Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park

[wetb4igetinthewater]

If agencies like to do e-learning, OK. But why can I have a book for reference in the future?

I'd recommend checking the RAID materials that they offer for free.
I don't know if all agencies do this, but with SSI, whenever there's an update, you have access. There is no expiration date, and AFAIK, there never was. SDI is the same. I took solo back in 2017 online, and still can access (actually updating to the new content as I write).

That's the upside of electronic manuals. But I fully do appreciate that some people would like a book in their hands. I haven't looked into it, but IIRC SSI will print a book and send it to you for a fee.

 

[MrVegas]

The attachments are court filings that may be of interest. These are a matter of public record and may be obtained by anyone from the clerk of courts in this case. I have redacted the exhibits from Defendant Snow's answer because, although on the public record in court files, they did contain some addresses and phone numbers. The exhibits included what looked like a liability waiver, student learning agreement, and medical form. Again, for those that want the exact exhibits, they can contact the clerk of court. (Compare paragraph 244 of the Second Amended Complaint to Paragraph 156 of the Answer and Affirmative Defense 9 at the end of the answer.) I have also enclosed two court rulings (the parties did reach agreement on a stipulated protective order, I believe).

This is nowhere near a complete record of the proceedings. There are lots of other filings.

 

[Omisson]

Just because e-learning is available, it doesn't mean a shop or instructor uses it. I know a few that don't because e-learning doesn't mean the student actually understood what was covered. The lights may have been on, but nobody was home.
I allowed students to choose it but it never reduced face-to-face classroom time. SDI never intended for it to. It was to be a supplement allowing instructors to spend more time on detailed instruction in areas that required it. I don't know PADI's intention.
And I have seen instructors from all the agencies that offer it use it to churn and burn people through to get some meaningless badge or recognition of quantity over quality.
Given that Linnea asked for the book would indicate that she did not do the e-learning.
I know students who came to me to retake AOW or do my Advanced Skills Workshop told me that the instructor didn't even bother going over the e-learning or the book. They were told to read the relevant chapters and if they had any questions they could ask them between dives. As a result, they didn't know what questions to even ask because the instructor was too lazy to do any classroom time.
It wasn't until later that they even found out there should have been classroom sessions.
And because the class was taught as an intro to advanced dives instead of an actual course with new materials and skills they had to master, it was garbage.
From the testimony and videos, it was clear that Snow did not have control over anyone or anything and didn't give a damn to even give the appearance that she did. And why? Because standards allowed her to do this. Unsafe ratios, combining classes and dives, and allowing her judgment to decide what she could handle.
And as long as these standards remain the same, people will continue to be killed by them.

You mean- other than she was expressly told it had to be finished BEFORE the dives?

…..prefer. The price is
$250.00 and the book or eLearning is included but must be
finished before class……..

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

You mean- other than she was expressly told it had to be finished BEFORE the dives?

…..prefer. The price is
$250.00 and the book or eLearning is included but must be
finished before class……..

It will be interesting to learn what dive briefing occurred that day if any. And what material was completed.

First time i tried AOW, my instructor told me I had to complete the knowledge reviews. I would do so for the planned dives and he'd change his mind on what dive we'd be doing.

That doesn't mean that Snow did the same, but given all the lapses in good judgement, skipping briefings/knowledge review discussions wouldn't surprise me.

 

[sea_ledford]

If agencies like to do e-learning, OK. But why can’t I have a book for reference in the future?

Who doesn't have books available? Is any agency elearning only? There probably is, I just don't know who.

There are also probably better texts than the one from your training agency. The old school NAUI Advanced Diving Technology and Techniques is an excellent, comprehensive book. The equipment sections are probably a bit outdated regarding computers and BCs, but physics and physiology hasn't changed.

 

[Omisson]

You may or may not be correct. Without doing a deep dive into that particular portion of the park, there's no way to know who has jurisdiction.

There are three types of jurisdiction on Federal Lands; exclusive, concurrent and proprietary.

Generally, federal buildings and things owned by the Federal Government are in the exclusive jurisdiction of the feds. There are large portions of what would be considered "federal land" that fall into either concurrent jurisdiction, or proprietary jurisdiction.

Concurrent places are places where both the state and the feds have jurisdiction to act. When the feds lease state lands, that would be an example of concurrent jurisdiction.

Proprietary jurisdiction are places that are federal solely because the feds are there. A federally leased office in a bank building would be an example.

It's pretty opaque for the average person - there's only one way I know to determine jurisdiction and that's via a telephone call to the agency's office of counsel.

My assumption is that you are correct, in this instance, but your blanket statement is incorrect.

