This is on Dateline NBC right now.
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
This is on Dateline NBC right now.
this is why i like to solo
The prosecution's statements regarding a duty to one's buddy, and the apparent special duty owed if one is a rescue diver, set just a terrible, terrible precedent, and are a perfect example of (1) "Hard cases make bad law", and (2) some people don't know when to shut their damn mouths. The prosecutor could have had the manslaughter plea without saying one word about it.
There generally is no duty to render aid -- i.e., you can watch someone drown and you have no legal obligation to help that person. This moron has effectively changed a LEGAL non-duty into a FACTUAL we-ll-look-at-each-case-to-see-if-you-have-a-duty -- i.e., whether or not you have a duty depends on the facts, including your skill level, with all the subjectivity and inconsistency that accompany fact-determinative questions.
And we're really not protected simply because this case is in Australia -- one trend, apparently approved of by some members of the US Supreme Court, is an increase in consideration of "international law" in US courts. We're going to see more of this sort of claim - civil and criminal -- and that doesn't bode well for most of us.
And as far as a US prosecutor not pursuing such a case: maybe not, but, if you're a certified rescue diver who is buddied up with the governor's idiot son, and that guy swims off into oblivion, I'd suggest getting a good lawyer.