Phillip Sweetman’s Bird Brained Evidence Repeated In Court

Bird Brained

Phillip Sweetman’s Bird Brained Evidence Repeated In Court
Mark Davies, Crown Law, Meredith Connell Auckland starts his cross- examination of Bolton –
“Now Mr Sweetman, who was also watching events unfold, also gave evidence about that, in page 2 of his evidence, he talks about seeing your vessel & he says, “At this point in time I observed a yacht which I now know to be Classique at approximately 30 degrees on the port bow, under power, crossing from port to starboard. It was apparent to me that the yacht was on a collision course with Seaway or at least that there was a risk of collision. I say this because the bearing of the approaching vessel did not appreciably change over the period of observation.”
Bolton mentioned – “That lack of changing was entirely due to him (Seaway) coming up towards me.”
Mark Davies – “OK, we’ll get to that. You say that this risk of collision was brought about, do you, by the ferry changing its course?”
Bolton affirmed – “Yes.”
Analysis of Phillip Sweetman’s evidence used by Mark Davies reveals that neither of them knew what they were talking about & it makes a nonsense of the court process before Judge Davis.
1: Mark Davies had not noticed that Phillip Sweetman had copied M Pigneguy’s brief of evidence & repeated M Pigneguy’s mistakes.
2: Both M Pigneguy & Phillip Sweetman used the ‘ same point of time 10.26am’ as the time when after turning at Sth Motuihe, they observed Classique at approx 30 degrees on Seaway’s ‘port bow’ crossing from port to starboard.
3: This mistake is rather glaring in Phillip Sweetman’s case because he has given his location at that time as being the same location M Pigneguy has given as being the point of incident at Photo 3 but there’s about 2 nmiles between their point of 1st observation of Classique& the purported point of incident.
4: Neither M Pigneguy nor Phillip Sweetman after turning at Sth Motuihe could have seen Classique at 30 degrees on Seaway’s port bow. To be seen there, Classique would have to be at the South of Browns Island but she was at the North of Browns.
This working out is an easy matter of laying on a chart Seaway’s course & a line 30 degrees to the West of that.
5: There is the possibility that both M Pigneguy & Phillip Sweetman were planning to entrap Classique which they could see before they turned at Sth Motuihe – in which case Classique would’ve been seen at 30 degrees on Seaway’s ‘starboard bow’ but in their preparation of their briefs of evidence they forgot that they had turned Seaway from 260 degrees to 284* & then 286* at Sth Motuihe.
6: The actual view of Classique as Seaway turned at Sth Motuihe to 284* & 286* would’ve been directly ahead of Seaway.
7: By the time M Pigneguy took Photo 1, Seaway was on 292*& Classique is seen in that Photo 1 at 5 degrees on Seaway’s port bow by which time there is 0.5 nmiles separating the vessels.

Classique was not seen South of Browns Island to port side as Seaway was heading towards her –
that’s impossible. Seaway saw Classique at 30* on starboard side before turning at Sth Motuihe?

Phillip Sweetman’s Bird Brained Evidence Repeated In Court, 30Double

 

Phillip Sweetman’s Bird Brained Evidence Repeated In Court

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