Seaway II was incrementally turning to starboard as proven in the three photographs & seen in 2 Diagrams
Defence expert Julian Joy’s Second Report – Part 2
Written for Court in response to Affidavit of Mr Young and Crown submissions.
And Reserved Decision of His Honour Judge Davis Ruling in Respect of the Prosecution MNZ v. Mel Bolton
Julian Joy B.Sc (Nautical), Dip Tchg, ACAT, FCILT, MNI.
The only photographs used in my report that I took myself are as follows:
Page 27, showing the position of the beacon that was denied by Mr Young.
Page 38, showing the view of Seaway II from ashore (the Howden position)
Pages 47 & 48 showing AIS screen-shots of typical Seaway II tracks.
Pages 57 & 58 showing features of Seaway II hull and view from conning position.
In Mr Young’s affidavit, paragraph 14:
Paragraph 14(a) “…the vessels were in a crossing situation” is of course agreed, no party disagrees there was a crossing situation.
Paragraph 14(b) his statement that the photos “Provide a means of quantifying the change in bearing of Classique as seen from Seaway II” is correct but misleading in the manner it has been used by Mr Young, as the relative angle on the bow changes according to Seaway II’s actions in turning to starboard. The following table (Diagram 1) uses the scenario of Seaway II maintaining its course of 286*, heading towards Sentinel building, which was the practice, not steering by the compass.
At the distances involved, the vessels, and the area, these are all adequate bearing changes and clearances. The actual angles were only less than that because Seaway II was incrementally turning to starboard as proven in the three photographs; this incremental turning changed the relative angles to being relatively constant at photos 1 and 2 as follows (Diagram 2): Note – These two diagrams are combined to view as a picture below.
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess