Removing items from the USS Oriskany (interesting dilemma)

[boulderjohn]

How much sense does it make to you that the Owner of a Pensacola Dive Charter Operation would suggest divers remove items from the very wrecks that make them a living?

And how much sense does it make for certain Asian fishermen to dynamite reefs so the fish will float to the surface, even though they know that when the reefs are gone, so are the fish? Yet they do it.

It is called short term thinking. I can make money doing this now; let tomorrow take care of itself.

Divers wanting to loot the wreck are looking for dive boat operators who will take them to the wreck and help them get what they want, and they will pay good money for it. Read Captain Tim's first posts in this thread. He pretty much says that his goal is to give the customer what he wants. If the customer wants "goodies," then "goodies" it will be.

 

[PerroneFord]

Yes I do believe that. "Directed me to" could mean a lot of things but not necessarilly that the Captain suggested he steal it.

I don't believe Tim Thorsen would say "hey man, there's a cool looking chrome plated telephone down there. Take your tool kit and rip it off the wall and take it back to Mississippi with you for your private collection. I would not want any of the divers I bring here in the future to see such cool looking item."

Don, I'm sure you've been on a number of dive boats. The Pensacola operations tend to be quite small charters. 27-35ft perhaps. On a boat that size, do you really feel the captain would not have seen a diver splash overboard with a hacksaw, a chisel, a crowbar, and a mallet? Do you think he missed the diver return the boat with a console he freshly cut from the wreck?

I've been diving on the Oriskany. Given the way the boats operate there and tie in, it would be nearly IMPOSSIBLE for a diver to splash with that stuff, and return with goodies without the captain or DM noticing what was happening.

Regardless of all, I enjoyed my dive on the wreck, and will return again. I just hope the boat is still reasonably intact for my next trip.

 

[djanni]

Don, ...do you really feel the captain would not have seen a diver splash overboard with a hacksaw, a chisel, a crowbar, and a mallet? Do you think he missed the diver return the boat with a console he freshly cut from the wreck?

I've been diving on the Oriskany. Given the way the boats operate there and tie in, it would be nearly IMPOSSIBLE for a diver to splash with that stuff, and return with goodies without the captain or DM noticing what was happening.

I never said I felt that way.

I said I am doubtful there is sufficent justification to consider Thorsen a co-conspirator, an accomplice or accessory to the crime.

I don't doubt for a minute that the diver put Thorsen in a very compromizing position when he brought up the control panel. If this was a debate on how the Captain should have responded to that situation I wouldn't be posting these comments. Instead the theme of this thread is lets "FRY" the lousy Captain and I'm just not sure there is sufficient justification for that.

If you read back through my other posts you'll see that this diver was aboard when my wife and I dove with Viking the first time. During that trip Thorsen mentioned the phone and even took my wife and I to see it. Yet, on that trip, nothing was brought on board the boat. So perhaps the diver became aware of the phone and it's location while on the 1st trip and not during the 2nd trip even though that is what he said.

I think it's entirely plausable that on the subsequent trip the diver acted independently and without prompting from Thorsen. I also think it's plausable for a diver to conceal a tool kit and take it down with him without the Captain seeing it. People can be pretty sneeky when they want to be. We all know that.

Again, I am doubtful there is sufficent justification to consider Thorsen a co-conspirator, an accomplice or accessory to the crime.

As a result of all this I bet (I hope) Thorsen has changed his approach a bit and is advising divers, right up front, not to bring anything up. If he has done that then with regard to Thorsen and Viking Diving I think we accomplished all we can hope to accomplish.

 

[King Kong Matt]

Again, I am doubtful there is sufficent justification to consider Thorsen a co-conspirator, an accomplice or accessory to the crime.

Hypothetical question for you.

If the Captain saw the diver return from the dive with an object that was clearly taken from the wreck and did not demand that the diver return the object on the next dive, would you still adhere to your point of view that the Captain could not be deemed an accessory?

 

[djanni]

And how much sense does it make for certain Asian fishermen to dynamite reefs so the fish will float to the surface, even though they know that when the reefs are gone, so are the fish? Yet they do it.

It is called short term thinking. I can make money doing this now; let tomorrow take care of itself.

Divers wanting to loot the wreck are looking for dive boat operators who will take them to the wreck and help them get what they want, and they will pay good money for it. Read Captain Tim's first posts in this thread. He pretty much says that his goal is to give the customer what he wants. If the customer wants "goodies," then "goodies" it will be.

See my post 302... I tried to answer to your questions in that post as well.

Look I'm not on some crusade to be Tim Thorsen's defender. I hardly know the man. As I said earlier, Thorsen will get what he deserves. We all do. He may not deserve anything other than a apology from Scubaboard for dragging him name through the mud. Guite frankly, I don't know.

This whole thread is a "WITCH HUNT." Put every word spoken by Thorsen under a microscope and lets see if we can make a bad guy out of him. Look at your very own words... "He pretty much says..." Pretty much? What the hell is that? Lets take his words and poke 'em, pull em, pinch em and see if something that makes us all feel better about ourselves falls out. I don't participate in witch hunts.

 

[boulderjohn]

If you read back through my other posts ... .

In the meantime, have you read through all of Captain Tim's posts? Do you see any thing in them that indicates he did not know what the guy was doing? Do you see anywhere that he denies being of assistance?

Did you see his post where he compares divers who want to take things from the reef to divers who smoke in the no-smoking areas? To refresh your memory, he says it is not his place to stop either one.

Did you read the Yahoo post from the looter, who thanked the Captain for his help?

I am really amazed at the great adoration you have for him, all evidence to the contrary.

 

[PerroneFord]

I don't participate in witch hunts.

Reeeaalllly?

 

[djanni]

Reeeaalllly?

Know what PerroneFord, I tried to give you the best reply to your questions that I could and to your "REEEAALLLLY" reply, all i have to say is that's about what I would have expected from you.:shakehead

 

[King Kong Matt]

Lets take his words and poke 'em, pull em, pinch em and see if something that makes us all feel better about ourselves falls out. I don't participate in witch hunts.

I don't know. Once again, it seems like folks were asking some pretty simple questions that he was just not going to answer. All of the questions seemed to be within the realm of his personal knowledge, which made his responses seem like he was intentionally trying to obfuscate and obstruct.

Like others have said, I don't want anything bad to happen to the man, his boat, or his operation. I honestly don't. More diving operations is a good thing for divers. I just want him to recognize that he is a caretaker (whether he wants to be or not) of a communal resource and therefore has a responsibility to all divers present and future who visit the Oriskany.

His responses were bothersome (and continue to be bothersome) because he insisted that 1) he is just the bus driver and has no control over what the divers on his vessel do and 2) even if he were to become aware of the fact that divers had broken the law while aboard his vessel, he was simply unable to come out with the simple statement that "such divers will not use my vessel to engage in the commission of a felony..."

 

[djanni]

Hypothetical question for you.

If the Captain saw the diver return from the dive with an object that was clearly taken from the wreck and did not demand that the diver return the object on the next dive, would you still adhere to your point of view that the Captain could not be deemed an accessory?

With the understanding that you have created a hypothetical situation......

I think the Captain should have taken a strong position against such activity. Beyond that, I don't know what he should have done on that day, at that time and under those conditions. I wasn't there.