# More Amateur Madness



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

It is reported that a yacht skipper dubbed Captain Calamity was rescued twice in two days by coastguards The man's 25ft trimaran first ran aground on Sunday night 19th October 2008. An RAF rescue helicopter braved bad weather to find the man and his friend off Burnham-On-Sea, Somerset. They guided in a lifeboat that towed the vessel to Barry, South Wales. Coastguards were amazed to find the boat had no lifejackets, flares, charts or radio and both men lacked sufficient maritime knowledge. 

Then on Tuesday, the skipper set off to return to Burnham, and ran aground again. The coastguard is quoted as saying: "This Captain Calamity has cost time and effort of lifeboat and helicopter crews and rescue teams twice in two days".

I and others have been banging on for ages about idiots like this taking to the high seas without knowing what they are doing and putting their own and others lives at risk. Surely it is time we all wrote to our MPs to try and get something done or start a petition?. With nearly 30,000 members, surely we would carry some weight?.

David


----------



## johnalderman (May 27, 2006)

Sadly the policing of everyone who goes down to the shore with a small boat or inflatable would be so expensive as to be a non starter.


----------



## Steve Woodward (Sep 4, 2006)

David I could not agree more,
Our MP's could be very useful in this situation, if we gathered enough of them together, tied them together and weighted them we could block all the rivers and harbours and thus prevent anyone going to sea ever again


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

johnalderman said:


> Sadly the policing of everyone who goes down to the shore with a small boat or inflatable would be so expensive as to be a non starter.


No more expensive that policing shore side, and we do not seem to be too good at doing that being more concerned about people dropping litter or catching us out with mobile speed cameras than cracking real crime.

Politicians are not interested in deaths and accidents at sea because they do not pay for it, and many have their own boats so they would not want anything to spoil their own pleasure if they had to prove they were capable of handling the craft and indeed taxed just as they do everything else. They would only be interested if the Government footed the bill for rescuing people at sea and that their seats were at stake if they failed to ensure those taking to the seas were competent to do so. Until then they will not be interested, pass the buck to the coastguard, and even charge the RNLI as this money grabbing Government is intending as mentioned in other threads.

David


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

Steve,
I think bounding 4 or 5 MP's together at a time would be a better idea, and then using them as small craft anchors.
Oh hang on, s**t floats, so perhaps they'd be more useful as mooring buoys?


----------



## johnalderman (May 27, 2006)

It may be foolish to go onto the water unprepared in small craft, but for now its not a crime, to make it so and then police it would cost millions of pounds I would guess.


----------



## Andrew Price (Aug 9, 2005)

Not totally correct about the ' not a crime ' bit.
There is an old common law offence that has been brought back into use in recent years by the police to cover incidents like this.
Its called COMMON or PUBLIC NUISANCE, and like all common law offences the maximum penalties are Life Imprisonment and unlimited Fine, though the actual penalty, if any, is likely to be a small fine.
What has to be proved is that someone did some act without law authority to the annoyance or endangerment of others (there are other reasons as well)
In respect of Captain Calamity, I suspect that he does commit the offence. However, the decision to prosecute (as with all UK Criminal Offences now) is not that of the Police anymore but that of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) (since Jan. 2006) and they must satisfy two legal tests before any prosecution takes place, i.e.
1. Sufficient Evidence to Convict, and
2. It is in the Public Interest
As Captain Calamity may well go Not Guilty on the advice of his lawyer, would it be cost effective (i.e. a case cost of £ 1,000 - 15,000) to prosecute him, together with the cost and inconvence of calling of all the witnesses (Coast Guard, RNLI, and RAF Rescue Crews, Police, DOT, etc,).
I suspect, after years of experience of dealing with the CPS, they would say NO, unless there was major media support or someone had been seriously injured or killed.
But theres always hope.

Andy Price


----------



## Geoff_E (Nov 24, 2006)

Googled "Captain Calamity" and it came up with a couple of hits for the incident; one on www.walesonline.co.uk & one on www.burnhamandhighbridgeweeklynews.co.uk 

The men named (it should be cited!) are one Anthony Woodford, aged 52 and a Chris Gregory, aged 35. The yacht is named as "Star of Burnham", 25 ft. trimaran.

It's not totally clear which of these might actually be "Captain Calamity" but the Burnham Weekly News site quotes Mr. Gregory as thanking his rescuers, as well he might!

I could add more exclamations and expletives but will leave it for others of sound, commonsense nautical mind, to draw their own conclusions. At least we know who this pair are!


----------



## johnalderman (May 27, 2006)

But this would only apply to those that get into difficulties and causing nuisance, not the many who get away without troubling the authorities. I agree with the original posters sentiments, but its just not practical to stop people going out in small boats or inflatables whether we like it or not.


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

Why is it not practicable? You need a license for most things these days why not a license for something as serious as this. I had my fill of 'grotty yachties' when seagoing and in particular off the South coast.


----------



## johnalderman (May 27, 2006)

well for instance where would you draw the line ? Water wings !


----------



## AncientBrit (Oct 6, 2007)

Maybe if after the completion of any required rescue operation it was found to be a case of the operators neglegence causing the emergency, simply sending the owner/operator an itemized bill for the total cost of their rescue with the possible seizure and sale of rescued assets in the case of non payment, might make people see things in a more practical way.
AB


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

johnalderman said:


> well for instance where would you draw the line ? Water wings !


Where there is a will .................


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Geoff_E said:


> Googled "Captain Calamity" and it came up with a couple of hits for the incident; one on www.walesonline.co.uk & one on www.burnhamandhighbridgeweeklynews.co.uk
> 
> The men named (it should be cited!) are one Anthony Woodford, aged 52 and a Chris Gregory, aged 35. The yacht is named as "Star of Burnham", 25 ft. trimaran.
> 
> ...



I knew the names of the people involved and name of yacht but decided not to because I did not have a link to quote from including names.

As long as we have this attitude that we can't stop people doing this or that or not practical we will never stop totally needless deaths or unavoidable accidents that change peoples lives forever. These people were not hurt, and neither were the people who rescued them. But that is not always the case. 

I have said many times in these threads, possibly irritating people. But I will never tire of telling of the needless deaths where I personally had to cut up children and adults at autopsy where they died utterly and totally due to the fact that they were able to take anything that floats from air beds, small inflatables to bigger boats onto the water. Their deaths were 100% avoidable, completely needless. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing to stop this. We should all be ashamed of ourselves that this can be allowed to happen. 

On land we have rules and regulations coming out of our ears all designed at keeping us as safe as possible from having to have a licence to drive a car, must have insurance, must pass a test, even having bike lanes to make it safer for cycles. As sea, a place more dangerous than the land can ever be there is absolutely *nothing*. Only when you carry passengers do rules of the land kick in. If stict rules are needed for small boats be it pleasure or fishing boats taking anglers out, why in the name of sanity does it not apply to private craft whatever the size?. Yes, accidents happen shore side even with regulations, but I personally saw more avoidable deaths from our coasts, than RTA's many of whom were accidents, and not always anybodies fault. The percentage were nowhere near those who died at the seaside who were as close as could be to 100% avoidable. I have to scratch my head to remember sea deaths that were total accidents. The one that springs to mind was a French racing driver who died when his speed boat overturned off the Needles. I was directly involved with that, but I struggle to think of any more. 

Until something is done expect more avoidable deaths along our coasts, the coastguard and rescuers putting their lives at risk to save these people, and the Government grabbing all they can out of the RNLI without giving them a single penny or support. Talk about one law for the land and another for the sea (Cloud) 


For 20 years I helped perform autopsy on a regular basis being at its highest in the summer and all exactly the same, not knowing how to handle a boat, not understanding local conditions, currents, tides, not understanding how the weather can change very quickly, children swept out to sea in a flash, cut off by the tide, no lifejackets, no radio, no nothing just like in this case because the stupid *stupid* pathetic law that demands children wear seat belts in cars do not demand they wear lifejackets in private boats. Yes, parents should be responsible but they are not because they either don't understand the dangers. Some people do not use even the most simple common sense if there is not a law that they have to follow. Responsible people voluntarily learn the rules of the seas and how to handle a boat, but many don't unless they have to.

I would be a rich man if I had a pound for every relatives who said: "If only". Then they say:"Why do authorities allow this". They are beside themselves with guilt because asking why there was nothing to warn or laws to stop them.

David


----------



## Geoff_E (Nov 24, 2006)

Three strikes and he's out! - Hopefully.

Article in this morning's Daily Telegraph reports that Army Ordnance Techs. were called to dispose of dangerous flares on the boat. It has now been impounded by Chris Spencer, the Harbourmaster.

I'd be seriously worried if I had either of these characters as a next door neighbour, somebody must have!


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Ancient Brit has the right idea - fines if negligence were the main cause. Seizure of property if they could not pay.

Did a few shouts in my time where the ungrateful buggers didn't even stick a tenner in the tin as a thank you. It was expected and 'that's your job, isn't it?'.

