The Report Covers 23 points Over Which, it would appear, The Court Was Mislead.

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

Photo 1 with locations of Browns Island & its light marked with Sky Tower as reference point

Red markings indicating the wheelhouse framework & how Browns Island & light are obscured in Photo 1

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

Yaw goes both ways & evens out to a straight course.
It doesn’t keep going in 1 direction causing a vessel to go off course steadily.


Website Pin Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati Digg Google StumbleUpon Premium Responsive

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge