Cruise ship ignores distressed boat

This is quite a sad story. Lives could have been saved had the captain done the right thing. At the very least they should have contacted the Coast Guard but I just don't see any reason why they couldn't have stopped to helped them out. There is a video inside the link and I can't imagine what the lady is going thru who reported seeing the boat. I also can't believe that someone actually lived after being out to sea for 4 weeks.

Adrian "Santi" Vasquez, 18, set out on a fishing trip Feb. 24, 2012, with two 16-year-old friends, Oropeces Betancourt and Fernando Osario. The trip turned deadly when the trio discovered that the outboard motor on their small fishing vessel, "The Fifty Cent," would not start, leaving them stranded in the middle of the ocean.
The three Panamanian fishermen drifted at sea for more than two weeks, hungry, hot, and dehydrated, before they spotted the Star Princess cruise ship and started desperately signaling for a rescue.
"It was a really big, white ship. I was waving a red T-shirt, and Fernando was waving a bright orange life jacket over his head. For a minute it looked like they were going to turn to come for us, but then they just went on their way.”

Vasquez, the sole remaining fisherman, was rescued at sea March 24, 2012, by an Ecuadoran fishing boat.
He was found 650 miles off shore, having thrown the bodies of his two friends overboard.
"It's really frustrating that those young men were at sea two more weeks and two of them died. Two of them died because the ship didn't turn around," Meredith said.

gma.yahoo.com...

My heart sunk hearing this story this morning.

I heard an interview this morning with the woman who tried to get the attention of the ship's crew to rescue these people. The crewmember she talked to thought as well that the boat was in distress, left, and she never heard from the crew again.

When she found out on the news that two people had died, one only a day after the cruise ship sighting, she said she felt sick, and still feels sick, over the whole incident.

Carnival is the company that owned this cruise ship the Concordia that crashed off of Italy. Carnival also owned the Allegra that had to be towed after a fire breakout not too long after the Concordia disaster.

I made the mistake of sailing Carnival for my honeymoon. We did an expedition to ride horses in Jamaica. The animals were starved and poorly kept. Another honeymooning couple that did the same expedition but at a different time, had a mare that had only given birth the day before and fought them the whole way to get back to the stable.

I wrote to Carnival to complain about the company they are using, and never heard back.

This company is horrible, and needs to be disbanded. I hope they go bankrupt.

The captain made up a lie about the reasons for not approaching the boat. Maritime law says that a boat must help another boat in distress as long as it doesn't put its own passengers at risk.

Ten bucks says that they didn't want to affect their schedule.

Just one more reason to avoid these massive cruise ships altogether. I can't stand them and the trash that they litter the sea with. I've had the privilege to sail in some of the same Caribbean waters that these ships cruise in and I have seen this garbage from these floating cities. They are free to dump around the Caribbean islands do to lack of regulations. Hence the popularity of these cruising waters.

As for this case. It is inexcusable that the capt. of this ship did not assist this boat in distress!!

Absolutely disgraceful! How can the captain live with himself? Surely he can be charged with manslaughter at the very least.

reply to post by nixie_nox


I'm with ya. It really hurt my heart and I'm not sure how I would cope knowing that 2 people died. It would be very hard.

reply to post by Insomniac


You would think there would be some sort of discipline. Very unlikely he will be charged officially with anything but something had to have been done for christ sake.

reply to post by HawkeyeNation


Yes, I don't know anything about maritime law but this scenario must be covered. If no one beats me to it I'll look into it later when I get to work.

You would think that a fishing boat would have had a radio,flares or at least some flags to display a distress signal. The guy that was head of the fishing boat is actually responsible for his friends.

reply to post by DavidWillts


The boat lost electricity.

reply to post by Insomniac


This is the excuse the captain gave:

When she got home, Meredith contacted Princess Cruises to see what action was taken. She says a customer relations representative told her the captain reported a different version of the incident — and that according to the captain's log, the ship had been passing through a fishing fleet.

Meredith says she was told that the Star Princess contacted the boat and "that they were asking the ship to move to the west, because they didn't want their nets to be damaged. And that the ship altered course. And they were waving their shirts because they were thanking the ship."

I hope they have documentation....


npr.org

Originally posted by Insomniac
reply to post by HawkeyeNation

 

Yes, I don't know anything about maritime law but this scenario must be covered. If no one beats me to it I'll look into it later when I get to work.

I just looked into it a little bit but did not see anything relevant to a case like this. It does state they are responsible for personal passengers but I couldn't find anything to this extent.

en.wikipedia.org...

Just from looking at other crime laws. If you witness a crime and do not report it, it is not a crime. Ethically and morally yes but not criminally. It's only a crime if you refuse to help if questioned.

Im pretty sure that is against international Maritime laws, If the cruise ship did see the destressed boat and kept going, that is a terrrible judgement call by the crew of the Cruise ship, and should be held responsible for the deaths of the other two men. Maritime law requires the closest vessel to aid in an SOS, or a rescue if they see one, not just pick and choose who you save, hell even during WW2 US vessels would come to the aid of sinking ships that had just been attacked even if they were the enemy.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Insomniac

 

This is the excuse the captain gave:

When she got home, Meredith contacted Princess Cruises to see what action was taken. She says a customer relations representative told her the captain reported a different version of the incident — and that according to the captain's log, the ship had been passing through a fishing fleet.

Meredith says she was told that the Star Princess contacted the boat and "that they were asking the ship to move to the west, because they didn't want their nets to be damaged. And that the ship altered course. And they were waving their shirts because they were thanking the ship."

I hope they have documentation....


npr.org

I thought I read that too and I'm trying to grasp this. How did the cruise ship contact them? Either way, common sense has to kick in for the captain. You see a small fishing boat that is 100+ miles off shore at this time. Do the math but a small fishing boat like this should not be 100+ miles of shore if I'm correct.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by DavidWillts

 

The boat lost electricity.

That really means nothing, he should have had visual distress signals.

reply to post by Glassbender777

Maritime law requires the closest vessel to aid in an SOS, or a rescue if they see one, not just pick and choose who you save, hell even during WW2 US vessels would come to the aid of sinking ships that had just been attacked even if they were the enemy.

Where did it say they in any way gave out an SOS?

reply to post by nixie_nox


Thankfully there's a survivor who can prove the captain to be the liar he so obviously is. Where does this company get its captains? Is there a school for incompetence and cowardice?

Originally posted by Glassbender777
Im pretty sure that is against international Maritime laws, If the cruise ship did see the destressed boat and kept going, that is a terrrible judgement call by the crew of the Cruise ship, and should be held responsible for the deaths of the other two men. Maritime law requires the closest vessel to aid in an SOS, or a rescue if they see one, not just pick and choose who you save, hell even during WW2 US vessels would come to the aid of sinking ships that had just been attacked even if they were the enemy.

Thanks for the information. Should be interesting to see where this ends up but I'm willing to bet that the lone survivor ends up with a nice settlement. Cruise ships have taken a huge hit the last few years and they probably want this swept right under the rug.

Nevermind.

reply to post by DavidWillts


It was a Panamanian fishing boat. Who knows what they had. They reported waving their orange life vests to get the attention of the cruise ship.

So even if they had signaled, apprently it doesn't matter.

Well if you look into maritime laws you will see that distress signals are pretty well defined. You really can't blame someone for not responding to a distress signal that was never given.