In Reply to: Re: Drifting Dan case declared a mistrial posted by MMorris on March 30, 2010 at 00:23:53:

Never let facts get in the way of an opinion. The captain was hired by a shop that provided the DM's, who's responsibility it was to check divers in and out of the water. Simple as that. So at that point, yep, he's a taxi driver. Yes, letter of the law is that the captain is ultimately responsible, but not SOLELY responsible. Where is the outrage at the DM's who obviously did not conduct a proper roll call? Any calls to boycott the shop in question? Oh yeah, that doesn't fit the agenda.

As divers none of us ever wants to get left at sea. We trust that it won't happen, even if we mess up really bad. And after this I believe that diver safety became a very big deal on the boats, and procedures were changed to make sure of that, at least on most boats. So what does crucifying the captain in this case accomplish? Does it send a message to all the other boats? I think that has already been done. Does Carlock deserve a whole bunch of money for breaking so many dive rules that he at least contributed to his own peril? I personally don't think so. Something, yes. But millions? No. So what is left to be accomplished other than some personal need to see this dive boat and it's owner/captain damaged in some way?

• Re: Re: Re: Drifting Dan case declared a mistrial Carlos 10:06:56 03/31/10 (1)
  • Carlock turned down $2M rumors 14:04:17 04/06/10 (0)