Summary Of My Conclusions, Concluded – Julian Joy Report

Result of inaccurate advice given to the Court, the wrong conclusion to this matter was reached

Summary Of My Conclusions, Concluded – Julian Joy Report
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess
20 – Considerable Court time was devoted to debating the use of a small compressed air can horn carried by Seaway & whether or not it was heard or audible at the ranges between the 2 vessels. The air can horn was carried as Seaway’s built-in ships Whistle was not functioning. My analysis concludes that this, while possibly being a temporary non-compliance issue, & appearing to be an ineffective signal in the manner in which it was used, the horn itself had no significant effect on the incident. Rather, the significant issue is the manner of use of the horn & the time of giving the blasts, which was according to the Seaway evidence at a range of 80 mtrs. This is in my opinion an ineffective range & of little use in avoiding a potential collision, as at their closing speeds, that would take 7 seconds to impact. In addition, although Seaway is very maneuverable, Classique is a heavy deep keel yacht & could not maneuver in that time.
Refer to lack of ships whistle & significant effect, in a post – 10/Nov/2014
“J Davis Sniffs At Maritime Rules Mandatory Warning Signals”
http://maritimenz.com/j-davis-sniffs-at-maritime-rules-mandatory-warning-signals/
21 – Considerable Court time was devoted to debating the issue of Seaway & any option of turning to port. It was agreed that she had not turned to port. The rule quoted specifies the behavior in a collision risk situation for the stand-on vessel, Seaway “…if the circumstances allow, it must not alter course to port for a vessel on its own port side” However my analysis shows that Classique was ahead & moving to starboard, not on the port side of Seaway in the critical last moments when these rules apply. Therefore this aspect of the rule is not applicable, & Seaway at the last moment in this case could not turn to starboard into Classique but must turn to port, or stop. Classique would have to turn away to port to avoid collision. In the analysis I show that had Seaway maintained course, Classique would be ahead crossing to the starboard side at a distance of about 1100 mtrs & neither vessel would need to alter course or speed.
22 – Seaway could legally turn to port as she usually does in that area. The AIS plots obtained of a typical weekend voyage show the general pattern of her voyage, curving to port around Browns Island & it is reasonable & seamanlike of other vessels to consider that as the likely behavior of Seaway when assessing risk of collision by one’s own vessel. It is as common as saying a Devonport – Auckland ferry is likely to be wanting to travel from Devonport to Auckland & taking that likelihood into account. This is not ignoring the maritime rules as the court was wrongly advised, rather it is implementing them wisely & correctly & making a broad assessment of the risk elements in a maritime situation.
23 – My investigation of this matter brings me to the conclusion that MNZ & their expert witness did not complete an adequately professional standard investigation of this matter. In my opinion & largely as a result of the inaccurate advice given to the Court, the wrong conclusion to this matter was reached.
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess

Diagram showing the incremental turning of Seaway towards the path of Classique –
in complete violation of Maritime Collision Prevention Rules.

Summary Of My Conclusions, Concluded – Julian Joy Report,2014-01-14_2212

 

Summary Of My Conclusions, Concluded – Julian Joy Report.

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