Star Princess investigation

[voyageur9]

The formal investigation by Bermuda (the state of registry of Star Princess and thus the governing maritime authority) has commenced as requested by the government's attorney-general. (This was confirmed by one of the people involved in the probe.)

 

At this stage it is not a criminal investigation (and seems unlikely to ever become one) but solely an investigation into the facts and circumstances as to why Star Princess did not render assistance to the small Panamanian fishing boat Fifty Cent. However, Bermuda's police have been asked to assist. (Presumably a number of people will be asked what they did or didn't do, logs will be examined as will -- if they still exist -- recordings of what transpired on the bridge.)

 

Usually the findings of such investigations are made public. However, the time frame is more likely to be months, rather than weeks. If there is reason to hold a formal maritime board of inquiry and/or pass the file on to other authorities, that will be determined later.

 

The inquiry is not intended to determine why the Fifty Cent was far from the coast or whether it was properly equipped. The obligation to render assistance doesn't depend on those in distress being good sailors in well-equipped vessels who made no mistakes.

[johnmik1]

I can't understand any reason why - if Captain Perrin did know about the stranded boat and that it was in distress - he wouldn't have stopped to investigate. It's unlike his behavior and it's unlike Princess' policies. While there are plenty of accusations that he ignored the plight of the boat, there's no logical reason why he would.

 

I received an email from Ed Perrin where he indicated that the first he heard of any of this was last Tuesday!He is crushed by all these accusations and expressed concern for his bridge officers and how these deaths would effect their feelings,when they had no knowledge of the situation.This is the same Ed Perrin I have been friends with for the last 10 years.Always a gentleman and an outstanding Captain!

[Loonbeam]

Thats the whole point of an 'independent investigation' so that a neutral 3rd party validates his (and everyone elses) statements. Do I think he is lying? Of course not. But just having someone say 'I didn't know' legally does not mean they didn't know. This is why we have inquiries and courts and statements made under oath.

 

I can't understand any reason why - if Captain Perrin did know about the stranded boat and that it was in distress - he wouldn't have stopped to investigate. It's unlike his behavior and it's unlike Princess' policies. While there are plenty of accusations that he ignored the plight of the boat, there's no logical reason why he would.

[billco]

I received an email from Ed Perrin where he indicated that the first he heard of any of this was last Tuesday!He is crushed by all these accusations and expressed concern for his bridge officers and how these deaths would effect their feelings,when they had no knowledge of the situation.This is the same Ed Perrin I have been friends with for the last 10 years.Always a gentleman and an outstanding Captain!

I am surprised Captain Perrin hasn't been counseled to not discuss this with anyone, even friends. Looks like Princess might not of taken this too serious if they didn't notify him until April 17 when the story broke on April 13.

[bdjam]

I received an email from Ed Perrin where he indicated that the first he heard of any of this was last Tuesday!He is crushed by all these accusations and expressed concern for his bridge officers and how these deaths would effect their feelings,when they had no knowledge of the situation.This is the same Ed Perrin I have been friends with for the last 10 years.Always a gentleman and an outstanding Captain!

I hope you let him know that he does have the support of some of his potential future passengers.

 

Thats the whole point of an 'independent investigation' so that a neutral 3rd party validates his (and everyone elses) statements. Do I think he is lying? Of course not. But just having someone say 'I didn't know' legally does not mean they didn't know. This is why we have inquiries and courts and statements made under oath.

Well if we're going to get down to brass tacks, it seems that inquiries and courts and statements made under oath don't necessarily come out validation of statements or truths anyway.

[johnmik1]

I am surprised Captain Perrin hasn't been counseled to not discuss this with anyone, even friends. Looks like Princess might not of taken this too serious if they didn't notify him until April 17 when the story broke on April 13.

 

Perhaps he is on vacation and unavailable?

[Charles4515]

I hope you let him know that he does have the support of some of his potential future passengers.

 

Well if we're going to get down to brass tacks, it seems that inquiries and courts and statements made under oath don't necessarily come out validation of statements or truths anyway.

 

And investigations by governments or other "outside" third parties are often not neutral or have an agenda. Sometimes they are looking for a scapegoat. So we don't have to agree with the conclusions. I will read whatever report with interest. That does not mean it will be satisfactory.

[flag fan]

HI All

 

 

 

Ed Perrin is a very nice captain and if there was the chance of this putting a mark on his record, if I was Princess I would give him the Royal to show he has done nothing wrong.

 

yours shogun

 

I see this differently. I think Princess has an obligation to not put the captain in charge of the Star or any other ship until after the investigation has cleared him (at least the internal Princess investigation, if not the Bermuda investigation). There is a serious issue--after a crew member was informed of a ship in distress by a passenger (or passengers), the ship failed to render any assistance (contrary to maritime law). (These facts do not seem to be in dispute by Princess.) The only statement by Princess on this matter is that there was a miscommunication and the captain was never advised of the boat in distress--which would indicate that Princess has already concluded the captain is not at fault. However, Princess also stated that the matter was under investigation and to date no final report has been issued. Any show of support for the captain by Princess before the end of the investigation would, to me, indicate that the investigation was a sham--they already decided the conclusion and it is only a public relations exercise. I realize that putting the captain on leave or a similar status while the investigation is pending may put a cloud (perhaps unfairly) over the captain, but a serious mistake was made on his ship while he was in command that resulted in the loss of life. Having to wait a while before being put in charge of a ship again while there is a thorough investigation to determine if his actions are in any way at fault seems reasonable and appropriate.

[JLC@SD]

I see this differently. I think Princess has an obligation to not put the captain in charge of the Star or any other ship until after the investigation has cleared him (at least the internal Princess investigation, if not the Bermuda investigation). There is a serious issue--after a crew member was informed of a ship in distress by a passenger (or passengers), the ship failed to render any assistance (contrary to maritime law). (These facts do not seem to be in dispute by Princess.) The only statement by Princess on this matter is that there was a miscommunication and the captain was never advised of the boat in distress--which would indicate that Princess has already concluded the captain is not at fault. However, Princess also stated that the matter was under investigation and to date no final report has been issued. Any show of support for the captain by Princess before the end of the investigation would, to me, indicate that the investigation was a sham--they already decided the conclusion and it is only a public relations exercise. I realize that putting the captain on leave or a similar status while the investigation is pending may put a cloud (perhaps unfairly) over the captain, but a serious mistake was made on his ship while he was in command that resulted in the loss of life. Having to wait a while before being put in charge of a ship again while there is a thorough investigation to determine if his actions are in any way at fault seems reasonable and appropriate.

 

.......what ever happen to innocent until proven guilty..........or at least innocent until charged.

[Scrapchick]

I received an email from Ed Perrin where he indicated that the first he heard of any of this was last Tuesday!He is crushed by all these accusations and expressed concern for his bridge officers and how these deaths would effect their feelings,when they had no knowledge of the situation.This is the same Ed Perrin I have been friends with for the last 10 years.Always a gentleman and an outstanding Captain!

 

Please let him know he has a lot of support out here... As a recent passenger who sailed with him, I thought he was a fantastic captain and a delight to talk to. He had a marvelous sense of humor and was passionate about his job. I enjoyed sailing with him very much and am saddened by what has happened. I would be delighted to be on board ship with him again. A lovely man and a great ambassador for Princess.

[PescadoAmarillo]

I, too see all the enduring and undying support for the captain as just a bit premature. I also find it a bit tasteless. Two lives were lost which the Star possibly could have prevented. I don't doubt Princess's claim that Captain Perrin was unaware of the situation, but something happened. I've read the NPR interview with two of the birders. They begged the FC consultant to ask someone from the bridge to come down to the Promenade Deck to look through their binoculars to see what they were seeing. Princess doesn't dispute that the birders reported the incident. Someone who has posted here was standing near the FCC desk when this event unfolded. There is no doubt or dispute that it was reported. Princess says the captain was never told. Aren't you are just a wee bit concerned about what happened in between???

 

Look at it this way...if two teenagers were spotted falling overboard from the Star, two people on the Promenade saw it, ran to the closest phone, which happened to be at the manned FCC desk, saw that two-stripe officer (which is what the FC consultant is) phone the bridge, took that person up to the Promenade and begged them to get someone from the bridge to do something, and the ship sailed on...

 

would you all be so quick to praise the congeniality of the ship's captain who was unaware of the situation until a month later when two lives had been lost?

