Bad Behavior by Carnival result in Lawsuit

First off I love the way all of you know the law, are you all lawyers that deal in international maritime law(admiralty law) and also binding contracts? By the way international maritime law is law of record in international waters, the only time the flag country comes in is if they are in that countries waters, in some cases if maritime does not cover something particular then it falls back to the flagged country next.

Just because a statement is in a contract and you both sign it does not mean that it is legal, all contracts in the courts eyes are written in the favor of the proposer of the contract, in this case Carnival, so it will be their burden to convince a judge to send it to arbitration. That being said, most states require arbitration in all civil cases before going to a jury any way.

As far as the detainment, if this was in US territorial waters then US law dictates what can be done. As for the person that says they work for a law enforcement agency, officers are not allowed to detain any one against their will for questioning unless they have been arrested. This action is abused by many officers, the reason asking for a lawyer is always recommended to help you with your rights. An officer can ask you to voluntarily answer questions but your right is to refuse and not answer any questions. In many cases even the bad guys never get questioned, they refuse to speak, so evidence has to be presented to a judge in order to obtain an arrest warrant. In this case the security may have been acting in good faith from eye witness testimony but they have the burden of proof via what ever means possible, sometimes the wrong people are convicted because of a witness mis identifies a bad guy. Once video was available then it should have been reviewed, the improper action most likely was the information getting to the victims family about the room number before the investigation was completed causing the process to be hastily and wrongly handled.

As far as lawsuit, he has numerous things to sue for, wrongful detention, defamation of character and party to assault. And before any of you experts chime in on not being able to sue big companies, first you can sue anybody in America if you know how to read a little research and know how to write a lawsuit. Which can be done at your local free law library.

After this incident, which we don't have all of the facts, and the incident on the Legend that video was provided, I have very little faith in the character or integrity of security team on Carnival ships.

No I am not a lawyer, just someone who deals in multi-million dollar contracts and law suits on a regular basis.

I will differ with you on your statement regarding flag state laws. International maritime law is there to regulate disputes between nations, as in between ships of two different nations. I can assure you that for the last 43 years that I have been sailing, mostly on US flag vessels, that US laws govern these US flag ships, regardless of where they are in the world.

The UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), article 92 states:

"Article 92. Status of ships

1. Ships shall sail under the flag of one State only and, save in exceptional cases expressly provided for in international treaties or in this Convention, shall be subject to its exclusive jurisdiction on the high seas." (bolding mine)

The UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), article 92 states:

 

"Article 92. Status of ships

1. Ships shall sail under the flag of one State only and, save in exceptional cases expressly provided for in international treaties or in this Convention, shall be subject to its exclusive jurisdiction on the high seas." (bolding mine)

Just as I said if not covered by international law then it falls to flagged country law, I recognize that you have sailed for many years but please read the whole thing.

Blue bolding mine.

Just as I said if not covered by international law then it falls to flagged country law, I recognize that you have sailed for many years but please read the whole thing.

 

Blue bolding mine.

I did read the whole thing, and my reading of your bolding says that only in exceptional cases (defined as "unusual, not typical") does any jurisdiction override the flag state.

I'm sure that most of the US flag shipping companies would be upset to learn that they could have ignored the US Jones Act regarding seaman's rights when their vessels were in international waters. Would have saved them tons of money.

I am sure that all ships agree to follow their flagged states laws not just the ones from the US. That being said yes the US laws may be more stringent so it appears they are always following our laws but in some cases there are other laws that the US may differ on that maritime says they must do, so they will follow that when in international waters, as I said that is the order that the laws must be followed. Not taking away from your add, in my opinion, about what US flagged ships must do. As far as I know Carnival has no US flagged ships.

Simply using US flag as an example, all flag states have the same jurisdiction over their ships. We will continue to disagree that the flag state is the primary and overriding authority not international law. Now, in disputes between ships, then you are correct. If your premise was correct, then as I said, US shipping companies could save lots of money by disregarding US law while in international waters, since in your scenario, the international law, as long as the situation was covered by international law, would prevail over the flag state, even if the flag state law was more restrictive.

