Judge Davis Cross-examines Witness Barry Young

Judge Davis Cross-examines Witness Barry Young
Questions from the Court –“If I understand Mr Bolton’s case correctly, the ferry came around Motuihe Island, changed course & set it for 286* … he is saying that the ferry did not in fact stay on that course, it appears to have either deliberately turned to starboard or perhaps incrementally turned towards starboard … now if the ferry has altered its course & turned to its starboard either incrementally or perhaps more aggressively than that, does that alter the obligations that either party may have in terms of those collision rules?”
Barry Young in his reply of – “No” to Judge Davis has transgressed monumentally to the point it appears that he deliberately lied in his role as Hired Gun to Maritime New Zealand & consequently mislead the Court instead of being a help to the Court as a sworn Expert Witness.
This is a serious abuse of our New Zealand Court process which has been allowed to be perpetrated with impunity – for a witness to lie to the Court & get away with it beggars comprehension.
Barry Young was asked by Judge Davis to give him an expert decision on probably the most crucial navigational point about the approach of 2 vessels.
Judge Davis had his question clearly enunciated
1: The ferry after Sth Motuihe set its course for 286*
2: It did not stay on 286*
3: It either deliberately or incrementally turned Starboard (ie towards Classique)
4: Does that alter the either party’s obligations regarding Collision Regulations?
The answer is unequivocally ‘Yes’ to that –
A: Whilst Seaway was on 286* there was no risk of collision
B: Each vessel was obliged to maintain their courses & pass clear of each other
C: M Pigneguy violated Maritime Rules by altering the category of approach negligently by his own action in turning starboard towards Classique’s path.
D: M Pigneguy is thus not entitled to unilaterally invoke the Crossing Rule 22.15
E: By so turning M Pigneguy reduced the 460 mtrs clearance that existed.
F: Maritime Rule 22.15 did not apply whilst Seaway was on its course of 286*
This navigational analysis is applicable to 2 vessels crossing with no risk of collision in the same way 2 cars approaching are required to stay on their respective sides of the road & pass safely.

Barry Young carries on to exhibit a serious proclivity towards ‘Foot in Mouth’
Judge Davis Cross-examines Witness Barry Young,2014-09-07_2017

Website Pin Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati del.icio.us Digg Google StumbleUpon Premium Responsive

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge