An Appeal against conviction made without Mr Joy’s report

An Appeal against conviction had to be made without Mr Joy’s report in support.
Judge Wylie dismissed the Appeal in his decision 3 August 2012.
It was disconcerting that he had not taken into account Bolton’s many submissions in detail, that the facts & law upon which Judge Davis based his decision on were wrong & consequently Judge Wylie repeated verbatim the same faulty evidence & reasoning that gave rise to Bolton’s Appeal against conviction for this spurious charge – Dangerous Use of Vessel, of which Bolton is not guilty.
Judge Wylie ran through the background as written in the Decision of Judge Davis without any recognition that evidence had been given regarding claims, principles & considerations
1: That the Easterly breeze would move the ferry away from Classique with no tendency towards drift, yaw or meander as claimed by B Young – impossible in those calm conditions.
2: That Classique would have been observed by M Pigneyguy at 5 degrees off Seaway’s port bow near Browns Island – not 30 deg which he stated – this alters entirely the Classification of Approach indicating there was no Risk of Collision existing.
3: That the use of a Relative Bearing is the most faulty of all methods – it requires a straight course & is not as J Wylie describes, “the angle between 2 vessels headings” but the angle to the other vessel in relation to the bow of own vessel.
4: That the Relative Bearing “did not” change, is not the same as M Pigneyguy’s statement “it wasn’t changing much” – the amount of change being affected by Seaway turning towards Classique & bringing the Relative Bearing up with it – an unreliable method. With a straight course the Rel. Bearing would’ve changed faster.
5: Initially there was no Risk of Collision as M Pigneyguy claimed & both vessels would’ve passed safely starboard to starboard – Risk of Collision came about as Seaway turned further towards Classique as from Photo 1 – Seaway was not entitled to invoke the “Crossing with RoC” Rule 22.15.
6: That it was impossible for M Pigneyguy to have sounded 2 series of 5 blasts with an interval in between at 80 mtrs off – neither did the aerosol handheld horn comply with Appendix 3, nor was it sounded at the mandatory time, “immediately there is concern”, which would’ve been prior to Photo 1 – early enough not only to alert Classique but to give time for reaction.
7: Judge Wylie does not describe the actions of Seaway correctly – in his claim M Pigneyguy said his actions began at 80 mtrs off – 1st by sounding 2 series of signals, then he decided to slow down when he saw no change in Classique’s course. It is impossible for Seaway to sound those signals, wait for Classique to respond & then decide to slow down in the about 10 seconds available. Bolton saw no slowing of Seaway at all. Further more there was no mandatory sounding of 3 blasts to indicate Seaway applied stern propulsion. The clearance observed from Classique was 50 – 80 mtrs & agreed by MNZ at the interview as well as at the Harbourmaster’s office. If it was as close as 10 – 20 mtrs as claimed by B Young, the ferry would be violating Collision Regulations which are designed to prevent close quarters – action being required a mile earlier – not at an unrealistic 80 mtrs.
8: Classique did not pass immediately in front of the ferry – the approach was oblique at an angle of aprox 25 deg. There was no smoke at all, as stated in the claim – the exhaust is always only white transparent steam over the grey colour of the dinghy being towed. There was nothing to indicate acceleration – the throttle wasn’t touched. Further more if the throttle is increased there is never any dark smoke – that was verified in a test by Harbourmaster’s staff before the MNZ interview.
Evidence not taken into account by Judge Wylie in his decision to dismiss Bolton’s Appeal continues …

Yaw, drift & meander can’t be used as excuse for Seaway’s turning towards the path of Classique
Yaw

5 deg is the correct angle off Seaway’s port bow after Seaway turned at Sth Motuihe –
not 30 deg which is the wrong place entirely
2014-01-10_1234

The aerosol horn used inappropriately by Seaway and didn’t comply with Appendix 3
images (25)

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