Malta Extradition

[jbomb001]

BSAC has released a statement today wherein they will cover the diver's legal costs up to GBP 100,000. This is despite the fact that BSAC's insurance policy in force at the time does not cover defence of criminal charges. BSAC's new insurance policy going forward now does cover "criminal defence costs for manslaughter, corporate manslaughter and culpable homicide".

Good luck Steve. I hope this nightmare ends quickly. I am also sorry for the loss of your partner.


Full text of email received from BSAC today:

Definitely a step it the right direction . Wish you the best of luck sir.

Sent from my galaxy S5 Active.

 

[markmud]

Stephen.Martin,

I am sorry for your loss and the compounding of your grief by being criminally charged.

I am glad that BSAC has changed its position on helping you financially and morally.

I am glad that BSAC has changed its policies to include coverage that assists its members in situations like yours.

Any dive professional who does not have insurance coverage through the roof, should reassess their diving situation.

Ritchie Kohler was found not liable in civil suit, but had to spend thousands to defend himself. He lost many days of his life and probably many sleepless nights due to interrogatories, depositions, and the trial (defending himself). All because he called some people and asked if they wanted to go diving.

I assume that what I have read is true, and will follow BoulderJohns admonishment.

markm

 

[Freewillow]

Hi, can you give the link to Richie's case. I am interested. I am a DM myself but never professionally practiced. I wonder if to declare yourself as a DM on a dive boat is safe nowdays. Maybe we should claim a lower level of qualification in order to avoid potential trial in case something bad happens. Any vew on this?

 

[boulderjohn]

Hi, can you give the link to Richie's case. I am interested. I am a DM myself but never professionally practiced. I wonder if to declare yourself as a DM on a dive boat is safe nowdays. Maybe we should claim a lower level of qualification in order to avoid potential trial in case something bad happens. Any vew on this?

It's been debated often.

I used to have pretty firm views on the debate, but this case is so baffling that it is shaking those beliefs.

One side of the issue: there is the potential for liability (as observed here), and the potential that you might get stuck tending to weaker divers because your greater expertise can be put to good use to keep track of them.

The other side of the issue (traditionally): The idea that you can be held liable for something that happens to someone with whom you do not have any professional relationship is pretty much of a fantasy. It never actually happens. The same is true for being stuck with weaker divers. In fact, the opposite is true. Dive operators usually want to make sure that professionals are happy enough to return and recommend them to others, so you are far, far more likely to get perks by letting your status be known. That has definitely been true for me. I always given my professional status, and on most trips I have gotten some benefit, even if it is only being left to my own devices without someone watching me the whole dive, and I have never been asked to assume some task I did not want to do. In instabuddy situations, they have always tried to get me matched up with the best available divers, not the worst.

Changing times: This case (and some other recent ones) have jolted me on the liability issue. This just seems too astonishing to be true. My guess is that the astonishing part explains why BSAC's policy did not originally cover incidents like this and why it had to be amended. I don't think they anticipated that something like this was remotely possible. That becomes a reason to avoid giving your real certification level. On the other hand, if someone is looking to find someone to blame for an incident, it would not take long for the attorneys involved to check the true certification levels of everyone involved, so I don't think hiding that certification level will help one bit. It may even hurt--why were you trying to hide your professional status? I think I will continue to play the odds and show my true certification so that I can continue to get the perks to which I have become accustomed.

 

[Lopez116]

I would be interested to see a copy of the BSAC policy. Most insurance policies in the U.S. (diving or otherwise) wouldn't provide defense coverage in a criminal case. Heck, many won't even provide indemnification on a restitution order.

BSAC's insurer's conduct doesn't really sound like anything out of the ordinary when I comes to insurance companies.

 

[Wookie]

Hi, can you give the link to Richie's case.

I googled Dewolf v Kohler, but only got the win on appeal. Basically, Richie Kohler met Terry Dewolf on my boat in 2007, during a Dry Tortugas trimix trip. Richie was putting together an Andrea Doria trip for 2008 and asked Terry if he would like to go. Terry did want to go, and signed up for the trip. Terry was a IT professional who worked for himself and made pretty good money, and had a wife who is a stay at home mom and three young daughters. Terry didn't think to buy a big fat insurance policy.

Terry had a virus. It had something to do with the sack around his heart, and Terry's heart stopped when he jumped off the boat. Richie found him on the bottom some time later, recovered the body, and brought him to shore. 3 years pass.

