There was no way it could have happened if they hit at a 90 degree angle and the boat going completely over the top. Now that other images have been published of the whaler it apparently did not go up and over the top like the way I thought it did. This was more of a side swipe which now explains so little damage to the Imperial. The port side, prop and transom of the boat does't even appear to have come in contact with the whaler , which again no damage. Upon the collision the whaler got spun away from the Imperial leaving the standing pilot falling into the path of the bow of the Imperial. Considering no one fell out of any of the boats this may not as been as fast and hard of an impact as it was being portrayed . The driver of the whaler got the worst of it because he was most likely standing at the time while everyone else was sitting and the wife was leaning forward.

Just goes to show that until all of the facts are in, judgement should be held off...

As a matter of well-settled law, and hundreds of cases, the trooper's statement was not factually correct. (plus he got 'stand on' and 'give way' reversed.)

What I found curious was the dueling experts about the light. It is forensically very-well tested and settled how bulbs fail differently when they are on and when they are unpowered. (Think rear-end collisions: 'I was breaking and my turn signal was on.' err ... let's see that forensics says.)

For those who think hit-and-run is a legal matter. Nope, not on the water, and for good reasons. NJ, even now, does not have a wet hit-and-run law. I don't think anyplace does, anywhere.

Bob

I assume you haven't looked at the photos... ???

The steering wheel was not torn off from the Imperial. There is a small break in the handle where possibly the man was holding it or debris slammed down on it, but the wheel is still very much intact to the console. Notice the throttles how they are also pulled to the starboard. Once again, if he was standing and the whaler was pushed out underneath him he pulled everything to the direction of the Imperial.

As I have stated, I am not choosing sides in this.

Hypothetically, If a person runs a red light and you collide with the vehicle and the person that ran the red light dies, should you get 10 years in jail ?

Was the light on the imp the old style bulb? When those are on and generating heat I believe they are fragile during impact. If the lights were on all this comes down to rules of the road and prudent speed in reduced visibility. If the defendent has enough money, this could go a long way because of the admiralty laws. I'm assuming from what I have read that there was some sort of impact with the 2. It does not surprise me that with a death involved, that charges were brought. People dying is a big deal, as it should. I was involved in a nightime accident many years ago. Fortunately, nobody was gravely injured but tens of thousands of dollars in damage was caused. It all boiled done to right of way, which was mine, lack of lights , and improper lookout which was his.
The lesson was learned, pay attention and make sure your equipment works. My heart goes out for all these people as all their lives are completely screwed for ever.

If you flee the scene, maybe so? Hard to say, some people do bad things out of stupidity, some people do bad things out of intent. As a matter of law for on the water "hit and run" not being such, could be, but there is still a matter of intent, no? Ethical and moral implications are a whole other thing????

There are only 2 people who know the intent, and they are both on the same side. I find it interesting that I have not seen any mention of the then girlfriend, now wife, testifying. did I miss it?

live at the courtroom http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/20....html#comments

You seem to be suggesting that a (perceived) moral or ethical failing should be criminalized - even in the face of the legal demands of Admiralty law?

I don't get the willful ignorance of COLREGS, especially from boaters.

However, and on the other hand, the Prosecutor gets it just fine: "Law? What law? We don't need no steenking laws to lock somebody ... anybody ... up if we don't like what they did. Admiralty Law? ... ummm, what's THAT? and just how does that stop me from locking somebody up who did things i don't like? I'm already making a pretzel out of NJ law, used toilet paper and smoke & mirrors ... why should I pay any attention to centuries of black letter law commanded this slimeball to act precisely, exactly, legally prudent ... a silly law that won't let me lock somebody up, 'cause, yanno ... I don't like what he did. Or didn't did. Or something like that."

Bob

this is some reporter providing live reports all day great job

I thought the same thing.........until she asked her readers "if Tacopina just yodeled?"....
WTF?

You make an awful lot of assumptions.