Star Princess investigation

[whitecap]

OK - so from what has been stated, we know the Captain didn't receive such a message and you're postulating about what the message that was sent contained. Based on the picture, it hardly looks like a vessel in distress. Hmm - given these guys were from a poor nation like Panama I wonder where they came up with the money for attorneys. Never mind. Another inconsistency - interesting that they are only "likely" about the time but in the email to the Coast Guard they quoted exact coordinates.

 

The implication that the Captain sailed away after receiving the report is equal to calling him for manslaughter. Personally, that's what I find disgusting about this whole sad story.

 

Attorneys, in some cases, like reporters; ever wonder the real reason behind their sudden appearances in cases like this? For those interested, I suggest you Google the reporter who wrote about the incident and who interviewed the lone survivor; see what others in Panama think of his work. As I have said before, I'll wait for the "official investigation" before making any comment on what people did or didn't do.

[Sulo]

After reading most but not all posts, I too, am saddened to hear so many assuming guilt on the Captain's part. Please, please, ease up on finding the captain guilty immediately. Let's see what comes out of the investigation. If the captain was made aware of the situation he would be required by maritime law to investigate. There are enough officers and crew on the bridge who would have been aware if the message had come through.

 

The following happened to us back in October 2009. DH and I were sailing on a westbound transatlantic on the QM2. At one point my DH saw what looked like the orange canopy of a small liferaft not too far from the ship, drifting away quite quickly as we were sailing at a good speed. However, there was no-one signalling to the ship and we hoped there was no-one on it and that it was just a lost liferaft. Being a sailor DH was really bothered by it, and we headed off to the purser's desk to report it.

 

When we asked the girl to please notify the bridge, she replied that she was unable to call them at that time because they were extremely busy!!!! When we insisted that someone be notified she said she would send an e-mail to the bridge!!!!! My DH asked her to note the approximate time that the liferaft was seen and to ensure the e-mail was sent 'urgent'.

 

Later that night we had a ship's officer join us at our dining table and DH told him the story and how disappointed we were in how it was handled. He told us he would follow up and get back to us.

 

The next day we received a call (can't remember from what dept.) thanking us for our concern, and that the issue would be brought up at the next staff meeting, emphasizing the importance of anything like this being reported by passengers.

 

We never did find out if the bridge was notified. It could have happened quite easily on this Princess ship. So lets have open minds until the results are in.

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

Something I am taking away from this conversation is that there needs to be an effective way for passengers to escalate safety concerns onboard. I hope there is some discussion taking place at Princess (etc.) about language that passengers can use to characterize safety incidents in such a way that a systematic response is triggered.

 

I'm impressed by the extent the bird watchers went to trying to attract some attention to this incident at the time it happened. It was, after all, someone onboard calling family ashore that triggered the attention of the local maritime authorities in Naples and the Italian Coast Guard to Costa Concordia.

[gdisney]

Something I am taking away from this conversation is that there needs to be an effective way for passengers to escalate safety concerns onboard. I hope there is some discussion taking place at Princess (etc.) about language that passengers can use to characterize safety incidents in such a way that a systematic response is triggered.

 

I would actually argue that it's the responsibility of the crew, not the passengers, to effectively "escalate" safety concerns. Certainly, passengers should report concerns, but it seems to me it's what happens after things are reported that needs to be addressed. Just my two cents :)

[voyageur9]

Something I am taking away from this conversation is that there needs to be an effective way for passengers to escalate safety concerns onboard. I hope there is some discussion taking place at Princess (etc.) about language that passengers can use to characterize safety incidents in such a way that a systematic response is triggered.

 

I'm impressed by the extent the bird watchers went to trying to attract some attention to this incident at the time it happened. It was, after all, someone onboard calling family ashore that triggered the attention of the local maritime authorities in Naples and the Italian Coast Guard to Costa Concordia.

 

Thanks for making such an intelligent and constructive suggestion in what has too often strayed into a thread for blaming the victims. Presumably everyone, including those those most stridently insisting that nothing went wrong, would welcome changes that, in future, would enhance the chances that the two men who died might have been rescued.

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

I would actually argue that it's the responsibility of the crew, not the passengers, to effectively "escalate" safety concerns. Certainly, passengers should report concerns, but it seems to me it's what happens after things are reported that needs to be addressed. Just my two cents :)

 

Undoubtedly, those conversations are taking place in the executive offices of cruise lines everwhere this week.