A very stupid ambulance chaser convinced Mrs. DeWolf to sue, and she sued the initial certifying instructor, the initial shop, the boat, the television production company Richie had worked for, the rebreather manufacturer, and the trip organizer. The shop and instructor settled, the boat got a summary judgement against it for failing to respond to the court, but the owner died shortly thereafter, and someone else already had a first preferred ships mortgage on the vessel, so that went nowhere, the production company was dismissed, leaving the rebreather manufacturer and the trip organizer (Richie). The rebreather was found to work as it was supposed to, so they were dismissed to, later. Richie was the last man standing.

Long story short, Richie could not have known about Terry's medical condition, because Terry didn't know about it himself. Richie won. Richie also won the appeal.

 

[boulderjohn]

A very stupid ambulance chaser convinced Mrs. DeWolf to sue, ...

Long story short, Richie could not have known about Terry's medical condition, because Terry didn't know about it himself. Richie won. Richie also won the appeal.

This is one of several recent stories, including the subject of this thread, that disturb me greatly. I used to respond to what I believed to be unrealistic fears by saying in essence "show me where something like that has ever happened," and no one could. Now they can. The problem is that I don't know what you can do to prepare a defense against this tide of lunacy.

A number of years ago, people were being sued after their good faith efforts to assist accident victims, with the result that people were afraid to provide such assistance. Governments responded by enacting good Samaritan laws to protect such people. I think something will need to be done along those lines to protect people who are accompanying others in high risk activities. Unfortunately, the trend seems to be going in the opposite direction.

 

[Wookie]

A number of years ago, people were being sued after their good faith efforts to assist accident victims, with the result that people were afraid to provide such assistance. Governments responded by enacting good Samaritan laws to protect such people. I think something will need to be done along those lines to protect people who are accompanying others in high risk activities. Unfortunately, the trend seems to be going in the opposite direction.

The public expects a good Samaritan to screw up, but since some help is better than no help, they need to be protected. This is a somewhat different story. This is the story of a professional dive leader, and no, he wasn't leading, but someone somewhere expected him to act in the capacity of a professional.

With hindsight, I would never have become an instructor had I known that the world was changing to this. What happens in the case of someone who wants to take an EMT-B course to be the medic on a expedition to find shipwrecks in northern Canada, or the MPIC on a commercial vessel. Many commercial vessels must have a Medical Person in Charge, which is almost an EMT-B. What if that person is walking through the mall and sees a heart attack victim?

Does this person who is a professional aid-renderer have any duty to render aid?

Does the public have any expectation that the professional should render aid?

Does the public have any expectation that the aid rendered should be effective?

Same for a Divemaster. A certified divemaster is on vacation in wherever and sees a person in trouble underwater.

Does the divemaster have a duty to render aid?

Would a member of the public expect that Divemaster to render aid?

Does the public expect that aid rendered to be effective?

As divemasters and instructors we all thump our chests and proclaim loudly "I'm not acting in a professional capacity, I'm on vacation, therefore I can't be expected to be in charge". But it may not be so cut and dried, because we also proclaim loudly "I'm a divemaster, and I want the professional courtesy due my rank and station", when a visiting divemaster gets treated like one of the herd on the dive boat.

Cops are never off duty, even if they aren't in uniform. If you don't believe that, just ask one. I personally don't think that Divemasters should be held to the same high standard as a police officer, but maybe the public does.

 

[Diver0001]

Stephen, just a word of caution. It's an extraordinarily bad idea to discuss this on social media before the trial. As anything you say here is a matter of public record you could very well be putting the noose around your own neck without even realizing it.

For your own good, I recommend you ask moderators to hide this thread from public view, although you may have already damaged your case more than you can imagine.

That said, I did hear about this accident when it happened. It would appear to me that the BSAC is covering it's legal patoosh here by keeping its head down and is going to watch this case carefully as are other agencies. What really appears to be under scrutiny here isn't so much the question of what when wrong during this particular dive but whether or not a buddy with an instructor qualification has a higher duty of care than a lower trained buddy, even if the dive is not a training dive.

Putting this in other terms if Stephen is found guilty it could mean to everyone out there that highest qualified diver in a group could be seen as criminally negligent if a rescue of their buddy is required and they fail to act before someone else does. All kinds of nasty complications could result from this.

R..

 

[dlofting]

What happens in the case of someone who wants to take an EMT-B course to be the medic on a expedition to find shipwrecks in northern Canada, or the MPIC on a commercial vessel. Many commercial vessels must have a Medical Person in Charge, which is almost an EMT-B. What if that person is walking through the mall and sees a heart attack victim?

Does this person who is a professional aid-renderer have any duty to render aid?

Does the public have any expectation that the professional should render aid?

Does the public have any expectation that the aid rendered should be effective?

I'm a certified Wilderness First Responder. In our course we were taught that we have a duty to provide first aid to anyone with whom we have a prior relationship (relative, friend, etc). This is in addition to any contracted professional relationship and applies to Canada, only, as far as I know.