Wow! Jeez! Stabbing on Encore

[Laszlo]

26 minutes ago, PaperSniper4 said:

Ouch! Yet another reason to "Buy American"!😎

Just one more thing "America" doesn't make.... a 4 million dollar digital press.

[PaperSniper4]

Just now, Laszlo said:

Just one more thing "America" doesn't make.... a 4 million dollar digital press.

Mores the pity, wish more things were made in American again.

[Panhandle Couple]

10 hours ago, MohrPfun said:

NCL Brass will want this settled as quickly and quietly as possible, which means a generous settlement and an NDA on the terms.  I can almost guarantee you that is what will happen here, and none of us will know the outcome.  That’s why they flew there and are handling this in person.  The alternative PR that would result from this moving forward in the court of public opinion, and/or law all but makes it a fait accompli.  It’s really that simple.

There are overriding reasons why NCL sent staff there.  I doubt they spent more than 10% of their time with the victim.

They reported a crime, and have to provide evidence of the crime.  They own the crime scene, which, happens to be movable, has 4,000 people wandering around, and will only be in port 8 hours. The incident happened in a public area that they simply can't shut down.

They have to ensure that the on board security has done the full collection of video, testimonies, and tracking of the suspect.  That has to be turned over to the local authority.  The locals may also want to inspect the area, and security has their regular port duties on top of this.

 

As stated earlier, jurisdiction will be up for discussion, which is well beyond the pay grade of the Captain and crew. That might take weeks to determine.

 

Also the corporate review of all the employees and actions involved.

What did we do right?

What did we do wrong?

Is our training sufficient for these events?

The faster you go thru this process, the better.

[zqvol]

Just love all the tourneys chiming in to make their voices known in this thread. 

[TheMichael]

On 5/8/2024 at 5:43 AM, Laszlo said:

I wonder if the woman passenger will get a free cruise.

 

One day, I'm going to compile an anthology of "cruise thing happened/significant compensation must surely come of this" instances.

 

Also, you can tell the Americans in the thread because they're the ones more concerned with lawsuits than how this would happen or updates on the people involved.

[RocketMan275]

On 5/9/2024 at 12:49 PM, ChutChut said:

Injured passenger won't need any of that as her suit will be against Norwegian. She doesn't need to go after the Filipino agency. It will be Norwegian's insurance company that will pay out. 

NCL may well sue the Filipino Agency.

[RocketMan275]

7 hours ago, TheMichael said:

 

One day, I'm going to compile an anthology of "cruise thing happened/significant compensation must surely come of this" instances.

Be sure and include the woman who was demanding NCL compensation of over $10K because NCL didn't inform her at the time of booking that they sold pepsi instead of coke on board.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, RocketMan275 said:

NCL may well sue the Filipino Agency.

South African, I was incorrect before.  But, still, nope.  If the person met the requirements of the contract between NCL and the crewing agency, there is nothing NCL can do about it.

[RocketMan275]

16 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

South African, I was incorrect before.  But, still, nope.  If the person met the requirements of the contract between NCL and the crewing agency, there is nothing NCL can do about it.

Of course, but you're assuming that the contract was met.  NCL could raise a due dilligence claim that the crewing agency failed to properly vet the individual.  We don't know how that would turn out but the possibility of a lawsuit is there.

[chengkp75]

36 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Of course, but you're assuming that the contract was met.  NCL could raise a due dilligence claim that the crewing agency failed to properly vet the individual.  We don't know how that would turn out but the possibility of a lawsuit is there.

But, what were the vetting requirements set by NCL?  Does it have a mental health investigation, and what does that cover?  Does it have a "temper" clause?  And, NCL has the right to turn down any crew member before they even travel to the ship.

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

Of course, but you're assuming that the contract was met.  NCL could raise a due dilligence claim that the crewing agency failed to properly vet the individual.  We don't know how that would turn out but the possibility of a lawsuit is there.

I don't think NCL will be pursuing any lawsuits. I think they will try to get this settled with the passenger with a non-disclosure agreement attached. And then they will not do anything that could get this back in the news.