 

I certainly hope that no crew member, regardless of his or her role, would fail to act immediately to escalate a passenger report of a "man overboard." That phrase conveys an urgency that everyone onboard (presumably) understands and it triggers a systematic response. I'm wondering about similar language from the passengers who observe other emergencies that would likewise trigger a systematic response from the crew....and how to proceed if/when it doesn't.

[robgvic]

My main question is still, how can one person on the fishing boat die of dehydration and another survive for another week? Still many questions in this whole situation and I refuse to prejudge

[voyageur9]

My main question is still, how can one person on the fishing boat die of dehydration and another survive for another week? Still many questions in this whole situation and I refuse to prejudge

 

Seafaring lore is full of instances of people dying of dehydration at different rates. In this instance, the survivor claimed, a major rain provided an infusion of fresh water after his colleagues died. Or maybe (as some seem to be insinuating) there was foul play on board 50 Cent, maybe murder, or cannibalism.

 

None of which is germane to the issue; which is whether or not Star Princess' captain and crew acted appropriately and in accordance with maritime law after passengers passed along their assessment that a nearby small boat had been spotted making what they considered to be signals of distress.

[Charles4515]

I would actually argue that it's the responsibility of the crew, not the passengers, to effectively "escalate" safety concerns. Certainly, passengers should report concerns, but it seems to me it's what happens after things are reported that needs to be addressed. Just my two cents :)

 

What the cruise lines need to do, all of them not just Princess, is have meetings with all crew and clearly explain what they must do when passengers report they have seen something.

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

My main question is still, how can one person on the fishing boat die of dehydration and another survive for another week? Still many questions in this whole situation and I refuse to prejudge

 

Better physiologic reserve?

[BillB48]

Let me offer this with the caveat it is speculation. In March Panama and surrounding area are in the Dry Season so the two weeks the men had on the boat were in all probability on the dry side. As the boat drifted closer towards the Galapagos Islands in may have entered the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and area much more conducive to producing rain. This is the same system that moves north and provides Panama with rain during the rainy season and moves south towards the equator during the winter months. Even though the survivor was on the boat for over another 2 weeks after the time of the "sighting" he may have been able to trap enough rainwater to keep him alive.

[bdjam]

Princess has teams of highly educated attorneys on its side, not just in house but likely also outside counsel charging $1000 an hour. Why shouldn't a teen who watched two friends suffer a slow death and then made the painful decision to push their bodies into the sea when they began to rot in the sun while imagining his own fate would be exactly the same also deserve to have one attorney, hired on contingency, looking out for his best interests as he navigates this here-to-fore untraveled course?? I'm a CCL stockholder, but I certainly don't begrudge him that.

 

Why do people some people on this thread insist on blaming the victims? Never mind.

I totally agree - why do some people on this thread insist on blaming the victims? Captain Perrin is a victim of circumstance, trial without a jury and guilt based on facts that haven't been proven - people should stop throwing blame in his direction.

 

The picture you paint of the passengers of the ill fated boat is pretty pathetic. And while events could have unfolded just the way you describe them, again, you're postulating. You don't know - you know the story of a young man who may have been traumatized when he told it, may have been in shock from the whole ordeal and who may be making the whole thing up. You don't know.

 

Another gap in this whole story is if Star Princess passed them in early March and they were in the vacinity of shipping lanes, how come no other ship came within their sight for a whole month?

[NorcalGuy]

Capt Perrin took a long scheduled vacation and it had nothing to do with any "incident". He is a captain above reproach and if he had knowledge of a boat in distress, he would have stopped and helped. All this jumping to conculsions makes my blood boil. I was on this sailing and we heard nothing, saw nothing.

 

I have met and sailed as a passenger with Captain Perrin, and believe he is an honerable man. I absolutely believe that if he were aware of an emergency, that assistance would have been offered.

 

I hope someone can recall some of the MANY instances where assistance at sea was offered by Princess captains!

 

I'm sorry those men lost their lives, and I believe the captain is as well.

[moniquet]

Many posters are saying don't jump to conclusions re. the Captain yet continue to speculate and tear apart the victims:rolleyes:

 

How can anyone know a Captain from being on a cruise and having a bit of small talk:confused:

[whitecap]

Many posters are saying don't jump to conclusions re. the Captain yet continue to speculate and tear apart the victims:rolleyes:

 

How can anyone know a Captain from being on a cruise and having a bit of small talk:confused:

 

I understand those who personally know the Captain speaking on his behalf and I also understand those that are talking about the actions of the fishermen, which began the event.

Please keep in mind that in order to do a complete and proper investigation, both for the purpose of determining what happened and what changes may be necessary, you must start at the beginning and follow through to the end, looking at every aspect.

