Jump to content

Ruby Princess police investigation


Recommended Posts

I guess the lawyers and court can decide but if this was your first cruise and you read that you'd be reassured you would be safe. If the ships can't prevent and contain the virus, and we know they can't then that line should not have been used. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aus Traveller said:

"The outbreak is believed to have been traced back to a crew member working in the galley.

Note the word "believed", that still does not confirm that to be fact at all. Unless the police can produce evidence that a crew member reported on board for duty on the 8th March and trace the crew member back to their point of origin then it is still a theory that can easily be debunked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

and at the time of the cruise, COVID test kits were in short supply worldwide. Cruise ships did not have them.

Exactly. 

 

A lot of people seem to forget how quickly this virus has moved through the world. In the relatively short time that Ruby was doing that cruise what was OK on embarkation day was not OK a few days later, and what should have been done on disembarkation wasn't done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pushka said:

I guess the lawyers and court can decide but if this was your first cruise and you read that you'd be reassured you would be safe. If the ships can't prevent and contain the virus, and we know they can't then that line should not have been used. 

You can't be reassured you'd be safe. Cruise lines, doctors or any medical professional can only say things like it's deemed "low risk, medium risk or high risk".  No professional body would use an absolute term  like "you would be safe".  Princess might have said "we have done everything in our power to make you safe" but that is not the same thing as guaranteeing you'd be safe. Just like no airline can guarantee it's not going to crash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have done many cruises and thankfully have not had to visit the medical centre.  My understanding is that there is a doctor and several nurses onboard, a bit like your local GP.  Maybe I am wrong but some people I have spoken to seem to believe that there is actually a Hospital onboard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Pushka said:

I guess the lawyers and court can decide but if this was your first cruise and you read that you'd be reassured you would be safe. If the ships can't prevent and contain the virus, and we know they can't then that line should not have been used. 

If I had read the line that "our ships are well equipped to prevent the spread ..." I would take it to mean that they have cleaning products available and that they'll take other measure to prevent the spread of illness, but I certainly would not take it to be definite. Other measure they used were information sheets, constant messages about hand washing, use your own bathroom and use hand sanitiser. I would not expect the ship to enforce social distancing or to isolate me in my cabin - that would have been extreme - unless they knew they had positive COVID cases on board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ondine said:

I have done many cruises and thankfully have not had to visit the medical centre.  My understanding is that there is a doctor and several nurses onboard, a bit like your local GP.  Maybe I am wrong but some people I have spoken to seem to believe that there is actually a Hospital onboard.

The ships do not like to refer to the Medical Centre as a hospital. There may be more staff on larger ships, but I know that the Sun Princess and the Sea Princess have two doctors and three or four nurses. I have heard from medical friends that the centres on the ships are very well equipped. (I am not qualified to judge.) They have at least one 'ward' where they can keep passengers who require hospitalization. Often a patient would stay there until they could be medivaced or taken ashore at the next port. It isn't the role of the Medical Centre to keep patients for more than a day or two until either they recover or can be taken ashore for hospital treatment.

 

BTW, I have visited the medical centre several times over many years of cruising and have been impressed by the professionalism of the staff.

Edited by Aus Traveller
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DiamondFour said:

Note the word "believed", that still does not confirm that to be fact at all. Unless the police can produce evidence that a crew member reported on board for duty on the 8th March and trace the crew member back to their point of origin then it is still a theory that can easily be debunked.

I don't believe the 'crew member theory' can be correct, simply because of the numbers of infected people on the two groups: passengers compared with crew.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I don't believe the 'crew member theory' can be correct, simply because of the numbers of infected people on the two groups: passengers compared with crew.


It amazes me how with tracing they can pinpoint who may have started a cluster. I guess in this case if the first batch of positive people had all dined together and there was a particular pattern of the way in which people turned positive then that may determine if a crew member was responsible or not. The team they are using have had experience in tracing Ebola and SARS. Not Aspen but a specific tracing company. 
 

Im sure the medical personnel were extremely professional. But this damned virus beats everything we know. 
 

Ruby not sailing tomorrow.  13 crew are in hospital. Another 9 test positive. Toxic. 

Edited by Pushka
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pushka said:


It amazes me how with tracing they can pinpoint who may have started a cluster. I guess in this case if the first batch of positive people had all dined together and there was a particular pattern of the way in which people turned positive then that may determine if a crew member was responsible or not. The team they are using have had experience in tracing Ebola and SARS. Not Aspen but a specific tracing company. 

I am not a medical expert, but I would be surprised if they will be able to determine who was 'patient 0'. I just work on the numbers and do not believe it is a crew member. I also can't see why they would bother to work out who it is: why does it matter?

 

The Police Commissioner claimed he believed it was someone working in the galley and, from what I read, his reasoning is that that would be the only explanation for the wide spread through the passengers. I believe they are trying to 'pin it on' a crew member to further damage Princess' reputation.

