Man buys speedboat “to pull women”......
Discussion
Macski said:
But it was her choice to go on a boat with no life jacket.
and?theboss said:
I’ll go against the grain here and say I feel sorry for the guy. If I were in my early 20’s facing a 6 year sentence for playing a role in a tragic accident, being vilified as a killer in the media, with the father goading me about prison treatment, I’d be jumping on the nearest plane too.
The girl is partially responsible for her own demise, as well as as being a victim of tragic misfortune. The guy isn’t innocent in all this but it does seem as though he’s being made a scapegoat IMHO.
YOu think the father was goading? How is the girl responsible for her own demise?The girl is partially responsible for her own demise, as well as as being a victim of tragic misfortune. The guy isn’t innocent in all this but it does seem as though he’s being made a scapegoat IMHO.
Halb said:
Macski said:
But it was her choice to go on a boat with no life jacket.
and?theboss said:
I’ll go against the grain here and say I feel sorry for the guy. If I were in my early 20’s facing a 6 year sentence for playing a role in a tragic accident, being vilified as a killer in the media, with the father goading me about prison treatment, I’d be jumping on the nearest plane too.
The girl is partially responsible for her own demise, as well as as being a victim of tragic misfortune. The guy isn’t innocent in all this but it does seem as though he’s being made a scapegoat IMHO.
YOu think the father was goading? How is the girl responsible for her own demise?The girl is partially responsible for her own demise, as well as as being a victim of tragic misfortune. The guy isn’t innocent in all this but it does seem as though he’s being made a scapegoat IMHO.
There are no winners here. A very tragic accident. Girl lost her life and Guys life will never be the same again.
Exige77 said:
I think your answer is written above ? She chose to go in a speedboat at “night” with no life jacket ?
There are no winners here. A very tragic accident. Girl lost her life and Guys life will never be the same again.
That's warped logic, like a lot of victim blaming that goes on here.There are no winners here. A very tragic accident. Girl lost her life and Guys life will never be the same again.
Halb said:
Exige77 said:
I think your answer is written above ? She chose to go in a speedboat at “night” with no life jacket ?
There are no winners here. A very tragic accident. Girl lost her life and Guys life will never be the same again.
That's warped logic, like a lot of victim blaming that goes on here.There are no winners here. A very tragic accident. Girl lost her life and Guys life will never be the same again.
As I said above the guy was certainly guilty of being reckless with their lives but the poor girl was a willing participant. Did he spike her drinks or force her to consume alcohol? Is it not obvious to any non-swimmer that it might be a good idea to insist on a life jacket or if uncomfortable with the situation refuse to get on the boat?
The comment I made about goading was based on the guy’s report about the father’s high ranking in the prison service and telling him what a hard time he’ll have inside. The guy doesn’t seem to be goading the family other than by absconding, which is understandable to a degree if he genuinely felt he was being stitched up.
theboss said:
On the contrary, too many people seem rabid about attributing blame to a perpetrator even if one doesn’t exist. It’s always “somebody” [else's] fault.
As I said above the guy was certainly guilty of being reckless with their lives but the poor girl was a willing participant. Did he spike her drinks or force her to consume alcohol? Is it not obvious to any non-swimmer that it might be a good idea to insist on a life jacket or if uncomfortable with the situation refuse to get on the boat?
The comment I made about goading was based on the guy’s report about the father’s high ranking in the prison service and telling him what a hard time he’ll have inside. The guy doesn’t seem to be goading the family other than by absconding, which is understandable to a degree if he genuinely felt he was being stitched up.
One does exist here. THe man who was in charge and running the show, and everything we've learned about him since, has added to the picture of the sort of person he first appeared to be. His bizarre comments on him turning himself in solidify that. Any blame the girl has is the same sort of sub-1% blame that anyone has when dealing with a violent fAs I said above the guy was certainly guilty of being reckless with their lives but the poor girl was a willing participant. Did he spike her drinks or force her to consume alcohol? Is it not obvious to any non-swimmer that it might be a good idea to insist on a life jacket or if uncomfortable with the situation refuse to get on the boat?