Jonty


----------



## johnalderman (May 27, 2006)

I would agree with that.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Two more local incidents reported this week.

1. Bembridge lifeboat helped a motor cruiser who had run out of fuel off Haling Island. When they got there they found a man attempting to row ashore in a three foot inflatable beach dinghy. They spotted the dinghy as they neared the 22ft cruiser in which another man was suffering severe sea sickness. A lifeboat spokesman said the man in the dinghy was rowing to shore about three quarters of a mile away, having phoned his wife to get petrol so he could take it back out to the boat.

2. Bembridge lifeboat was again in action when a 22ft angling boat, swamped three miles north of Bembridge Lifeboat Station with two people on board without lifejackets or a marine radio. The lifeboat which arrived in ten minutes found they had managed to get the engine started, so escorted them into Langstone Harbour.

Nobody in either incident was hurt, but it shows how stupid people are not going out prepared, and how stupid society is for allowing people to do as they want on the high seas despite having strict rules on land. Nothing will change which is good news for makers of body bags, and keeps my former profession in work (==D) 

David


----------



## John Rogers (May 11, 2004)

Thats using the name "Captain"kind of loosely isn't it. Idiot would be a better term. Where I live all small boats are required to have life jackets for each member in the boat,fire extinguisher,whistle or air horn,and baler, also subject to watercraft police inspection at any time while operating a boat.


Mandatory Boater Education

Beginning January 1, 2005, every person born after January 1, 1984, who operates a vessel on Missouri lakes shall possess, on the vessel, a boating safety identification card issued by the Missouri State Water Patrol (along with a valid photo ID). If you fall into the required age range and are a resident of Missouri, you will need to obtain a Missouri certification card. If you are a resident of Missouri but do not fall into the age range, you are not required to have the Missouri card. Remember, a vessel is every motorboat and motorized watercraft including a personal watercraft.

Any person convicted of Boating While Intoxicated, Reckless and Negligent Operation, Failing to Stop on Signal of Water Patrol, or Leaving the Scene of a Vessel Accident shall enroll in and successfully complete, at his or her own expense, a boating safety education course. They must then file with the court proof of successful completion of such course and submit a certified copy to the Missouri State Water Patrol. The convicted person cannot operate a vessel until such filing is made.


----------



## dundalkie (Mar 15, 2006)

Just to put things a little bit into perspective, I am working out here in a the UAE. I drive a lot to and from work. I always considered my self a responsible driver having passed my drivers test some 30 years ago. Out here its usual to see mini buses, coaches, lorries speed along the road between 100 and 120 km/hr, suddenly switch lanes and indicate at the same time, doddle along in an outside lane forcing overtaking on the inside, inability to filter in and out of traffic. now for the idiots in the 4x4s and fast cars to add to the equation, I have seen more accidents in five months here that I have seen in years driving up and down the M1/M6/M5 and M25. To get a driving licence here you must have a valid licence from a recognised country or pass a test. Some test. The point I want to make here is that the majority of drivers are competent and observe the rules and the law. A few idiots don't and we get fatalities and injuries. Its exactly the same with the small craft users. The majority abide by good practise a few idiots don't. Fortunately we have the emergency services around the UK/Irish coasts and we should be greatful to them. Its why I support the lifeboats. so pompeyfan, with all due respects stop shroud waving and let people get on with it. Who knows the people who went aground might have learnt their lesson and be our next round the world heros.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

dundalkie said:


> Just to put things a little bit into perspective, I am working out here in a the UAE. I drive a lot to and from work. I always considered my self a responsible driver having passed my drivers test some 30 years ago. Out here its usual to see mini buses, coaches, lorries speed along the road between 100 and 120 km/hr, suddenly switch lanes and indicate at the same time, doddle along in an outside lane forcing overtaking on the inside, inability to filter in and out of traffic. now for the idiots in the 4x4s and fast cars to add to the equation, I have seen more accidents in five months here that I have seen in years driving up and down the M1/M6/M5 and M25. To get a driving licence here you must have a valid licence from a recognised country or pass a test. Some test. The point I want to make here is that the majority of drivers are competent and observe the rules and the law. A few idiots don't and we get fatalities and injuries. Its exactly the same with the small craft users. The majority abide by good practise a few idiots don't. Fortunately we have the emergency services around the UK/Irish coasts and we should be greatful to them. Its why I support the lifeboats. so pompeyfan, with all due respects stop shroud waving and let people get on with it. Who knows the people who went aground might have learnt their lesson and be our next round the world heros.