We are agreeing more than you realize, as the ships have agreeded to their respective laws of their flagged countries, then yes they have agreed to follow the more restrictive laws of their own country, if it covered by both maritime and their respective law. What they can not do is go against what maritime says if it is more restrictive.

Just as in the US most states have agreed to follow all Federal laws with a few exceptions but the law that gives the citizen the most protection is usually the one followed. That being said in some cases you can still be prosecuted federally for a crime if the state offers protection yet the law broken is a federal law.

As this is getting off subject, I agree that the ship must follow maritime and in most cases their flagged countries laws at the same time.

So lesson here is research the law in the country the ship is flagged in.

First off I love the way all of you know the law, are you all lawyers that deal in international maritime law(admiralty law) and also binding contracts? By the way international maritime law is law of record in international waters, the only time the flag country comes in is if they are in that countries waters, in some cases if maritime does not cover something particular then it falls back to the flagged country next.

 

Just because a statement is in a contract and you both sign it does not mean that it is legal, all contracts in the courts eyes are written in the favor of the proposer of the contract, in this case Carnival, so it will be their burden to convince a judge to send it to arbitration. That being said, most states require arbitration in all civil cases before going to a jury any way.

 

As far as the detainment, if this was in US territorial waters then US law dictates what can be done. As for the person that says they work for a law enforcement agency, officers are not allowed to detain any one against their will for questioning unless they have been arrested. This action is abused by many officers, the reason asking for a lawyer is always recommended to help you with your rights. An officer can ask you to voluntarily answer questions but your right is to refuse and not answer any questions. In many cases even the bad guys never get questioned, they refuse to speak, so evidence has to be presented to a judge in order to obtain an arrest warrant. In this case the security may have been acting in good faith from eye witness testimony but they have the burden of proof via what ever means possible, sometimes the wrong people are convicted because of a witness mis identifies a bad guy. Once video was available then it should have been reviewed, the improper action most likely was the information getting to the victims family about the room number before the investigation was completed causing the process to be hastily and wrongly handled.

 

As far as lawsuit, he has numerous things to sue for, wrongful detention, defamation of character and party to assault. And before any of you experts chime in on not being able to sue big companies, first you can sue anybody in America if you know how to read a little research and know how to write a lawsuit. Which can be done at your local free law library.

 

After this incident, which we don't have all of the facts, and the incident on the Legend that video was provided, I have very little faith in the character or integrity of security team on Carnival ships.

 

No I am not a lawyer, just someone who deals in multi-million dollar contracts and law suits on a regular basis.

Thank you!! Wish I could like this comment x100. Love it when informed people add their input to these sorts of conversations

As far as the detainment, if this was in US territorial waters then US law dictates what can be done. As for the person that says they work for a law enforcement agency, officers are not allowed to detain any one against their will for questioning unless they have been arrested. This action is abused by many officers, the reason asking for a lawyer is always recommended to help you with your rights. An officer can ask you to voluntarily answer questions but your right is to refuse and not answer any questions. In many cases even the bad guys never get questioned, they refuse to speak, so evidence has to be presented to a judge in order to obtain an arrest warrant. In this case the security may have been acting in good faith from eye witness testimony but they have the burden of proof via what ever means possible, sometimes the wrong people are convicted because of a witness mis identifies a bad guy. Once video was available then it should have been reviewed, the improper action most likely was the information getting to the victims family about the room number before the investigation was completed causing the process to be hastily and wrongly handled.

An arrest does not need to be made in order to detain a person against their will. Investigative Detention only requires Reasonable Suspicion. Traffic stops are a good example of ID. You are not free to leave, but are not under arrest. A key element to ID is the length of time in which a person is detained. It must be reasonable given the circumstances. But regardless, you're crossing hairs. This is not a law enforcement entity we're talking about. This is Carnival. Carnival has every right to detain a person they think was involved in a crime or has violated guest conduct rules. If the plaintiff feels he was detained for an unreasonable amount of time, it's his burden to prove it before an arbitrator in the proper venue.

After this incident, which we don't have all of the facts, and the incident on the Legend that video was provided, I have very little faith in the character or integrity of security team on Carnival ships.

I do agree with this part of your post. As is natural in a forum like this, we rush to make judgements without all the facts. The following are questions that come to my mind...

1. How exactly was Carnival led to Mr. Sun to begin with? I find it very odd that they presented one ID to the parents. Did they pull up every single Asian male on board and do a photo line-up with the parents? Something is missing with that part of the story.

2. When Mr. Sun was detained, was he wearing sleeves? Maybe it wasn't apparent to Carnival that he had arms full of tattoos. Exactly how much did he look like the actual suspect?

3. What happened to the father? Was he charged for the assault? Did he and Mr. Sun have any dialogue after this incident? I'd really like to know the father's side of this entire story.

Traffic stop is not a good example of your supposed authority to detain a person, in the State of Texas an officer must inform you that you will receive a ticket(which is an arrest in the State of Texas) in order to keep you from leaving. This is also an event that they themselves witnessed negating all of the other information stated here about a third party witness. I have researched many states laws and this seems to be the case in most but not all.

A ticket is an arrest and the person is released on their own recognizance with a promise to appear before a judge in the allotted time. If this does not occur a judge then signs an arrest warrant. In some states an officer of the court including police officers can sign the arrest warrant if they are attesting to having first hand knowledge of the offense.

Laws are very tricky to understand unless you spend a lot of time researching all of the laws that pertain to a certain situation. I know all sorts of people in law enforcement from police officers to judges that do not know all of the laws and I do not expect them to, due to the sheer volume of laws.

Again I stated that if this incident occurred in US waters they are governed by US laws, Carnival security has the same abilities to hold and interrogate anyone they want but it could be considered unlawful detention if they are not an officer of the court, just as if anyone that is not an officer can only make a citizens arrest and detain someone if they have first hand knowledge of the offense. In this case they did not, unless they have some first hand knowledge, and yes the video would qualify unless it was later proven to have been doctored in some way, there should not have been a detention.

I understand that the offense is disturbing and it is with in the rights of a ship captain to restrict someone to quarters but I believe that the 90 minute interrogation if proven to be true is a little excessive. Again I am not an Attorney, I only offer my opinion and understanding of the law over the last 40 years or so.

Hunter, your opinion sounds somewhat educated, but I still do not agree. In my professional opinion (maritime and federal law is my field of expertise), this is not unlawful detention. In your example....which is not reality in this case...had this occurred in US waters, Carnival absolutely can legally detain a person until such time that person can be handed over to law enforcement. In fact, that is the very definition of lawful detention as a private entity.

But this didn't happen in US waters. Flag state is what applies here, along with civil tort in NSW. So this whole side conversation is kinda fruitless.

 

 

Again I stated that if this incident occurred in US waters they are governed by US laws,

 

I'll let you argue unlawful detention with the USCG investigator. However, if you look up wording such as "jurisdiction overlap of foreign flag ship in US waters", I find this and other writings on the SCOTUS ruling in 2005, Spector v NCL, which relates to the ADA and foreign flag ships:

https://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/working-papers/WP84e.pdf

This article points out the "clear statement rule" and its applicability to foreign flag ships. It points to cases in the 50's and 60's where the court ruled that the NLRA did not apply to foreign flag ships in US waters, since there was no "clear statement" to that effect. In Spector, the court ruled that the ADA did apply to foreign flag ships, in the absence of a "clear statement, except if the provisions of the ADA deal with the "internal affairs of the vessel". The court decided that in order to affect the internal affairs of a foreign flag ship, there would need to be a "clear statement" to that effect. Going back even further, the court ruled that Prohibition applied to foreign flag ships in US waters, since Congress intended the act to "extend to the territorial waters of the US". So, there is only a limited amount of specifically named "extraterritorial" jurisdiction that the US has passed, and that are binding on a foreign flag ship. Yes, in some instances, in reference to some laws, US law applies to foreign flag ships in US waters, but not always. The guiding principle used when determining the jurisdictional overlap between flag state and port state is that the flag state's law applies unless the action affects the safety or well-being of the port state.

Carnival security has the same abilities to hold and interrogate anyone they want but it could be considered unlawful detention if they are not an officer of the court, just as if anyone that is not an officer can only make a citizens arrest and detain someone if they have first hand knowledge of the offense. In this case they did not, unless they have some first hand knowledge, and yes the video would qualify unless it was later proven to have been doctored in some way, there should not have been a detention.

 

Again, I will disagree. Maritime law and the flag state's licensing laws authorize the ship's Captain to enforce the laws of the flag state (only on that particular vessel he is commanding).

 

I understand that the offense is disturbing and it is with in the rights of a ship captain to restrict someone to quarters but I believe that the 90 minute interrogation if proven to be true is a little excessive. Again I am not an Attorney, I only offer my opinion and understanding of the law over the last 40 years or so.

Was this incident done poorly, yes indeed. Is the person due some compensation, yes indeed. But it must be based on the flag state laws, any port state laws (if the ship was in territorial waters), but not on US laws. I don't believe the US has made a "clear statement" of extraterritoriality for "wrongful detention", if that is even proven to be applicable.

Thanks, Paul, you posted while I was composing this novel.

Certainly it is their ship and they can do as they please, whether it is lawful or not, hence the lawsuit, if this is decided in court it will set precedence for future actions. This is why it is in Carnival's best to settle out of court as stated by someone else above.

I am not aware of any detention laws in the international laws other than a captain having someone either confined to cabin or removed from their ship. If the law of their flagged country gives them to enforce the law then they are an officer of that countries court then(unknown to me). As far as them breaking US law in our waters they are most certainly bond by our laws how else would the USCG be able to arrest and detain people on foreign flagged vessels for trafficking drugs or weapons or other illegal acts. Happens all of the time so there may be something in the maritime that has been added since the cases were adjudicated in the 50's and 60's.

I won't respond any more to this thread because we are way off topic, this is a discussion for a law forum somewhere. We can wait and see how the lawsuit is settled and hopefully someone will come here and inform us all of the decision made by the court.

Golly folks....when was the last time you looked at your sale and sign card....I have sailed 17 times since 2005 (all on Carnival) and never has there been a room number on the card......but......if you looked at one of the photos that showed the card involved you should have noticed that this incident happened in 1997. Maybe we should be asking....who and why dredged this story up in 2018.

Golly folks....when was the last time you looked at your sale and sign card....I have sailed 17 times since 2005 (all on Carnival) and never has there been a room number on the card......but......if you looked at one of the photos that showed the card involved you should have noticed that this incident happened in 1997. Maybe we should be asking....who and why dredged this story up in 2018.

Don't think it happened in 1997, since that is not the person's name mentioned as the accused. I think the blogger only googled a Carnival card that would have had the cabin number, and had to look that far back.

Golly folks....when was the last time you looked at your sale and sign card....I have sailed 17 times since 2005 (all on Carnival) and never has there been a room number on the card......but......if you looked at one of the photos that showed the card involved you should have noticed that this incident happened in 1997. Maybe we should be asking....who and why dredged this story up in 2018.

That blogger was using anecdotal photos throughout his whole video. I doubt Carnival showed the father the actual sign and sail card, being that they have neither pictures nor room numbers on them, not to mention they would have to print one. My guess is they showed him a screen shot of the man's on board profile.

UPdate: After digging around the internet.....this happened in Sydney....(down under one) in December of 2016......there was something about the way the story was presented leaning toward the fact it was just recent.....a terrible thing for the family to go thru.....regardless....and who altered the original vid...?? Did the Bob guy get hacked?

Why would Carnival get sued? It was a mistake, sucked for him being falsely accused, that wasn't their fault, they were told by another passenger that he did something. Yes, they should have checked video surveillance before the interrogation, shame on them, but they offered him a meal in a specialty restaurant to make up for it. I would have personally pushed for something more, maybe an excursion or OBC, but they didn't ignore it.

Carnival CL GAVE (or at the very least ALLOWED) the mother of the 'allegedly molested' child to have Mr. Sun's PERSONAL info .... name, cabin #, etc. THEN she told hubby and hubby BROKE into this man's cabin and physically assaulted him and threatened him!

THEN Carnival detained the innocent man for 90 minutes or more and accused him and coerced him to confess and AFTER 90 minutes of harassment and mistreatment, they show the video that exonerates the innocent man! ALL of this is worthy of a lawsuit ... and I agree ... in the millions!

Carnival CL GAVE (or at the very least ALLOWED) the mother of the 'allegedly molested' child to have Mr. Sun's PERSONAL info .... name, cabin #, etc. THEN she told hubby and hubby BROKE into this man's cabin and physically assaulted him and threatened him!

 

THEN Carnival detained the innocent man for 90 minutes or more and accused him and coerced him to confess and AFTER 90 minutes of harassment and mistreatment, they show the video that exonerates the innocent man! ALL of this is worthy of a lawsuit ... and I agree ... in the millions!

Truthfully, at this time you have one side of the story. And this is not even the court filings that Mr. Sun's lawyers filed (or intend to file), all you have is what the Sun family told the press and/or this blogger.

Carnival CL GAVE (or at the very least ALLOWED) the mother of the 'allegedly molested' child to have Mr. Sun's PERSONAL info .... name, cabin #, etc. THEN she told hubby and hubby BROKE into this man's cabin and physically assaulted him and threatened him!

 

 

 

THEN Carnival detained the innocent man for 90 minutes or more and accused him and coerced him to confess and AFTER 90 minutes of harassment and mistreatment, they show the video that exonerates the innocent man! ALL of this is worthy of a lawsuit ... and I agree ... in the millions!

I think it should be hundreds of millions...... really? Curious as to how you came to the amount? Do you arbitrate cases like this? I never knew we had so many experts here...tried....convicted....surprised a few executions are not in order.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Ummm....I'm sure someone mentioned this, but I don't have time to read all the ridiculousness. Sail and Sign cards do NOT have room numbers on them. The one shown in the video is from 1997. Maybe they did then, I don't know.

They didn't expose his room number, he called security after a passenger came to his room accusing him, a passenger, not an employee.

Did you watch the same video as the rest of us? And the WHOLE video? They DID expose his room number when the wife of the assailant was with security. They showed his photo file- the one that is in use ALL OVER the ship such as when you buy a drink or try to embark/debark. Next time you're on board any line, pay closer attention to what actually pops up on that little screen. The wife noticed the man's room number, told her husband, and that is how he ended up at Mr. Sun's room. When Mr. Sun called, ship's security came and took him away, basically accusing him of a crime, asking him to confess, and denying him medical attention. Worse, when they FINALLY looked at the the security footage it was Mr. Sun who had to point out to the supposed security personnel that the person on the screen wasn't him because he has many tattoos and the person on screen had none. Their apology was basically well, sorry, I mean, you're both Asian.

If you find no wrong in any of that then you're clueless. I can only hope this doesn't one day happen to you or someone you love. Maybe then you'd care.

I think it should be hundreds of millions...... really? Curious as to how you came to the amount? Do you arbitrate cases like this? I never knew we had so many experts here...tried....convicted....surprised a few executions are not in order.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

They should just gift the man the Triumph as settlement. What better way to get rid of problem customer and cursed ship than let him set sail and be stranded forever at sea somewhere. LOL.

What better way to get rid of problem customer and cursed ship than let him set sail and be stranded forever at sea somewhere. LOL.

How is he a problem customer?