The reason a close quarters situation occurred was Seaway II incrementally altered course to starboard,
Defence Expert Julian Joy’s Second Report – Part 5
Written for Court in response to Affidavit of Mr Young and Crown submissions and Reserved Decision of His Honour Judge Davis’s Ruling in Respect of the Prosecution – MNZ v. Mel Bolton
Julian Joy B.Sc (Nautical), Dip Tchg, ACAT, FCILT, MNI.
Continuing with Julian Joy’s 2nd Report …
In the following table, to provide further clarification, I show the effect of passing distance reductions using figures around Mr Young’s calculations. The calculation shows passing distance reductions related to a change of course over the distance of 0.5 miles (925 metres), which is the distance from photo 1 to photo 3 approximately. In other words, the amount by which the passing distance between the vessels is reduced by Seaway II’s altering course incrementally to starboard.
The table shows that even using Mr Young’s figures, the difference is very significant. For Mr Young to deny this is in my opinion unprofessional and misleading. Using his actual closest point of approach distance of 25 metres (not agreed to or verified), means that Classique would have therefore passed 25 + 53.5 = 78.5 metres from Seaway II as a minimum if Seaway II had maintained course and speed. This is not a dangerous distance between vessels like this in the environment they were in.
I therefore have no reason to change my conclusion in paragraph 5.2.15 on Page 65, which I stand by regardless of the amount of course change being 2.4*, 3.4* or 11* or somewhere in between:
“My analysis showed therefore, in my opinion beyond reasonable doubt, that the reason a close quarters situation occurred was that Seaway II incrementally altered course to starboard, in contravention of the rules and also in contravention of good practice.”
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess