|Where Dan surfaced|
Posted by Ken Kurtis on October 25, 2010 at 11:28:06:|
In Reply to: Re: If the search had started at Eureka . . . posted by Thalassamania on October 24, 2010 at 23:31:53:
Thalassamania wrote: "I would differ, and respectfully submit that the first breach of duty occurred when the diver surfaced, blew a whistle and waived and was not seen by anyone one the boat."
Not an unreasonable assumption but there's a great disparagy about where Dan surfaced. He changed his story at trial from what he said at his depo.
At trial, he says he was 400 feet from the rig, the boat was between him and the rig 9so maybe he wass 200 feet fr9om the boat), and - on a diagram he drew in court as an exhibit - he was due north of the rig, more or less between the NW and NE legs. However . . .
The current was moving west-to-east. Dan's claimed position is 90 degrees perpendicular to current direction. I fail to see how he could have drifted 90 degrees perpedicular to the current.
Based on his previous testimony and his statements of being near a large mooring buoy (which is 1039 feet away from the NE corner of the rig), and based on the speed of ther drift and the time he was in the blue with no reference, I think Dan surfaced roughly 1100 feet to the east of the rig.
This is an area where (1) no diver has ever surfaced before, and (2) is nowhere near the area surrounding the rigs where you'd reasonably expect anyone to be watching. It's essentially waaaaay behind the boat and nowhere near the dive area.
It somewhat like me saying we should meet in Maui but then I go to Kaui and wonder why you didn't find me. They're both Hawaii, right???
Also, a staged picture (that I took) was entered into evidence of a diver in the water with an inflated safety sausage. The diver is 1100 feet from the rig and the boat is on the NW corner. The only thing visible in the picture is a black speck, and you have to know to look for it. Point is, this idea of blowing up a safety sausage means you'll be seen isn't necessarily true.
So your general premise of duty is fine had Dan surfaced that close to the boat but I just don't think that what he testified to in court is what actually happened.
|Optional Link URL:|
|Optional Link Title:|
|Optional Image URL:|
|Post Background Color:||White Black|
|Post Area Page Width:||Normal Full|
|You must type in the
scrambled text key to
This is required to
help prevent spam bots
from flooding this BBS.