The comment I made about goading was based on the guy’s report about the father’s high ranking in the prison service and telling him what a hard time he’ll have inside. The guy doesn’t seem to be goading the family other than by absconding, which is understandable to a degree if he genuinely felt he was being stitched up.
kwit in day to day life.The comment about a 'hard time inside' is a goad. But running away after you've killed someone is not in any way relatable. It goes way beyond the comment of a parent who've lost their child.
Halb said:
One does exist here. THe man who was in charge and running the show, and everything we've learned about him since, has added to the picture of the sort of person he first appeared to be. His bizarre comments on him turning himself in solidify that. Any blame the girl has is the same sort of sub-1% blame that anyone has when dealing with a violent fkwit in day to day life.
The comment about a 'hard time inside' is a goad. But running away after you've killed someone is not in any way relatable. It goes way beyond the comment of a parent who've lost their child.
I still think it’s a disproportionate sentence and I don’t blame him for running off.kwit in day to day life.The comment about a 'hard time inside' is a goad. But running away after you've killed someone is not in any way relatable. It goes way beyond the comment of a parent who've lost their child.
Will be interesting to see what the Shoreham pilot gets in comparison if found guilty of manslaughter by negligence.
Other than that we’ll just agree to disagree.
theboss said:
Halb said:
One does exist here. THe man who was in charge and running the show, and everything we've learned about him since, has added to the picture of the sort of person he first appeared to be. His bizarre comments on him turning himself in solidify that. Any blame the girl has is the same sort of sub-1% blame that anyone has when dealing with a violent fkwit in day to day life.
The comment about a 'hard time inside' is a goad. But running away after you've killed someone is not in any way relatable. It goes way beyond the comment of a parent who've lost their child.
I still think it’s a disproportionate sentence and I don’t blame him for running off.kwit in day to day life.The comment about a 'hard time inside' is a goad. But running away after you've killed someone is not in any way relatable. It goes way beyond the comment of a parent who've lost their child.
Will be interesting to see what the Shoreham pilot gets in comparison if found guilty of manslaughter by negligence.
Other than that we’ll just agree to disagree.
Despite handing himself in to police in Georgia, Shepherd is starting to make noises about fighting extradition.
His lawyer Tariel Kakabadze said:
“If the extradition happens, it is important to make sure there will not be a danger to him in the UK. If I get assurances that his extradition is not dangerous, we might not disagree with extradition. Each step will be decided after we carefully study all the possibilities and options.”
Gruniad linkTerzo123 said:
I'm of a similar mind.
What if she had died in his car instead of his boat. She was the one driving, she was the one who crashed. She wasn't forced to do this. They both took a daft risk and unfortunately she lost her life.
Apologies if it has been covered already, but how do we know she was driving? Has that been established independently or is that just from his account? Not exactly a reliable witness is he.What if she had died in his car instead of his boat. She was the one driving, she was the one who crashed. She wasn't forced to do this. They both took a daft risk and unfortunately she lost her life.
I've tried to find the trial record and the Judge's sentencing remarks - still looking.
However, it appears Shepherd invited her onto his boat, knowing she was drunk, at night and did not issue a lifejacket.
The boat is his, the responsibility to ensure passengers are kept safe is his, he is the master of the vessel, whether he has his RYA Powerboat 2 or Tufty club badge.
He should have known that entering a waterway with a high tidal range and complex fast flowing currents, at night, with a drunk and inexperienced passenger was foolhardy. He did nothing to mitigate the risk. It is understood that he "zig zagged" - a dangerous thing to do in a waterway which has clear lines of travel for vessels (all vessels are required to return to starboard bank once their manoeuvre is complete). 14mph (12kts), in a small fibre boat is also quite fast. If he was running with tide, his speed over the ground could easily have been in excess of 16ts.
Even at 12kts it could be catastrophic to hit a submerged large object, mooring or other obstruction.
It's a while since I sailed the Thames, but I recall my passage plan, the speed limit if 8kts once west of the Barrier. The PLA also don't piss about - it's a busy and dangerous bit of water.
