Trial Started for Boat Crash of 2008
04-07-2013 | 12:23 PM
#91
Registered
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: SW1
Rule 6 - Safe Speed
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.
In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:
(a) By all vessels:
(i) The state of visibility;
(ii) The traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels;
(iii) The manageability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions;
(iv) At night, the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter from her own lights;
(v) The state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards;
(vi) The draft in relation to the available depth of water.
Rule 8 - Action to Avoid Collision
(a) Any action shall [be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and], if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.
(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.
(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.
(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.
(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel may slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion.
(f) (i) A vessel which, by any of these rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by the rules of this part.(iii) A vessel, the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision.
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.
In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:
(a) By all vessels:
(i) The state of visibility;
(ii) The traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels;
(iii) The manageability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions;
(iv) At night, the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter from her own lights;
(v) The state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards;
(vi) The draft in relation to the available depth of water.
Rule 8 - Action to Avoid Collision
(a) Any action shall [be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and], if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.
(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.
(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.
(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.
(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel may slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion.
(f) (i) A vessel which, by any of these rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by the rules of this part.(iii) A vessel, the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision.
04-07-2013 | 01:08 PM
#92
Registered
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
From: Rochester, NY
No, actually I have been very consistent in my statements. The prosecutors are Gestapo, making up sh!t as they go along, trying to criminalise a civil matter, using 'law' which does not exist.
Mr DeGilio is, pretty clearly, a slimeball, which has nothing to do with prosecutors who are arrogantly contemptuous of law, justice, custom, treaties and indeed NJ state law.
I do not credit THEM with one scintilla of good faith.
Better?
Mr DeGilio is, pretty clearly, a slimeball, which has nothing to do with prosecutors who are arrogantly contemptuous of law, justice, custom, treaties and indeed NJ state law.
I do not credit THEM with one scintilla of good faith.
Better?
04-07-2013 | 01:25 PM
#93
Thread Starter
OSO Content Provider
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,757
Likes: 112
From: Sharkey-Images.com
Just watched opening arguments video again. Prosecutor does state the Whaler was "going about 20 mph". 5 Adults onboard and it has been reported by the Widow the boat was on plane. Can that boat be on plane with that kind of weight and only maintain 20 mph ? I realize it is mostly a flat bottom/tri-hull but just curious... ?
Here is the link to the videos of opening arguments: http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/20...oms_river.html
So the Prosecutor must think 20 mph in extreme low visibility conditions is safe.
I personally came down that river in a 28 Checkmate on a night without a moon and it was the darkest I had ever seen and with the lights from the barrier island in the background made it very difficult to see any other boat lights. It was the longest idle ride we had going down that river.
The woman on the 911 call said she had her back to the direction they were heading so she certainly would not know if the bow light was on or not.
.
Here is the link to the videos of opening arguments: http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/20...oms_river.html
So the Prosecutor must think 20 mph in extreme low visibility conditions is safe.
I personally came down that river in a 28 Checkmate on a night without a moon and it was the darkest I had ever seen and with the lights from the barrier island in the background made it very difficult to see any other boat lights. It was the longest idle ride we had going down that river.
The woman on the 911 call said she had her back to the direction they were heading so she certainly would not know if the bow light was on or not.
.
Last edited by SHARKEY-IMAGES; 04-07-2013 at 01:41 PM.
04-07-2013 | 01:37 PM
#94
Registered
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: SW1
I thought it was vehicular homicide (why charge, when you can OVERcharge?) and a couple of other misc assault, too.
Was a boat underway a 'vehicle' when the crash happened? (I understand there is a slight re-writing of the law, since.) What are the particular elements of 'homicide/manslaughter' by vessel and how do these square with superceeding laws which CLEARLY address the situation and remedies?
This is a feelgood power grab, that, if successful, puts the liberty interests of every boater in NJ subject to the whim of the petulant and power-crazed.
Was a boat underway a 'vehicle' when the crash happened? (I understand there is a slight re-writing of the law, since.) What are the particular elements of 'homicide/manslaughter' by vessel and how do these square with superceeding laws which CLEARLY address the situation and remedies?
This is a feelgood power grab, that, if successful, puts the liberty interests of every boater in NJ subject to the whim of the petulant and power-crazed.
04-07-2013 | 01:48 PM
#95
Thread Starter
OSO Content Provider
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,757
Likes: 112
From: Sharkey-Images.com
Being as so much is being placed on the "Bow Lights",
["The bow light was indeed working, and it was on," said Tacopina, disputing a claim by Bryce that the Imperial's flaps over the bow lights were closed and one bulb was burnt out. ]
Please take note in the 3 photos I shot of this boat and its Bow Light.
1st in 2005 showing the Bow Light in the recessed/flush position.
2nd a few days after the accident it appears the light is in the up position.
3rd, 3 weeks later the Bow Light back in the down position.
So depending upon when the investigators saw the boat, I wonder which position they saw the bow light in. Quite obviously there was a change in its position after the fact while impounded.
See photos: http://sharkeyimages.zenfolio.com/bl...ugust-3rd-2008
.
["The bow light was indeed working, and it was on," said Tacopina, disputing a claim by Bryce that the Imperial's flaps over the bow lights were closed and one bulb was burnt out. ]
Please take note in the 3 photos I shot of this boat and its Bow Light.
1st in 2005 showing the Bow Light in the recessed/flush position.
2nd a few days after the accident it appears the light is in the up position.
3rd, 3 weeks later the Bow Light back in the down position.
So depending upon when the investigators saw the boat, I wonder which position they saw the bow light in. Quite obviously there was a change in its position after the fact while impounded.
See photos: http://sharkeyimages.zenfolio.com/bl...ugust-3rd-2008
.
Last edited by SHARKEY-IMAGES; 04-07-2013 at 01:56 PM.
04-07-2013 | 02:20 PM
#96
Registered
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 9,214
Likes: 5
I don't know at this point in time whether DeGilio is innocent or guilty, we will all find out soon enough. But, if that low to the water Imperial did in fact collide with that Boston Whaler, then he knows it. They are damn near eye level. Leaving the scene, and those people to fend for themselves is an act of cowardice. If that is the case, then I hope he is unhappy with what the Judge & Jury decide. If he didn't do it, then let him go.
Last edited by Comanche3Six; 04-08-2013 at 04:08 PM.
04-07-2013 | 02:47 PM
#97
Registered
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: SW1
I don't know at this point in time whether DeGilio is innocent or guilty, we will all find out soon enough. But, if that low to the water Imperial did in fact collide with that Boston Whaler, then he knows it. They are damn near eye level. Leaving the scene, and those people to fend for themselves is an act of cowardice. If that is the case, then I hope he is unhappy with what the Judge & Jury decide. If he didn't do it, then let him go.
And if prosecutors were interested in justice v. scalps.
I think that with the civil suits, the proprieties have been served, actually.
One can argue how much DeGilo contributed to the wreck, but that is angels dancing on a pin. It is inarguable that the near-absolute duty to avoid a collision rests primarily and chiefly with the whaler.
And, actually, and perhaps strangely, the only thing that DeGilio did absolutely, completely and 100% correctly is to immediately protect his boat and crew when the bilge light came on. That the fact it was surely accidental, self-serving and rationalized after-the-fact is beside the point.
I know of no jurisdiction that has a maritime hit-and-run law, and there are good reasons for that. Still ... DeGilio makes you want to wash your hands.
Yeah, he's a slime-bucket, and were I a member of any club that accepted him for membership, I would resign immediately, loudly and publicly.
None of which has anything to do with prosecution by whim.
Ocean Co. prosecutors are a far greater danger to NJ boating than anything DiGilio & Post did or didn't do.
Last edited by goatskin; 04-07-2013 at 03:07 PM.
04-07-2013 | 03:12 PM
#98
Registered
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
From: Rochester, NY
I don't know at this point in time whether DeGilio is innocent or guilty, we will all find out soon enough. But, if that low to the water Imperial did in fact collide with that Boston Whaler, then he knows it. They are damn near eye level. Leaving the scene, and those people to fend for themselves is an act of cowardice. If that is the case, then I hope he is unhappy with what the Judge & Jury decide. If he didn't do it, then let him go.
04-07-2013 | 03:38 PM
#99
Thread Starter
OSO Content Provider
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,757
Likes: 112
From: Sharkey-Images.com
If the lift on the Metedeconk River was open for him to do this, authorities would have found it quite quickly as it would have been less than a mile away in the open waters of the river. Several choppers were out with search lights up and down the river from what I heard.
04-07-2013 | 04:15 PM
#100
Registered
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 9,214
Likes: 5
His lawyer admitted to the collision in his opening statement. He also reportedly left his Imperial on the lift that night, and then retrieved it the next morning to stuff it in a garage. I'm sure it was all over the news, right while he was backing it into the garage, probably with one hand on the truck steering wheel, and the other holding his cell, speaking to his lawyer.