[moniquet]

Please keep in mind that in order to do a complete and proper investigation, both for the purpose of determining what happened and what changes may be necessary, you must start at the beginning and follow through to the end, looking at every aspect.

 

Very true, but this forum is not the appropriate place to do it. The only people qualified to comment are his crew who work alongside him and the passengers involved at the time.

[PescadoAmarillo]

I'm sorry those men lost their lives, and I believe the captain is as well.

Very well stated, and I'm certain you are right. There is, after all, a brotherhood among sailors, however disparate their backgrounds.

[Boatdrill]

 

 

... He says, the report of the 'vessel in distress' was passed more or less immediately from Ricardo, (not a maritime officer but still a Princess employee) to 'ships officers.'

 

If that is true and if it is also true, as Capt Perrin claims, that neither he nor the senior officer of the watch at the time, were ever told of the 'vessel in distress' then the failure of communication is far more serious because it may involve maritime officers.

 

Sounds good in theory, however many staff on ships wear officer uniforms, but they're not licensed maritime officers. For example: Hotel Manager, and department heads such as Food & Beverage Manager, Cruise Director, Chief Purser, Chief of Security, etc. Even the Environmental Officer wears an officer uniform.

 

So unless the two officers were specifically identified as deck or engine "martime" officers, they could have been pratically anyone.

 

Regardless, Princess knows who they are.

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

Sounds good in theory, however many staff on ships wear officer uniforms, but they're not licensed maritime officers. For example: Hotel Manager, and department heads such as Food & Beverage Manager, Cruise Director, Chief Purser, Chief of Security, etc. Even the Environmental Officer wears an officer uniform.

 

So unless the two officers were specifically identified as deck or engine "martime" officers, they could have been pratically anyone.

 

Regardless, Princess knows who they are.

 

Surely, the officers sent from the bridge to Ricardo's desk to take the bird-watchers report of the vessel in distress were officers involved in the navigation of the ship rather than officers responsible for the lobster bisque?

[Loonbeam]

We are assuming they were sent directly from the bridge and not, perhaps, passenger services, but that said I suspect they were Junior officers, probably from security division (not sure if that is considered bridge staff)

 

Surely, the officers sent from the bridge to Ricardo's desk to take the bird-watchers report of the vessel in distress were officers involved in the navigation of the ship rather than officers responsible for the lobster bisque?

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

We are assuming they were sent directly from the bridge and not, perhaps, passenger services, but that said I suspect they were Junior officers, probably from security division (not sure if that is considered bridge staff)

 

Yes, I suppose I am assuming that the assignment to follow-up on this sighting would be made to someone associated with the navigation of the ship and not to someone in the hotel department. That seems like common sense. Surely, a similar situation like a "man overboard" triggers a response from the bridge officers as opposed to a purser.

 

I am also assuming that the passengers that overheard the initial report are accurately conveying their observations:

 

Originally Posted by bbq

When the bird watchers reported to the Captain CIrcle representative, who reported to the bridge, who sent two officers to investigate, the passengers believed the situation is under control and in safe hands.

[Loonbeam]

It's a fair assumption and I am inclined to agree. But we don't know for sure as their positions have not been positively identified.

 

Yes, I suppose I am assuming that the assignment to follow-up on this sighting would be made to someone associated with the navigation of the ship and not to someone in the hotel department. That seems like common sense. Surely, a similar situation like a "man overboard" triggers a response from the bridge officers as opposed to a purser.

 

I am also assuming that the passengers that overheard the initial report are accurately conveying their observations:

[rtlk]

After all this input has anyone seen or heard anything new?

[vkuehne]

Yeah, I was wondering the same...just finished reading the thread (was on a ship the last week)...some very interesting points were made, and some statements repeated over and over.

 

Didnt find anything new through news/Google searches, so just fired off a comment to the FB thread on Princess' page (https://www.facebook.com/PrincessCruises/posts/104158879720418). I think they've had enough time by now to figure out who didnt pass on the report, where exactly the "communication problem" occured and tell the world/their future customers.

[RickEk]

Yeah, I was wondering the same...just finished reading the thread (was on a ship the last week)...some very interesting points were made, and some statements repeated over and over.

 

Didnt find anything new through news/Google searches, so just fired off a comment to the FB thread on Princess' page (https://www.facebook.com/PrincessCruises/posts/104158879720418). I think they've had enough time by now to figure out who didnt pass on the report, where exactly the "communication problem" occured and tell the world/their future customers.

 

I would think that they would be waiting for the Bermudan government to finish their investigation... and we know how slow government bureaucracy can be...