[Mom33]

I see this differently. I think Princess has an obligation to not put the captain in charge of the Star or any other ship until after the investigation has cleared him (at least the internal Princess investigation, if not the Bermuda investigation). There is a serious issue--after a crew member was informed of a ship in distress by a passenger (or passengers), the ship failed to render any assistance (contrary to maritime law). (These facts do not seem to be in dispute by Princess.) The only statement by Princess on this matter is that there was a miscommunication and the captain was never advised of the boat in distress--which would indicate that Princess has already concluded the captain is not at fault. However, Princess also stated that the matter was under investigation and to date no final report has been issued. Any show of support for the captain by Princess before the end of the investigation would, to me, indicate that the investigation was a sham--they already decided the conclusion and it is only a public relations exercise. I realize that putting the captain on leave or a similar status while the investigation is pending may put a cloud (perhaps unfairly) over the captain, but a serious mistake was made on his ship while he was in command that resulted in the loss of life. Having to wait a while before being put in charge of a ship again while there is a thorough investigation to determine if his actions are in any way at fault seems reasonable and appropriate.

 

There is no proof of that at this time. It remains to be seen until after the investigation.

[rdsqrl]

Occam's Razor: the fact is, the bridge lookout probably saw another boat entirely, which would account for the supposed acknowledgement they received. Or else the bridge simply didn't/couldn't see the boat and had no way of knowing their optical equipment was less powerful than that of the birders -- something maybe a Future Cruise person was not in a position to realize.

 

If the bridge doesn't take the reports of a non-deck officer seriously, then that is a problem. But, why didn't the FC person escalate? If s/he really did go out on deck and really did see this little boat and see someone waving wildly, why didn't s/he contact the captain or someone higher up than the bridge phone-answerer directly if s/he felt the bridge was unresponsive and realized the ship was sailing on?

 

Frankly, while I agree with your assessment to a point, I doubt a man overboard call would have been greeted with indifference even if the lookout on the bridge couldn't see people in the water. Unless there's something systemically wrong with bridge procedures aboard the Star and that is what the investigation will hopefully determine.

[RickEk]

I see this differently. I think Princess has an obligation to not put the captain in charge of the Star or any other ship until after the investigation has cleared him (at least the internal Princess investigation, if not the Bermuda investigation). There is a serious issue--after a crew member was informed of a ship in distress by a passenger (or passengers), the ship failed to render any assistance (contrary to maritime law). (These facts do not seem to be in dispute by Princess.) The only statement by Princess on this matter is that there was a miscommunication and the captain was never advised of the boat in distress--which would indicate that Princess has already concluded the captain is not at fault. However, Princess also stated that the matter was under investigation and to date no final report has been issued. Any show of support for the captain by Princess before the end of the investigation would, to me, indicate that the investigation was a sham--they already decided the conclusion and it is only a public relations exercise. I realize that putting the captain on leave or a similar status while the investigation is pending may put a cloud (perhaps unfairly) over the captain, but a serious mistake was made on his ship while he was in command that resulted in the loss of life. Having to wait a while before being put in charge of a ship again while there is a thorough investigation to determine if his actions are in any way at fault seems reasonable and appropriate.

 

The more I think about it, the more that I would tend to agree with this. Administrative leave until the investigation is complete is entirely reasonable. Maybe this has not been done (or announced) because Captain Perrin is on vacation.

 

.......what ever happen to innocent until proven guilty..........or at least innocent until charged.

 

Absolutely, but Princess does have an obligation to its passengers (and shareholders) to not allow Captain Perrin to command another ship until he is absolved (which I sincerely hope is the case).

[flag fan]

I do believe that people should be treated as innocent until they are proven guilty, but that is not inconsistent with suspending someone from his duties (with pay) while there is an investigation. Of course in the criminal context, the "innocent until proven guilty" does not mean suspects are not arrested and jailed and required to put up bail (and no release on bail in some cases) because they are innocent until after the jury has spoken.

 

My statement that a serious mistake was made that resulted in the loss of life is based on what I think are uncontested facts--a floundering ship was not given assistance by the Star Princess after the problem was reported to an official of the cruise line. I don't think even Princess is disputing this; the question is whether there was a tragic but reasonable misunderstanding and miscommunication or whether there was negligence or malfeasance by someone (not necessarily the captain) in the employ of the company.

 

I don't wish any problems on the captain and I have no reason to question his integrity or professionalism and if I were to bet, it would be that the final report is that the captain was not informed of the ship in distress and did nothing wrong. But at this stage it would be just wishful thinking. The captain and others should be cleared (if at all) after the investigation, not before; until then the right approach is do nothing that will hamper the investigation or undermine its integrity -- IMHO.

