actually be supportive and possibly intervene on his behalf?
I am very sorry for what you are going through. It sounds like the Maltese government agency responsible for this is both ignorant and run by lunatics. And you are a victim of red tape bureaucracy on the UK side. A collision of poor government decisions and you are caught in the middle with life altering consequences.
The biggest travesty here seems to me to be the behavior of the BSAC as regards Stephen. If you have been a long time contributing member of a major organization dedicated to the sport that is now at the center of a political clusterf***k, it is not unreasonable to expect them to have your back. In fact, it seems completely unreasonable for them to abandon you during a scuba related crisis arising from an incident that involved several of their members.
Does anyone here know how to start an online petition to the BSAC to get them to reinstate Stephen as a member and actually be supportive and possibly intervene on his behalf?
I want to issue a caution here.
First, I don't know Stephen from Adam, and I don't know anything about this case that is not in this thread. The case against BSAC's actions seems to be a good one--almost too good, in fact.
When I was getting my license to be a school administrator, we spent an entire class on the dangers of stepping out in support of good causes without a full investigation. We were given some pretty horrible case studies of instances in which that support came back to bite the supporters.
Just last year we had a raging ScubaBoard discussion about a similar case involving PADI's failure to support an instructor accused of wrong doing in a student's death. The discussion started with "facts" and people venting their outrage at PADI for their terrible actions in regard to the poor, blameless instructor. PADI was not talking, because they do not normally talk publicly in such actions. But the outrage against them grew and grew and grew until they were forced to make a public statement about their actions. Eventually we learned that MOST of the "facts" we had originally were wrong, and we learned that PADI's actions were in fact quite reasonable given the true facts in the case. Once it became clear that PADI's actions were justified, the people who had been making the most virulent attacks suddenly had a hard time justifying those positions.
As I said, I don't know the details of the case, and BSAC's failure to support this instructor seems to be highly suspect. Why would they do something that seems so clearly wrong? When I see something that seems to defy common sense, my reflex reaction is that there might be more going on than I know about. Before I engage in a campaign of this sort, I would like to be more certain that I am fighting for the right cause. I don't like to find myself having to live down big "Ooopsies" in my decision making.
My first impulse then is to get an explanation from BSAC as to why they are doing what they did. Most agencies never publish their reasoning on such cases unless it becomes absolutely necessary, as it did with PADI. I would like to hear their side of the story first and then make a decision about my level of support. Since I am not associated with BSAC in any way, I am by myself in no position to do this. I would think it would require a large, united effort or an effort by people in BSAC leadership to make this happen.
smooboy
Registered
@boulderjohn-
Thank you for your well thought out and well written word of caution. The only facts I have are the one's from this thread and from the media accounts, which are notoriously suspect. However, as you pointed out here, there is a catch 22. It seems likely that the only way that the BSAC will provide a public explanation of their decision making in this case is if there is considerable outside pressure for them to do so, as in the PADI case you mentioned. And someone needs to apply that pressure or we will never know if they are an organization making good decisions that support all of their members or if they are in some way corrupt and abusing a member.
I would like to revise my request to :
Does anyone know how to start a petition or otherwise apply pressure on the BSAC to make a public statement about their decision making in this case and why they felt it was appropriate to block Stephen the way they did?
Last edited:
Stephen issued a statement on FB last week, clarifying he had been getting support from BSAC. In addition BSAC have issued a statement, to BSAC members, detailing what has transpired (limited as there is a Court case involved). And the situation in relation to our Third-Party Liability insurance.
Stephen's membership of BSAC has remained valid throughout.
---------- Post added August 12th, 2015 at 08:15 AM ----------
Now its been posted in the wild.
---
BSAC would like to reassure its members that it has provided its full support to Stephen Martin, a BSAC member who is currently facing potential extradition to Malta in relation to a criminal charge for the involuntary homicide of two people in June 2014. This is a traumatic situation for Stephen but it is an ongoing legal matter and we are prevented from commenting further on these charges.
BSAC attended the UK inquest held in February 2015. The first time BSAC was made aware that Stephen was facing criminal charges in Malta was when he contacted us on July 10th 2015. We immediately offered our support – and continue to do so. Our insurers were informed of the development in the incident and are dealing with this but it is inappropriate to discuss an individual case with anyone other than the individual concerned.
BSAC is continuing to pursue any avenue that could resolve this matter as quickly and positively as possible. We are currently in touch with key officials in Malta regarding this incident. We remain in direct contact with Stephen during this incredibly difficult time and we will continue to offer him whatever support we can.
We would like to reiterate that two people lost their lives in this tragic incident, one was a member of BSAC and one was a non-member and we should be respectful to all those involved.
In the meantime BSAC would like to advise its members and clubs that if you are looking at organising diving holidays abroad, but especially to Malta or Gozo, always ensure you are aware of local regulations, your paperwork and risk assessments are in place and consider diving with a local dive centre and dive guide.
We would also like to reassure BSAC members that they are covered for Third-Party liability under the current 2015/16 BSAC policy. Details of the cover are available here www.bsac.com/insurance.
For full details of the policy wording or further clarification please contact Wendy Meadows on 0151 350 6218.
---
From BSAC HQ.
Last edited:
Jeremy.Coster
New
Hi, I've only just realized the full length of the comments on this forum re this incident (I'm new to scuba board). I am the other diver who was involved in this tragic incident. The account you have heard from Steve is completely accurate. Steve was not acting in an instructor capacity, we are all qualified divers, we all signed disclaimers and were all responsible for ourselves. (But obviously used a buddy system) The weather and conditions were checked but changed while we were underwater. I don't want to go through every detail of what happened on this forum but what I can categorically confirm is that Steve bears no responsibility for this. The only reason this case is happening is because there was a closed, secret inquest held in Malta where none of the witnesses could give statements and the full truth was not heard. It is outrageous. It certainly is not the case that a full attempt to uncover the truth happened up to now. We are where we are because there was a deliberate effort to block the truth which can be demonstrated by the Maltese authorities refusal to give any Information about the Inquest to the witnesses, family of the deceased or uk coroner despite repeatedly being asked. The only information presented to the court described a version of events which doesn't correlate with the true events as they happened. The flawed narrative presented to the court appears to be a attempt to find a way to blame someone and certainly not an attempt to find the truth. In the meantime nothing has been done to prevent a similar tragedy occurring at the same spot.
The whole thing stinks.
Jeremy Coster
The whole thing stinks.
Jeremy Coster
Thank you Jeremy for the comment. This backs me telling earlier in this post that I do not understand why the UK authorities allow this mascarade to go on. yes they are bilateral treathies but if an inquiry was done in the UK and if the case seems to be manipulated by the maltese authorities, I do not get it.
The same for the lack of answer from Wendy Meadows. Yes a "public" statement was issued, but that does not excuse her from not answering my personnal email to her.
As you said, the whole thing stinks.
The same for the lack of answer from Wendy Meadows. Yes a "public" statement was issued, but that does not excuse her from not answering my personnal email to her.
As you said, the whole thing stinks.
Similar threads
