GUILTY CA - Boat fire near Santa Cruz Island; 34 missing, Sept 2019 *captain charged*

New Posts

Divers on Wednesday recovered the body of the last missing victim of a boat fire off the California coast that killed 34 people.

The Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office announced the end of the search on Twitter , saying it was “relieved to report” the final victim had been found.

Authorities were still doing DNA tests to confirm the identities of seven of the victims.

Earlier in the day, the Coast Guard announced it has issued new safety recommendations in the wake of the tragedy near Santa Cruz Island, such as limiting the unsupervised charging of lithium-ion batteries and the use of power strips and extension cords.
Divers recover body of last missing victim of boat fire
 
imstilla.grandma said:
...
The Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office announced the end of the search on Twitter , saying it was “relieved to report” the final victim had been found.

Authorities were still doing DNA tests to confirm the identities of seven of the victims.
...
Divers recover body of last missing victim of boat fire
Click to expand...
sbm.

It is a relief that the final body was found, putting a stop to some speculation. I wonder if this person was sleeping in the bunk or had gone to the galley after hearing noise.

Hopefully all debris would be collected by divers, to figure out if there was some sort of explosion in the galley.
 
Shaz14 said:
Actually you bring up an important point about surge protection. You actually shouldn’t use a surge protector on a boat, at least not one made for land-based use like a typical power bar, because it is a fire hazard. Power bars with surge protectors are actually banned on cruise ships for this reason.
Click to expand...
I will look up the regulations for surge bars for cruise ships, but they are electrically ok to use in boats and yachts.

Usually the simple power bars catch fire when overloaded. Typical surge protected power bars have short circuit protection. The main problem is multiple power bars, connected in series, with too many devices plugged into them.

The major fire in Trump Tower, killing Todd Brassner, was caused by such a setup.
 
Maritime laws enacted in the 1800s, typically obscure to all but a handful of experts, are suddenly gaining prominence through their link to the Southern California boat fire that killed 34 people.

The Limitation of Liability Act of 1851 was cited last week by the owners of dive boat operator Truth Aquatics, whose vessel burst into flames early in the morning of Labor Day just off Santa Cruz Island, claiming the lives of 33 passengers and a crew member.

Now the arcane Seaman’s Manslaughter Statute, passed in 1838 and amended in 1852, figures to play a leading role if prosecutors file criminal charges stemming from the tragedy.

Two sources have confirmed to The Associated Press that a criminal investigation has been opened into the case, with the FBI, U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles spearheading the inquiry.

Here are questions to some answers about a pre-Civil War law that has gained new relevance:

What’s the law’s intent?
The Seaman’s Manslaughter Statute aimed to curtail steamboat accidents at a time when thousands were dying in such mishaps.

The law calls for up to 10 years in prison for any “captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on any steamboat or vessel, by whose misconduct, negligence, or inattention to his duties on such vessel the life of any person is destroyed.’’

The measure also applies to owners, operators and public officers whose dereliction of duties leads to any deaths.

The most unusual aspect of the statute is it requires prosecutors only to prove negligence or misconduct, a low bar to gain a conviction for a criminal offense.

“It creates a standard that’s very similar to civil fault,’’ said Martin Davies, director of the Tulane University Maritime Law Center. “It’s just ordinary negligence. It’s usually much higher (like gross negligence).’’
Charges in California boat fire may hinge on 1838 law. Here's why
 
Kubirai said:
I will look up the regulations for surge bars for cruise ships, but they are electrically ok to use in boats and yachts.

Usually the simple power bars catch fire when overloaded. Typical surge protected power bars have short circuit protection. The main problem is multiple power bars, connected in series, with too many devices plugged into them.

The major fire in Trump Tower, killing Todd Brassner, was caused by such a setup.
Click to expand...

I’m definitely not an expert, nor an electrical engineer, but from what i’ve been reading, surge protectors seem to be a problem on boats that have AC power due to lack of ground. Most small boats have DC power but larger boats and ships often have AC electrical systems installed. According to the specs for the Conception I think that they had an AC electrical system.

Northern Lights MP55C, 55 KW, 220/110 Volts

Conception - Truth Aquatics
 
On FOX news...just reported, all crew members were asleep when fire started. One person was required to be "on watch." If correct, could explain why fire has spread so widely before noise awoke crew members.
ps...I'm unable to link the new report. Perhaps will eventually make it to msm article.
 
IQuestion said:
:(The latest findings....I found this story, finally. :(
Entire crew was asleep, NTSB:
Entire crew was asleep when dive boat fire started: NTSB
Click to expand...
It also said there were two smoke detectors in the bunk room, but didn’t say if they were working. It says the crew repeatedly tried to get to the trapped passengers but were turned away by flames. It makes me wonder if they had fire extinguishers? This article doesn’t say.
 
NTSB's initial report apparently contains references to a failure to keep a roving night watch:

NTSB preliminary report says Conception dive boat did not have crewmember on roving overnight watch as required - CNNPolitics

As another sharp reading poster noted, the Coast Guard regulations state that the charterer and/or the ship's crew are responsible for maintaining the night watch.

Perhaps there was confusion between the two different organizations as to whom was going to maintain what watches? Likewise, there could have been confusuin about whether there would be a single roaming watchman, or whether each deck would have a separate watch? (USGS regulations seem to permit both variations)
 
Last edited:
happyday said:
It also said there were two smoke detectors in the bunk room, but didn’t say if they were working. It says the crew repeatedly tried to get to the trapped passengers but were turned away by flames. It makes me wonder if they had fire extinguishers? This article doesn’t say.
Click to expand...
Happyday, the info below is consistent with info I read earlier. Also remember seeing a fire extinguisher under the bathroom sink (near sleeping area) and another one in the dining area. I saw them on a video someone posted of their trip. This is an unimaginable tragedy.
From earlier article, no smoke /fire alarm heard:
What did the first crew member see?

“He heard no smoke alarm, he smelled no smoke, but he did see flames when he looked over,” she said. “They didn’t hear anything.”

She described the smoke alarm on the vessel as one that can be bought at Home Depot.
Serious safety flaws aboard Conception, early boat fire investigation finds
 
Link to an article posted Thursday, Sept 12 in the LA Times:

Conception crew members were sleeping when boat fire
broke out, in violation of rules
SANTA BARBARA —

"All crew members were asleep when the Conception caught fire early on Labor Day, the National Transportation Safety Board said Thursday, a major revelation in the investigation of the worst maritime disaster in modern California history.

The agency’s preliminary report said “at the time of the fire, five crewmembers were asleep in berths behind the wheelhouse, and one crewmember was asleep in the bunkroom.” The boat was required by federal law to have a night watchman who was awake and could alert others to fire and other dangers, said NTSB board member Jennifer Homendy.

U.S. Coast Guard Capt. Monica Rochester said a watchman typically walks through the vessel and checks equipment throughout the night. Coast Guard investigators determined, based on early interviews with the crew, that no one was on watch when the blaze broke out."​

The articles goes on to say that officials are also investigating whether passengers received appropriate safety instructions aboard the vessel and whether the escape hatch located in the bunk room provided an adequate route for people to leave the boat during an emergency. Officials are also wondering "whether safety agencies that have been aware of the dangers of lithium-ion batteries in other modes of transportation have considered applying this knowledge to the charter boating industry."

Here is also a link to another image of the wreckage of the Conception after it had been lifted off the ocean floor - from a CNN online article.
 
Penelope said:
Link to an article posted Thursday, Sept 12 in the LA Times:

Conception crew members were sleeping when boat fire
broke out, in violation of rules
SANTA BARBARA —

"All crew members were asleep when the Conception caught fire early on Labor Day, the National Transportation Safety Board said Thursday, a major revelation in the investigation of the worst maritime disaster in modern California history.

The agency’s preliminary report said “at the time of the fire, five crewmembers were asleep in berths behind the wheelhouse, and one crewmember was asleep in the bunkroom.” The boat was required by federal law to have a night watchman who was awake and could alert others to fire and other dangers, said NTSB board member Jennifer Homendy.

U.S. Coast Guard Capt. Monica Rochester said a watchman typically walks through the vessel and checks equipment throughout the night. Coast Guard investigators determined, based on early interviews with the crew, that no one was on watch when the blaze broke out."​

The articles goes on to say that officials are also investigating whether passengers received appropriate safety instructions aboard the vessel and whether the escape hatch located in the bunk room provided an adequate route for people to leave the boat during an emergency. Officials are also wondering "whether safety agencies that have been aware of the dangers of lithium-ion batteries in other modes of transportation have considered applying this knowledge to the charter boating industry."

Here is also a link to another image of the wreckage of the Conception after it had been lifted off the ocean floor - from a CNN online article.
Click to expand...

The LA Times is a desperate dumpster fire, imo. From the link upthread:

according to the National Transportation Safety Board's preliminary report and NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt. *** "Part of the certificate for this vessel required that there be constantly a roving watch person to keep an eye on the safety of the vessel," Sumwalt said. "The interviews, to this point, have indicated that the five surviving crew members were in fact asleep at the time that the fire broke out."
He said investigators have no way of knowing whether an additional crew member and any of the passengers, who were all below deck and died, were awake.
 
