In the Report prepared to review the evidence in respect of this ill advised MNZ prosecution, will be coverage of 23 points over which it would appear, the Court was mislead.
1: B Young refused to accept that Browns Island Light was hiddenbehind the ferry’s wheelhouse window frame & that Browns Island was obscured by the left side framework in Photo 1, considering Sky Tower was easily identifiable.
2: B young’s statement that – the position of Photo 1 couldn’t be established using visible features on shore.
3: That the position of Photo 3 was the only one that could be used & that was the position given by M Pigneyguy as taken at the time of the closest approach.
4: That B Young could use M Pigneyguy’s chart drawing of the point of Incident to get a “known” 29 degree angle for his calculations but deny the accuracy of Bolton’s work.
5: B Young’s rejection of Bolton’s plottings, saying incorrectly that there was no given fixed starting point.
6: That Bolton’s position for Photo 3 can’t be established
(using a transit from Rangitoto over Illiomana Light.)
7: M Pigneyguy’s statement that Classique was 1st seen at 30 degrees on the ferry’s port bow (It was about 5 deg)
8: B Young’s statement that the ferry’s incremental alteration of course towards Classique was “yaw”
9: That the ferry couldn’t steer a course closer than plus or minus 5 degrees due to the compass markings.
10: That the ferry’s gradual altering of course towards Classique was “drift”
11: M Pigneyguy’s statement that the ferry maintained a straight course & that it was 286 degrees T from Motuihe
12: That the ferry slowed, to a halt or dead in the water thus allowing Classique to cross over to the starboard side.
13: B Young’s statement that the ferry turning 2.4 degrees towards Classique would not have made any difference.
14: That yaw or drift caused the ferry’s turn to starboard.
15: That “if” Classique had been ahead at Photo 2, it would have been ok, when Classique was already ahead then.
16: MNZ’s & B Young’s refusal to accept Bolton’s calculations & evidence that he may not have been guilty
17: Their statements that the ferry was not permitted to turn to port through-out the incident.
18: B Young describing the ferry as being difficult & slow to turn or stop in an emergency.
19: That smaller vessels are required to keep out of the way.
20: That the ferry was a heavy, flat-bottomed vessel.
21: M Pigneyguy referring to “horn blasts” when the ferry’s regulation horn was not working at the time of the incident.
22: That he took the actions commencing at 80 mtrs when it would be impossible & in violation within 10 secs available
23: That after that being pointed out, there were evidential inconsistencies as to being made at photos 1 or 2 positions.
There are a further 18 points of misleading arising from the evidence of the prosecution during the hearing.
1: B Young told Judge Davis that Bolton’s transit, intersecting a line of position was not sufficient to get a fix.
2: MNZ appeared to falsify a document after it was pointed out that TAIC had not been notified of the incident in 2009
3: That M Pigneyguy & P Sweetman colluded – information was copied later & the course wasn’t checked at the time.
4: B Young would not allow the course of a ferry on a regular run to be part of Classique’s Risk Assessment.
5: Saying that at Photo 1 it was a give-way situation when it was close to the usual turning point of the ferry to Auckland but the ferry had already been turning towards Classique
6: Not accepting that a safe crossing astern of Classique, starboard to starboard was entirely appropriate
7: Not accepting that the ferry had already at Photo 3, passed its usual turning area to Auckland & had turned further towards Classique.
8: Not admitting that M Pigneyguy & the ferry had any contributing fault, obligation, liability or deficiency.
9: That MNZ hadn’t checked the ferry’s claim re feasibility
10: That B Young would not allow evidential facts outside of the 3 photos to be used to determine the situation fully.
11: That Page 9 of the Coastguard handbook was used to illustrate the approach as being an orthodox right angle
12: No acceptance that the ferry should’ve sounded its horn well before or at least at Photo 1 instead of taking photos
13: No acknowledgement that the horn was faulty.
14: That the parties didn’t know each other
15: Not accepting that there had been long term antagonism from all parties towards the activities of Classique as possible motive for creating & bringing a prosecution
16: Not accepting any evidence that Bolton might not be guilty or that the violations of ferry contributed
17: No acceptance that the zooming of Photo created an artificial closeness & that B Young’s drawing of the ferry’s bow projection against the hull of Classique was inaccurate
18: B Young not admitting Photo 1 was taken close to Browns reef & unsuitable area for Classique to turn into.
These errors, omissions & points on which Judge Davis was mislead, throw doubt on the impartiality & validity of the Judgement made against Bolton
Page 9 of Coastguard Handbook – the top orthodox crossing approach was said to illustrate the situation before the Court. The lower modified diagram shows a 25* approach which was the actual situation on the day showing how a safe crossing would’ve been possible if the ferry had kept a straight course