[RocketMan275]

23 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I don't think NCL will be pursuing any lawsuits. I think they will try to get this settled with the passenger with a non-disclosure agreement attached. And then they will not do anything that could get this back in the news.

NCL could do those things and still pursue legal action to recover damages from the crewing agency.  

[ChiefMateJRK]

12 hours ago, TheMichael said:

Also, you can tell the Americans in the thread because they're the ones more concerned with lawsuits than how this would happen or updates on the people involved.

All Americans?  Every one?  You mean that there is at least one thing where all Americans think the same?  Wow!!

[TheMichael]

11 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

All Americans?  Every one?  You mean that there is at least one thing where all Americans think the same?  Wow!!

Oh, the drama!

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, RocketMan275 said:

NCL could do those things and still pursue legal action to recover damages from the crewing agency.  

And a news agency could publicize that legal action and keep the original incident in the public's awareness. I don't think they would want that.

[RocketMan275]

17 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

And a news agency could publicize that legal action and keep the original incident in the public's awareness. I don't think they would want that.

You're assuming the legal action would be public.  It could be a threat of legal action which would not be publicized but still resulting in consideration.

[ontheweb]

14 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

You're assuming the legal action would be public.  It could be a threat of legal action which would not be publicized but still resulting in consideration.

I still think they would just want to drop it after settling and getting a non-disclosure agreement. There would be no guarantee of getting any compensation from the agency, and why risk more publicity?

 

I guess we should agree to disagree on this subject.

[Aquahound]

Jurisdiction is the United States, and this case is being investigated by the FBI and the Coast Guard Investigative Service.  The crewmember was arrested upon arrival in Juneau.  Here is a link to the press release from the US Attorney's Office.

 

District of Alaska | South African man arrested for stabbing on cruise ship | United States Department of Justice

  

[Panhandle Couple]

9 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

Jurisdiction is the United States, and this case is being investigated by the FBI and the Coast Guard Investigative Service.  The crewmember was arrested upon arrival in Juneau.  Here is a link to the press release from the US Attorney's Office.

 

District of Alaska | South African man arrested for stabbing on cruise ship | United States Department of Justice

  

I guess I don't know Jack Schmidt.

(Anyone from St, Louis area, can laugh)

 

[Aquahound]

On 5/9/2024 at 4:18 PM, Panhandle Couple said:

The timeline is unclear in the news articles, but here is what I came up with.

Other crew stated he was only onboard "24 hrs".

It was also stated that the incidents happened at night.

If Encore left Seattle on Sunday afternoon, it could have happened Sunday or Monday night, but sounds like Monday.  Which would be somewhere off the coast of Canada.

We didn't find out until they ported in Juneau on Wednesday, which is right for sailing duration.

 

As this was not an act of piracy or terrorism, applying extra-territorial rights seems unnecessary?  That would be important for criminal charges, but liability claims?  The two may end up being tied together for which court gets the cases, assuming there is a liability claim. 

In any case, a judge will likely recommend binding arbitration vs being the determinate of any award.

 

My point was what you mentioned, lots of grey areas here, which most "personal injury" lawyers are not prepared to handle.

 

The incident occurred on May 6, which was Encore's sea day between Seattle and Juneau.  The ship was offshore, west of Vancouver Island, on the high seas.  Because the incident took place on the high seas while transiting between 2 US ports and because a US citizen was involved as a victim, the US claimed jurisdiction per the Special Maritime & Territorial Jurisdiction (SMTJ).  

 

There was no jurisdictional conversation.  This one was pretty easy.  

 

Regarding a civil claim, I'm 99.99% certain NCL's cruise contract lists the Southern District of Florida, Miami, as the designated venue.  

 

  

Edited May 14 by Aquahound

[gknep]

I was on this cruise and there has been more talking about it in here than there was on the ship itself. 

[ontheweb]

12 hours ago, gknep said:

I was on this cruise and there has been more talking about it in here than there was on the ship itself. 

How much information was shared with the passengers on the ship?

[gknep]

3 hours ago, ontheweb said:

How much information was shared with the passengers on the ship?

Many of us saw the news about it on the web. The captain also made a lengthy announcement about it.