So I am shroud waving am I?. Well, before I retired deaths from seaside accidents were far higher in percentage than those killed on the roads. Letting people get on with it caused more needless deaths at the seaside than you can ever imagine. Well, on my patch at least. I dealt with every death on the Isle of Wight. 

You are quite right that many small boat owners are responsible, but it is not the majority, certainly not where I live in a coastal area. In the summer especially and school holidays incidents are very high where boat owners do not have a clue as to what they are doing, and not always reported. Anything I may report on this site or indeed in the local press is just the tip of the iceberg. Not all these people die of course, but they could have done, and they put rescuers lives at risk. 

It is all very well to disagree, accuse me of shroud waving, but the public never EVER see behind the closed doors of my department. It was not them who had to cut a young child open who's death was totally needless because regulations allowed the child or a parent to take a small boat out. It was not the public, politicians local or national working in mine or other hospital departments. If they had to deal with what we had to deal with far more would be done to make our sea sides safer. And incidents where people were not killed but had to be rescued is far higher. Our A&E is busy every year during the summer time due to seaside accidents, lifeboat crew and coastguard busy and so on. Almost all the incidents avoidable had the people known what they were doing. 

Okay, driving licences do not make people good drivers, there are always the idiots whatever laws are in place. But on the sea, for private users at least there is nothing. That is why my own figures in my own department showed higher death rate for sea deaths than RTA's. 

My dad was in the coastguard. Called out all the time for vessels blown ashore in small or large craft, caught by the tide, stuck on cliffs. All these people could roam as they like, not understanding tides etc because they are simply not taught. We are taught road sense but not sea sense.

You must remember that shore side the percentage of people on the roads is far higher than the public on the sea. So when I tell you that my figures for sea side deaths were higher than road traffic accidents you may appreciate why I am so concerned.

As for the roads, yes, you are quite right there are a lot of idiots. Having a licence does not stop idiots being idiots. And many drive without a licence. I also dealt with many deaths from road traffic accidents of course, but the majority of those I dealt with were pure accidents, often weather related. Very few were down to total negligence. There were a few yes, but nothing like the same percentage of those who died at the sea side.

Apart from one that springs to mind, every single death from the sea I dealt with was avoidable. That is a massive percentage in relation to deaths on roads in my neck of the woods at least. It is not in the same league.

That is why it concerns me so much, why I call for something to be done because unlike others, I did not read about deaths on the roads or from the sea. I was there at the deep end directly involved, writing the names into my register when they came in, where they died and so on keeping records, statistics. It was then me who took them into the PM Room, and did the gory stuff with the pathologist. And it was then me who put them back together, put the shroud on, tidied them up for grieving relatives to view in my chapel wondering if they could see my stitching. I opened up, and sewed up. If I got it wrong, it was my head on the line. We are professionals. We don't enlarge on things to make a point, we speak as we see, and what we see is not pleasant.

My job is not for the faint hearted, few people could stomach it. But the thing that stuck in my memory and all those who do the job is children. And I can tell you and all members of SN one thing. I have had to perform autopsies on more children with the pathologist that died in needless seaside accidents than on land, far more. That is why I never stop talking about it and why I want something done. Like I said, we are professionals, we do not speak out for the sake of it. We use our job to point out where something should be done, but those who need to listen do not or pour scorn on us often without meaning to, but simply not understanding or wanting to understand. I am not having a go at anybody who do not agree, but simply stating fact as it happened in my department.

I must also point out that I live amongst the yachting and boating fraternity. People who do not want rules and regulations for small boat owners and so on. I grew up with these people. If you live next to Uffa Fox like my family did you would know very well that we were connected to the very top people. But I could not care a less, I say what I think is right based on my job which tells me that unless something is done, the needless deaths will continue, more children drowned and parents scarred for life. Why oh why is it so hard to try to stop this annual madness just because people hate rules and regulations. Do my job for a week and I reckon peoples attitude would change. That is not shroud waving, it is common sense.

Sorry for the rant, I am hopeless at putting what I mean into words. But I do not call for regulations at the sea side without good reason, professional reason. 

David


----------



## Ian6 (Feb 1, 2006)

Raw emotions there. It is one thing to read the statistics and see the pictures in the newspapers but quite another to actually live the event.