This accident, just breaks my heart.
I know, for sure, that no one onboard this ship, wanted anyone on board to die.
It is a horrific accident.
The question is. Could this accident have been prevented?
As an owner of a circa 1978 boat.
I'm going to say yes.
It's damn expensive to bring an old boat up to current electrical standards. For this boat, I'm guessing at least between $15 to $20,000.00.

But, when you are responsible for many souls, you need to bite the bullet and do it.
There are many to blame for this horrible loss of human lives.
Our old Maritime rules, and the boat owners not wanting to spend the major dollars, to make this boat up to 2019 electric standards to handle all the new gizmos.
I truly feel for the boat owners. None of this was on purpose, their lives are surely shattered.
I am also devastated, for the people who lost their lives in a most horrible way, while on a trip of their dreams.
This entire situation is nothing less then a tragedy. Everyone loses.
Then, the Lawyers get involved.
Lawyers or not, I grieve for everyone.
It's just ALL horrific.


imstilla.grandma said:
Maritime laws enacted in the 1800s, typically obscure to all but a handful of experts, are suddenly gaining prominence through their link to the Southern California boat fire that killed 34 people.

The Limitation of Liability Act of 1851 was cited last week by the owners of dive boat operator Truth Aquatics, whose vessel burst into flames early in the morning of Labor Day just off Santa Cruz Island, claiming the lives of 33 passengers and a crew member.

Now the arcane Seaman’s Manslaughter Statute, passed in 1838 and amended in 1852, figures to play a leading role if prosecutors file criminal charges stemming from the tragedy.

Two sources have confirmed to The Associated Press that a criminal investigation has been opened into the case, with the FBI, U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles spearheading the inquiry.

Here are questions to some answers about a pre-Civil War law that has gained new relevance:

What’s the law’s intent?
The Seaman’s Manslaughter Statute aimed to curtail steamboat accidents at a time when thousands were dying in such mishaps.

The law calls for up to 10 years in prison for any “captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on any steamboat or vessel, by whose misconduct, negligence, or inattention to his duties on such vessel the life of any person is destroyed.’’

The measure also applies to owners, operators and public officers whose dereliction of duties leads to any deaths.

The most unusual aspect of the statute is it requires prosecutors only to prove negligence or misconduct, a low bar to gain a conviction for a criminal offense.

“It creates a standard that’s very similar to civil fault,’’ said Martin Davies, director of the Tulane University Maritime Law Center. “It’s just ordinary negligence. It’s usually much higher (like gross negligence).’’
Charges in California boat fire may hinge on 1838 law. Here's why
Click to expand...
 
IQuestion said:
Very interesting information on "requirement." (Note: requirement, not a suggestion)
The Conception's Certificate of Inspection, issued by the Coast Guard, requires a "roving patrol at all times" when passengers' bunks are occupied.
Crew was asleep when fatal boat fire ignited, officials say
Click to expand...



Certificate of Inspection pdf
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/...5f54/conception-certificate-of-inspection.pdf

A MEMBER OF THE VESSEL'S CREW SHALL BE DESIGNATED BY THE MASTER AS A ROVING PATROL AT ALL TIMES, WHETHER OR
NOT THE VESSEL IS UNDERWAY, WHEN THE PASSENGER'S BUNKS ARE OCCUPIED.
 
BeachSky said:
Certificate of Inspection pdf
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/...5f54/conception-certificate-of-inspection.pdf

A MEMBER OF THE VESSEL'S CREW SHALL BE DESIGNATED BY THE MASTER AS A ROVING PATROL AT ALL TIMES, WHETHER OR
NOT THE VESSEL IS UNDERWAY, WHEN THE PASSENGER'S BUNKS ARE OCCUPIED.
Click to expand...

I have been following a scuba divers forum and will say that the majority of the forum's members consider the fact that there was no watch a breach of trust and pretty much there is no excuse for this. Some questions:
1. Did the Captain not assign a watch (knew no one was watching) or did the assigned watch not perform his/her duties and fell asleep instead?
2. Report states it is based on interviews with 3 crew members. Do all 3 definitively know that no one was on watch? Why weren't the other 2 crew members interviewed? Did they lawyer up?

I did find a link to the NTSB's Preliminary Report (not sure if it's been posted yet).
Click here to read it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 145 more.
Total: 4,304 (members: 146, guests: 4,158)

Online statistics

Members online
146
Guests online
4,158
Total visitors
4,304
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,629
Messages
17,990,100
Members
229,182
Latest member
nikkitafrombama
Back
Top