 

I can see how an very infectious virus like COVID would spread much more easily than if the original source was someone working in the galley. (Infectious diseases experts say it can't be spread on food.) Occasions when it would spread would include the Captain's cocktail party, crowded lifts, the Princess Theatre, standing in the buffet line, standing in a queue to disembark at the ports, buses for tours ashore (a tour guide and bus driver in Napier were infected). There are many, many occasions when you are very close to other people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pushka said:


It amazes me how with tracing they can pinpoint who may have started a cluster. I guess in this case if the first batch of positive people had all dined together and there was a particular pattern of the way in which people turned positive then that may determine if a crew member was responsible or not. The team they are using have had experience in tracing Ebola and SARS. Not Aspen but a specific tracing company. 

They have traced several clusters. At least two were at nursing homes, one was a wedding reception at Stanwell Tops, and another was a birthday party at Sails Restaurant in Noosa.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I am not a medical expert, but I would be surprised if they will be able to determine who was 'patient 0'. I just work on the numbers and do not believe it is a crew member. I also can't see why they would bother to work out who it is: why does it matter?

 

The Police Commissioner claimed he believed it was someone working in the galley and, from what I read, his reasoning is that that would be the only explanation for the wide spread through the passengers. I believe they are trying to 'pin it on' a crew member to further damage Princess' reputation.

 

I can see how an very infectious virus like COVID would spread much more easily than if the original source was someone working in the galley. (Infectious diseases experts say it can't be spread on food.) Occasions when it would spread would include the Captain's cocktail party, crowded lifts, the Princess Theatre, standing in the buffet line, standing in a queue to disembark at the ports, buses for tours ashore (a tour guide and bus driver in Napier were infected). There are many, many occasions when you are very close to other people.

Yes, it's far more likely to have started from a passenger then spread to the crew.

 

If 'patient 0' was a crew member and joined the ship on the 8th then that person would probably not have been infectious for a few days, then it would have passed to other crew members, until one or more crew members that directly interacted with the public were infectious. Then, and only then, would it start spreading among the passengers. There probably wouldn't have been time for that number of passengers to have been infected, and there would have been more crew infected. 

 

The galley concept doesn't gel. I'm fairly certain that galley crew would have been wearing gloves by then, and possibly even masks. But even if they weren't the food isn't served to the passengers by the same people who prepare and plate it. The plated dish is picked up by the waiters from the pass. Since it is believed that the virus can't be passed on in food then the only way would have been from a contaminated plate. Since the waiters handle those first then the virus would move equally between crew and passengers and that didn't happen either. 

 

So, logically, it has to have come from a passenger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Yes, it's far more likely to have started from a passenger then spread to the crew.

 

If 'patient 0' was a crew member and joined the ship on the 8th then that person would probably not have been infectious for a few days, then it would have passed to other crew members, until one or more crew members that directly interacted with the public were infectious. Then, and only then, would it start spreading among the passengers. There probably wouldn't have been time for that number of passengers to have been infected, and there would have been more crew infected.

I agree with what you are saying but I will make one comment: whoever 'patient 0' was, he/she would have already reached the infectious stage when they boarded the ship. We are presuming it is likely they were infected before they left an overseas country to fly to Australia. Therefore it is quite possible that they started spreading the disease when they boarded. If it was a passenger, that transmission could have even started while they were queued up waiting to board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I believe they are trying to 'pin it on' a crew member to further damage Princess' reputation.

That is exactly how I feel and it speaks volumes for his integrity as a human being to do such a thing and scary that someone in his position would rather pin the blame on someone rather than seek the truth. That is why I feel that no investigation led by him will be fair, balanced and impartial.

 

I have made direct contact with Princess and sent links to news articles and television broadcasts where he expressed his bias. I did not go straight to the top in Princess but have a contact in the office who is well positioned to be in direct contact with all of those handling this. What I have done is explained to them that I believe the police investigation is going to be a stitch up to blame Princess and that I as a past passenger with over a decade of cruising history (lets leave it at that number to start with) am prepared to be a witness for Princess and its past credibility and history. I am happy to provide their legal team with links and documented dates and times where the police commissioner has expressed biased or outrageous views towards the cruise line or acted in a manner that is not in accordance with international laws. Examples are ordering ships to leave when we are under obligation by international treaty to render assistance.

 

Suffice to say what I am doing is being appreciated by Princess as I have direct access to news and articles in this country. By doing a running log of events so to speak will save their legal team valuable time if they needed information like this if the case did make it to court. I have been keeping a very detailed log of events. It is uploaded onto secure storage daily and also sent to a safe email address daily. I think others are aware that this so called investigation is looking more like a major operation at huge expense to find something just slightly incriminating to blame Princess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I agree with what you are saying but I will make one comment: whoever 'patient 0' was, he/she would have already reached the infectious stage when they boarded the ship. We are presuming it is likely they were infected before they left an overseas country to fly to Australia. Therefore it is quite possible that they started spreading the disease when they boarded. If it was a passenger, that transmission could have even started while they were queued up waiting to board.

Yes, that is possible but not a certainty. The time it takes for the virus to reach the infectious stage is quite variable, I believe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Yes, that is possible but not a certainty. The time it takes for the virus to reach the infectious stage is quite variable, I believe. 

I meant to say "could have reached the infections stage when they boarded the ship" not, "would have". 🙂 Information websites indicate the infectious period is between one and three days before symptoms begin, but this time varies from one to 14 days after exposure to the virus, with the most common being five days. The timeline is quite variable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aus Traveller said:

They have traced several clusters. At least two were at nursing homes, one was a wedding reception at Stanwell Tops, and another was a birthday party at Sails Restaurant in Noosa.

And another cluster was on Ruby Princess.  It should be treated as nothing more sinister than that!

 

What criminal proceedings are going on with these other clusters?

 

The only reason there is an investigation on this cluster is to deflect media attention from the NSW and Federal Goverments.  Cruise industry is ripe for the blame!

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Yes, but if the NSW Police is cherry-picking who it sends the questionaires to then it would be pointless to contact them. I agree that the media don't report the truth but they do like reporting anything that is sensationalism, and hints of irregularities in the send out of the questionaires would probably be sensationalist enough. 🙄

 

Argh! I'm becoming too cynical. I'm heading back onboard the virtual cruise. It's much more fun.  

 

But which can be reported as either: "The cruise line provided the list of contacts to the Police, so we are now investigating why the list given appears to be incomplete." or "The cruise line was responsible to contact the passengers, so we are now investigating reports that passengers have not been contacted."...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DiamondFour said:

Note the word "believed", that still does not confirm that to be fact at all. Unless the police can produce evidence that a crew member reported on board for duty on the 8th March and trace the crew member back to their point of origin then it is still a theory that can easily be debunked.

 

But smear tactics are all about giving the impression. Pollies, shock jocks and lawyers have long known that you can throw accusations out that lets people start forming an opinion of something without it being true.

 

Then if you issue an apology later, it gets glossed over and people still retain the initial impression regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Obilix said:

I suggest a bex, a cup of tea, a good lie down, and a dose of reality is called for from some posters here. 

 

Can you explain why only one company has 3 criminal/legal investigations into it, and no other cases, companies or government departments have any at all?

 

And why the commissioner has been on the offensive against the cruise industry, and made leading, unsubstantiated claims against them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

It would be impossible for any cruise line to prevent it unless all passengers were required to have a medical certificate stating they were COVID-19 free, and overseas passengers would have had to arrive 14 days early to self-isolate just in case.

 

And to contain it, first they have to be 100% certain that people onboard the ship have it, and that would require every passenger to report as soon as they felt even the slightest bit ill, and tests would have to be done regularly as we know the virus doesn't always show immediately.

 

And even then there could still be passengers who were asymptomatic. 

I'm sure it was an asymptomatic passenger who spread the virus on the Ruby to begin with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Aus Traveller said:

I am not a medical expert, but I would be surprised if they will be able to determine who was 'patient 0'. I just work on the numbers and do not believe it is a crew member. I also can't see why they would bother to work out who it is: why does it matter?

 

The Police Commissioner claimed he believed it was someone working in the galley and, from what I read, his reasoning is that that would be the only explanation for the wide spread through the passengers. I believe they are trying to 'pin it on' a crew member to further damage Princess' reputation.

 

I can see how an very infectious virus like COVID would spread much more easily than if the original source was someone working in the galley. (Infectious diseases experts say it can't be spread on food.) Occasions when it would spread would include the Captain's cocktail party, crowded lifts, the Princess Theatre, standing in the buffet line, standing in a queue to disembark at the ports, buses for tours ashore (a tour guide and bus driver in Napier were infected). There are many, many occasions when you are very close to other people.

How about the menus at mealtimes?  Salt and pepper shakers, sugar container.  This looks like a passenger to passenger spread. And there were not a lot of coughing sneezing people.  Asymptomatic passenger had to be the start.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

Can you explain why only one company has 3 criminal/legal investigations into it, and no other cases, companies or government departments have any at all?

 

And why the commissioner has been on the offensive against the cruise industry, and made leading, unsubstantiated claims against them?

 

Furthermore, the moment the NSW police commissioner responded to a question about the two gov departments involved in this by saying "There's a third party - The Captain" I instantly smelled a rat. As we know the captains aren't pirates, they're often ex-navy, highly professional people. Dare I say more professional than NSW police. Remember how they handled the Lindt siege?- it was like the Keystone cops. It still angers me how that woman was killed by an errant police bullet. 

 

Anyway I am pretty confident that they will not be able to find fault in how it was handled by Carnival.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BRANDEE said:

I'm sure it was an asymptomatic passenger who spread the virus on the Ruby to begin with.

This is interesting, from Diamond Princess. I have been shot down before for quoting pieces but this one is from our own ABC so can’t be wrong 🙄

To know that this percentage of passengers can have the virus, can spread it, but NOT KNOW IT is what is so terrible about it.

 

What proportion of people with COVID-19 show symptoms?

Some 3,063 passengers on the Diamond Princess cruise ship were tested for SARS-COV-2 and 634 were found positive. After studying the proportion of asymptomatic passengers, researchers estimated that 17.9 per cent of people with COVID-19 do not show symptoms.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-04/covid-19-coronavirus-without-symptoms-still-contagious/12119942

 

Edited by Porky55
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with RiverCruising.co.uk
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...