This case happened in a federal park in the national parks system, which makes it exclusive federal jurisdiction-according to precedent for criminal juris diction. But again- even that has been argued the other way.

https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039&context=land_water

so there has been some debate on this with arguments on both sides. That link is a good primer on the issue…gives an expansive reading argument (over current case law).

 

[VikingDives]

This case happened in a federal park in the national parks system, which makes it exclusive federal jurisdiction-according to precedent for criminal juris diction. But again- even that has been argued the other way.

https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039&context=land_water

so there has been some debate on this with arguments on both sides. That link is a good primer on the issue…gives an expansive reading argument (over current case law).

Again you're wrong. The crime has nothing to do with the jurisdiction, it's the status of the land that determines jurisdiction. The federal government cannot assert exclusive jurisdiction and stop a case from being filed in state courts if the state has jurisdiction, or vice versa.

That primer is ok, I read it before you posted it because I don't work for the NPS and I wasn't sure that NPS had proprietary and concurrent lands, though I suspected they did.

I'd suggest you look at the DOJ's criminal resource manual, which explains exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction in simple terms.

"There are three methods by which the United States obtains exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction over federal lands in a state: (1) a state statute consenting to the purchase of land by the United States for the purposes enumerated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 7, of the Constitution of the United States; (2) a state cession statute; and (3) a reservation of federal jurisdiction upon the admission of a state into the Union. See Collins v. Yosemite Park Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938). Since February 1, 1940, the United States acquires no jurisdiction over federal lands in a state until the head or other authorized officer of the department or agency which has custody of the lands formally accepts the jurisdiction offered by state law. See 40 U.S.C. § 255; Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943). Prior to February 1, 1940, acceptance of jurisdiction had been presumed in the absence of evidence of a contrary intent on the part of the acquiring agency or Congress. See Silas Mason Co., Inc. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. 186 (1937). See also JM 9-20.000 et seq., for a discussion of federal enclave jurisdiction."

Also, see: 664. Territorial Jurisdiction

and Glacier NP: Final Master Plan (Appendix B) (which appears to show that most of the park is in the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, but parts of the park retain the state's concurrent jurisdiction).

Lastly, http://npshistory.com/publications/fletc/law-enforcement-jurisdiction.pdf though I would put as much stock in a memo from the 1970's being current and controlling as I would a summary of case law from 1967.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

Who doesn't have books available? Is any agency elearning only? There probably is, I just don't know who.

There are also probably better texts than the one from your training agency. The old school NAUI Advanced Diving Technology and Techniques is an excellent, comprehensive book. The equipment sections are probably a bit outdated regarding computers and BCs, but physics and physiology hasn't changed.

All of RAID's materials are online. Some shops I know of try to discourage people from doing anything but online. They don't want to carry the book inventory. Even when a student did online materials before coming to me, I provided a book. For OW they got the OW manual and a copy of my first book as a supplement. I used mine for the dive planning, gas management, and gear selection classroom sessions.
For AOW and Intro to Tech they got the agency book and my second book. Though we primarily used the agency for supplements and mine as a primary resource because my AOW class was set up to meet agency standards (exceed them actually) and built around the dives, skills, and knowledge outlined in my book. One student referred to my AOW class as an Intro to Tech on steroids after having taken both with another instructor.
As far as agency texts the NAUI Master Diver text is top-notch and one of the best texts out there IMO for anything above open water. It's an actual course. Everything is at DM/Instructor level without the teaching components of the pro-level courses. No other DM text that I've seen is as comprehensive.
Dennis Graver's SCUBA Diving is the best Basic Open Water text. Comprehensive, not filled with advertising crap, and doesn't talk down to people. Every other OW text is thin on content, dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, and tries to sell further training before people are ready.
For DM and Instructor level training Tom Leaird's Diving Fundamentals for Leadership is a great text. Fir any agency. Unlike other leadership course texts, it's not about how to sell the next class and relieve people of their money. It's about actually teaching diving and developing an effective style.
Not parroting Marcel Marceau on quaaludes techniques that have little practical value and make skills harder for students.
The problem with courses like the one Snow was "teaching" is that standards allowed her to fail and result in the death of Linnea Mills. They allowed her to combine courses and teach them in conditions that should have been a no go from the start.
Those standards leave too much to the discretion, judgment, and EGO of the instructor.

 

[KevinNM]

The sad thing is a young girl's death prompted all these discussions of changes in the industry standards. Why did someone have to die in the first place?

Steve

Rules can mostly only be written in blood. It’s sad but true way human nature works.

 

[cerich]

And the Olson's (owners of Gull) are no longer part of lawsuit.

Paying legal costs, I will assume they settled.

Interesting turn.