[Loonbeam]

We're not dealing with criminal charges here. He could easily be put into a training or other office role with pay until resolved, similar to what happens to airline pilots, police, firefighters etc when an incident happens until the inquiry is complete. It's a matter of legal liability.

 

.......what ever happen to innocent until proven guilty..........or at least innocent until charged.

[Loonbeam]

Princess has already admitted there was a miscommunication, i.e. mistake. Whether it resulted in loss of life will never be determined, as there is no way to judge what the end outcome would be.

 

There is no proof of that at this time. It remains to be seen until after the investigation.

[bdjam]

Any show of support for the captain by Princess before the end of the investigation would, to me, indicate that the investigation was a sham--they already decided the conclusion and it is only a public relations exercise. I realize that putting the captain on leave or a similar status while the investigation is pending may put a cloud (perhaps unfairly) over the captain, but a serious mistake was made on his ship while he was in command that resulted in the loss of life. Having to wait a while before being put in charge of a ship again while there is a thorough investigation to determine if his actions are in any way at fault seems reasonable and appropriate.

God some of you people are tough - I hope you never get hung in a public forum before you have a chance to tell your story. Not only have two wayward men unfortunately died, and not only would you assume that because they did the Captain is not competent to command a ship, but you also think Princess is putting on a show and don't really take this matter seriously. I'm glad you are able to see through the charade :rolleyes:

.......what ever happen to innocent until proven guilty..........or at least innocent until charged.

Amen, brother.

 

I, too see all the enduring and undying support for the captain as just a bit premature. I also find it a bit tasteless. Two lives were lost which the Star possibly could have prevented. I don't doubt Princess's claim that Captain Perrin was unaware of the situation, but something happened. I've read the NPR interview with two of the birders. They begged the FC consultant to ask someone from the bridge to come down to the Promenade Deck to look through their binoculars to see what they were seeing. Princess doesn't dispute that the birders reported the incident. Someone who has posted here was standing near the FCC desk when this event unfolded. There is no doubt or dispute that it was reported. Princess says the captain was never told. Aren't you are just a wee bit concerned about what happened in between???

If you want to talk about tasteless, see the first post that I've quoted here - I don't think it any less tasteless to accuse someone of wrong doing before you know what happened.

Look at it this way...if two teenagers were spotted falling overboard from the Star, two people on the Promenade saw it, ran to the closest phone, which happened to be at the manned FCC desk, saw that two-stripe officer (which is what the FC consultant is) phone the bridge, took that person up to the Promenade and begged them to get someone from the bridge to do something, and the ship sailed on...would you all be so quick to praise the congeniality of the ship's captain who was unaware of the situation until a month later when two lives had been lost?

I don't think the Future Cruise Consultant wears stripes, officer or not. In fact I know they don't. And didn't the birders indicate that an officer did come to the rail and looked to see what was there? I don't honestly believe that if he saw something he would just turn away.

Occam's Razor: the fact is, the bridge lookout probably saw another boat entirely, which would account for the supposed acknowledgement they received. Or else the bridge simply didn't/couldn't see the boat and had no way of knowing their optical equipment was less powerful than that of the birders -- something maybe a Future Cruise person was not in a position to realize.

 

If the bridge doesn't take the reports of a non-deck officer seriously, then that is a problem. But, why didn't the FC person escalate? If s/he really did go out on deck and really did see this little boat and see someone waving wildly, why didn't s/he contact the captain or someone higher up than the bridge phone-answerer directly if s/he felt the bridge was unresponsive and realized the ship was sailing on?

 

Frankly, while I agree with your assessment to a point, I doubt a man overboard call would have been greeted with indifference even if the lookout on the bridge couldn't see people in the water. Unless there's something systemically wrong with bridge procedures aboard the Star and that is what the investigation will hopefully determine.

So I'm thinking the bird lady goes in and goes all the way from Deck 7 to Deck 5 and reports to the Future Cruise Consultant who somehow has binoculars with him and comes up on Promenade and sees the boat and then reports it. We don't know how agile she is - maybe it took her a while to get down to Deck 5 - makes me wonder why she didn't stop at Deck 6 where the Customer Relations Desk is, especially since Deck 5 has only passenger services and no official crew, but I digress. Maybe she waited for the elevator. In any case, by the time the report gets to the bridge, the ship has sailed at least a mile or two so now the teeny tiny boat that was two and a half miles away and only visible with high powered binoculars is five miles away and behind Star Princess - what's the lookout going to see? Without confirmation that there was something to go after, would they report to the officer on watch or the Captain? Maybe instead of failure to communicate there was a failure to see something outside of the range of sight. If we hold Star Princess responsible for that, then we have to hold any ship at sea responsible for not rescuing any sailor in distress - whether in sight or not.

 

Just sayin'

[bdjam]

I don't wish any problems on the captain and I have no reason to question his integrity or professionalism and if I were to bet, it would be that the final report is that the captain was not informed of the ship in distress and did nothing wrong. But at this stage it would be just wishful thinking. The captain and others should be cleared (if at all) after the investigation, not before; until then the right approach is do nothing that will hamper the investigation or undermine its integrity -- IMHO.

The Captain's reputation is gone no matter what the investigation turns up - he's been tried and convicted in the media and on the inter web ... those who have done it either don't know the power of the tool they are using...or they do. It's unfortunate that people die from accidents, but death through the internet is preventable.

[PescadoAmarillo]

Bdjam, I am mobile, so I am not going to go quote by quote. But you are wrong on several counts.

 

The FC consultant IS a two stripe officer, higher than the Captains Circle host or the front line people at the PSD. His attire has nothing to do with it. His was the first phone the one of the birders (I would expect better from you than what I'm sure you meant to be a derogatory use of the term bird lady) encountered when they re-entered the ship on Deck 7. It makes no difference. We have all been led to expect swift and immediate action if we notify a deck hand in the event of an emergency.

 

It was, however, the FC consultant, a two stripe officer, who was notified. It has been stated and corroborated that he phoned the bridge. He is also the person who accompanied the birder to the Promenade Deck and used their binoculars to view the fishing boat. Read the NPR interview transcript; I'm not making this up.

 

The FC desk on the Star is on Deck 7, not Deck 5. In fact, if one re-entered the ship on Deck 7 just aft of the Princess Theater, it IS the first phone one might encounter. I doubt much time passed at all before the time the birder entered the ship and the time she got the attention of the FC consultant. We're not talking about two flights of stairs. And I've seen the photos of the birders. Old and feeble, of body or mind, they do not appear to be.

 

Perhaps you do not find it tasteless to discuss Captains Perrin's cocktail party manner at the same time calling the dead teens "wayward" and the birders "bird lady" but I do. And I'm not pointing fingers in ANY direction. I'm just saying something happened, and I'm curious as to why others aren't.

 

Some of us are tough?? I would consider that, since this same thing could happen again tomorrow with the same result, it is those who still find it's the appropriate time to discuss a captain's social skills to be the tough ones. Very tough, and very cold.

[richard1s]

Occam's Razor

 

 

That would mean the simplest and most obvious; which would seem to be that the incident was reported and whoever received the report, chose to not advance the information up the chain of command.

[caribill]

My statement that a serious mistake was made that resulted in the loss of life is based on what I think are uncontested facts--a floundering ship was not given assistance by the Star Princess after the problem was reported to an official of the cruise line.

 

I do not think it is an uncontested fact that the ship that was seen over two miles by a person on the distressed boat was indeed the Star Princess.

 

Uncontested is that it was white.

[rtlk]

Until such time as the investitgations are complete the Captian, no matter how nice a guy he maybe, must not return to a possition of authority, he is was responsible, he was in command of the ship, two folks died. Princess/Carnival has once again stumbled on the PR standpoint. To let this Captain return until all questions are answered is just unthinkable.......

[JLC@SD]

Until such time as the investitgations are complete the Captian, no matter how nice a guy he maybe, must not return to a possition of authority, he is was responsible, he was in command of the ship, two folks died. Princess/Carnival has once again stumbled on the PR standpoint. To let this Captain return until all questions are answered is just unthinkable.......

 

....Ready..........Fire............Aim..........:):)

[Di Princess]

HI All - A Captain can have up to 3 months away from his ship, often there will be holiday time, as well as training and stuff that they do at the head office, so would not expect him back for a few weeks. Ed Perrin is a very nice captain and if there were the chance of this putting a mark on his record, if I were Princess I would give him the Royal to show he has done nothing wrong. yours shogun

 

BRAVO, Sho,

I'll second this. I will be on the Royal Princess Inaugural cruise and I think this a stunning suggestion.

 

:D;):cool:;):D