A few years ago there was an RTA here, in Oxford, involving a car with far too many children being driven by one of the mothers. Several deaths, severe injuries. We know the Paediatric Intensive Care Nurse who was i/c that night in A&E at the John Radcliffe. It affected staff almost as much as relatives. We seldom consider the effect on those who help after these events.
Ian


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Ian6 said:


> Raw emotions there. It is one thing to read the statistics and see the pictures in the newspapers but quite another to actually live the event.
> 
> A few years ago there was an RTA here, in Oxford, involving a car with far too many children being driven by one of the mothers. Several deaths, severe injuries. We know the Paediatric Intensive Care Nurse who was i/c that night in A&E at the John Radcliffe. It affected staff almost as much as relatives. We seldom consider the effect on those who help after these events.
> Ian


Ian

You are so right. And as hard as it is for nurses to cope, it is far worse in my department emotionally. Ambulance staff and police all said they could not do my job. Some nurses refused to come into the place. They found it hard to cope when nursing the wounded especially children, and of course emotionally affected when they die, but they could not have done my job, that was a bridge to far emotionally. Some police officers who sometimes had to attend the autopsy struggled to cope. Some could not, and fainted.

I however, would have found it harder to attend the scene, especially if people were dying. By the time they got to me they were dead.

The public with all due respect have no idea. I hate saying too much about my job because I know how it can affect people. It is often best to know nothing. However, as long as people including authority keep their head in the sand, not wanting to know the emotional stuff, we will never cut down on accidents be it on land or at sea.

People can criticise me as much as they like. But we had a motto in my mortuary: Mortui Vivos Docent. That is Latin for: The Dead Shall Teach The Living. That is what we try to do. Whatever the person dies of, child or adult, accident or otherwise we try to use that to educate others not to fall into the same trap. That is how we can cope, hoping that one persons death will mean that lessons are learned allowing others to live longer. It is all about education using the plight of others to help others. That is why I will never stay silent until something is done to prevent needless deaths on our coasts. Those who lost their lives cannot warn others not to fall into the same trap, but I can and I will. If I upset a few people trying to save lives then tough (MAD) 

David


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

Brian 
I would disagree with you regarding any RTA being a pure accident due to weather. My Grand daughter wrote three cars of all within a year of her passing her test, all in inclement weather conditions. I explained to her that she was driving too fast, she argues that she wasn't because each time she was within the speed limits. I have tried to explain the speed limits are the maximum you are allowed to drive at on that particular road, that she should also drive at a speed that is safe according to the weather and road conditions. The second car she wrote off overturned and smashed all the glass in the car, she got out with a couple of scratches and bruises, at the time the road was wet and near a farm entrance where the ''accident'' happened where there is always a lot of mud, I would still argue that she was going too fast for the prevailing conditions,she still wouldn't listen. The last one could have been more serious so at last she has learnt her lesson.

Regards Robert


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

ROBERT HENDERSON said:


> Brian
> I would disagree with you regarding any RTA being a pure accident due to weather. My Grand daughter wrote three cars of all within a year of her passing her test, all in inclement weather conditions. I explained to her that she was driving too fast, she argues that she wasn't because each time she was within the speed limits. I have tried to explain the speed limits are the maximum you are allowed to drive at on that particular road, that she should also drive at a speed that is safe according to the weather and road conditions. The second car she wrote off overturned and smashed all the glass in the car, she got out with a couple of scratches and bruises, at the time the road was wet and near a farm entrance where the ''accident'' happened where there is always a lot of mud, I would still argue that she was going too fast for the prevailing conditions,she still wouldn't listen. The last one could have been more serious so at last she has learnt her lesson.
> 
> Regards Robert


Robert

With the greatest of respect, how can you disagree when I dealt with each case on it's merit?!. I said that some RTA's were caused by weather. I did not mean all RTA's but some. My actual words were majority, and by that I meant accidental, not on purpose. It is basically a play on words, some, many, all, majority or whatever because quite a lot was purely weather related and not the drivers fault. Just sheer bad luck. However, in your granddaughters case and many others it is ignoring the conditions. I did not mean that. We had that too, but less than those taken totally by surprise. That is what I meant. 

Part of my job was to read the police report when the body came in. I was always the first person into the mortuary when the body arrived with police in attendance having been called in. They gave me an initial report. That report was often enough for me to take various body fluid samples off my own bat because I was qualified to do so sending them to the lab on behalf of the coroner so that by the time the pathologist arrived for the autopsy he had the lab report. As I have always said, we worked as a team. A full police report came later. On many occasions weather played a major part. These were often early morning accidents, no drink involved and often no other vehicle involved, just pure accident that nobody could foresee not even when taking conditions into account. 

As for your granddaughter it seems that she did indeed ignore your advice and paid the price hopefully learning her lesson as you say, but in the accidents I refer to some were indeed totally accidental.

David


----------