It's a high bar to pass and obtain a conviction of manslaughter by gross negligence, and the law is clear when alcohol comes into play. Everything i have read about this suggests he was reckless from the start and negligent in his actions. As a Yachmaster with commercial endorsement, it's drummed into me that as master of a vessel, whether it's a 45ft offshore racing yacht, a 90ft power cruiser or a 14ft fletcher speed boat, the buck stops with you.
Personally, i think we should apply the Col. Regs to the road, that would soon sort a few DCW out, but that's another matter....
However, it appears Shepherd invited her onto his boat, knowing she was drunk, at night and did not issue a lifejacket.
The boat is his, the responsibility to ensure passengers are kept safe is his, he is the master of the vessel, whether he has his RYA Powerboat 2 or Tufty club badge.
He should have known that entering a waterway with a high tidal range and complex fast flowing currents, at night, with a drunk and inexperienced passenger was foolhardy. He did nothing to mitigate the risk. It is understood that he "zig zagged" - a dangerous thing to do in a waterway which has clear lines of travel for vessels (all vessels are required to return to starboard bank once their manoeuvre is complete). 14mph (12kts), in a small fibre boat is also quite fast. If he was running with tide, his speed over the ground could easily have been in excess of 16ts.
Even at 12kts it could be catastrophic to hit a submerged large object, mooring or other obstruction.
It's a while since I sailed the Thames, but I recall my passage plan, the speed limit if 8kts once west of the Barrier. The PLA also don't piss about - it's a busy and dangerous bit of water.
It's a high bar to pass and obtain a conviction of manslaughter by gross negligence, and the law is clear when alcohol comes into play. Everything i have read about this suggests he was reckless from the start and negligent in his actions. As a Yachmaster with commercial endorsement, it's drummed into me that as master of a vessel, whether it's a 45ft offshore racing yacht, a 90ft power cruiser or a 14ft fletcher speed boat, the buck stops with you.
Personally, i think we should apply the Col. Regs to the road, that would soon sort a few DCW out, but that's another matter....
Edited by Labradorofperception on Friday 25th January 08:57
Labradorofperception said:
the buck stops with you.
Absolutely. We sold out family yacht some time ago, but it was a common occurrence in the Solent to see plenty of similar antics by people who could afford the boats acting fairly irresponsibly. You don't need to be RYA YM, DS or whatever (up to a certain size and non commercial, unless the rules have changed recently) good old fashioned experience counts for plenty, but this chap was a complete idiot. I know they were talking about some sort of sobriety legislation for those controlling a vessel, not sure it every came to anything, but as you say 16knots SOG is quick on a relatively narrow, congested and busy section of water.
popeyewhite said:
Sa Calobra said:
If you have the court summary could you share it with us? Or were you sat in the court throughout?
If you've taken it from media reporting please, just don't.
I've taken it from the same sources as everyone else on this thread you wazzock, the only difference is I'm trying to cast an objective eye on it. If you've taken it from media reporting please, just don't.
-So you've only seen media reporting.
-You haven't been privy to all court room information from the CPS.
-Youve made up your mind using limited information and joined it all together with emotions.
You do realise that the media uses limited information and pads it out.
I would agree that regardless of who was at the helm, the responsibility for the safety on board rests with him. Drawing parallels between boats and cars is a flawed argument, in legal terms. There is a reasonsble possibility he is lying about who was at the helm anyway, unless that has already been established independently.
I bought a small speedboat many years ago when I had a mooring in Port Grimaud.
First thing I did was get Level 2 Powerboat certification so I had a rough idea of what I was doing.
Second thing I did was make sure I never went faster than around 3 knots at night.
The advisability of this second precaution is endorsed by this story:
A bunch of Dutch lads experienced in boating had taken it into St Tropez for the evening. Coming back into Port Grimaud late at night they ignored the 3 knot speed limit and hurtled straight into the anchor chain of a pleasure boat moored near the harbour entrance,
What the story below doesn't tell you was that one of them was decapitated by the chain.
https://www.yachtforums.com/threads/tragic-acciden...
First thing I did was get Level 2 Powerboat certification so I had a rough idea of what I was doing.
Second thing I did was make sure I never went faster than around 3 knots at night.
The advisability of this second precaution is endorsed by this story:
A bunch of Dutch lads experienced in boating had taken it into St Tropez for the evening. Coming back into Port Grimaud late at night they ignored the 3 knot speed limit and hurtled straight into the anchor chain of a pleasure boat moored near the harbour entrance,
What the story below doesn't tell you was that one of them was decapitated by the chain.
https://www.yachtforums.com/threads/tragic-acciden...
Labradorofperception said:
I've tried to find the trial record and the Judge's sentencing remarks - still looking.
However, it appears Shepherd invited her onto his boat, knowing she was drunk, at night and did not issue a lifejacket.
The boat is his, the responsibility to ensure passengers are kept safe is his, he is the master of the vessel, whether he has his RYA Powerboat 2 or Tufty club badge.
He should have known that entering a waterway with a high tidal range and complex fast flowing currents, at night, with a drunk and inexperienced passenger was foolhardy. He did nothing to mitigate the risk. It is understood that he "zig zagged" - a dangerous thing to do in a waterway which has clear lines of travel for vessels (all vessels are required to return to starboard bank once their manoeuvre is complete). 14mph (12kts), in a small fibre boat is also quite fast. If he was running with tide, his speed over the ground could easily have been in excess of 16ts.
Even at 12kts it could be catastrophic to hit a submerged large object, mooring or other obstruction.
It's a while since I sailed the Thames, but I recall my passage plan, the speed limit if 8kts once west of the Barrier. The PLA also don't piss about - it's a busy and dangerous bit of water.
It's a high bar to pass and obtain a conviction of manslaughter by gross negligence, and the law is clear when alcohol comes into play. Everything i have read about this suggests he was reckless from the start and negligent in his actions. As a Yachmaster with commercial endorsement, it's drummed into me that as master of a vessel, whether it's a 45ft offshore racing yacht, a 90ft power cruiser or a 14ft fletcher speed boat, the buck stops with you.
Personally, i think we should apply the Col. Regs to the road, that would soon sort a few DCW out, but that's another matter....
Yep, to find someone guilty of gross negligence manslaughter is not straightforward; there is a 4 stage test that has to be satisfied:However, it appears Shepherd invited her onto his boat, knowing she was drunk, at night and did not issue a lifejacket.
The boat is his, the responsibility to ensure passengers are kept safe is his, he is the master of the vessel, whether he has his RYA Powerboat 2 or Tufty club badge.
He should have known that entering a waterway with a high tidal range and complex fast flowing currents, at night, with a drunk and inexperienced passenger was foolhardy. He did nothing to mitigate the risk. It is understood that he "zig zagged" - a dangerous thing to do in a waterway which has clear lines of travel for vessels (all vessels are required to return to starboard bank once their manoeuvre is complete). 14mph (12kts), in a small fibre boat is also quite fast. If he was running with tide, his speed over the ground could easily have been in excess of 16ts.
Even at 12kts it could be catastrophic to hit a submerged large object, mooring or other obstruction.
It's a while since I sailed the Thames, but I recall my passage plan, the speed limit if 8kts once west of the Barrier. The PLA also don't piss about - it's a busy and dangerous bit of water.
It's a high bar to pass and obtain a conviction of manslaughter by gross negligence, and the law is clear when alcohol comes into play. Everything i have read about this suggests he was reckless from the start and negligent in his actions. As a Yachmaster with commercial endorsement, it's drummed into me that as master of a vessel, whether it's a 45ft offshore racing yacht, a 90ft power cruiser or a 14ft fletcher speed boat, the buck stops with you.
Personally, i think we should apply the Col. Regs to the road, that would soon sort a few DCW out, but that's another matter....
Edited by Labradorofperception on Friday 25th January 08:57
1) the existence of a duty of care to the deceased
2) a breach of that duty of care which
3) causes (or significantly contributes) to the death of the victim, and
4) the breach should be characterised as gross negligence and therefore a crime.
There are then 9 guidelines to consider when sentencing.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff