Drunk Ryndam passenger faces 20 years in prison after dropping the anchor!

[matondo]

Put him on the do not cruise list for any cruise line. Who knows what "brilliant" act he might come up with the next time he cruises?

[RuthC]

Along with jail time, they should also make this AS+++++ handwrite personal letters of apology to each of the passanges and crew members.

Excellent idea. Perhaps it would drive home the point that there were real, live people who had to suffer the effects of his little stunt.

[twodogmom]

I would like the person to spend time in prison. It could prevent others from doing similar stunts which could cause harm to the ship or fellow passengers.

 

Hopefully some one will post what sentence he gets.

[vbmom87]

Along with jail time, they should also make this AS+++++ handwrite personal letters of apology to each of the passanges and crew members. Very lucky nothing serious happened..

 

I like that idea!

[Cruising-along]

I would like the person to spend time in prison. It could prevent others from doing similar stunts which could cause harm to the ship or fellow passengers.

 

Hopefully some one will post what sentence he gets.

 

I agree. IMO a fine and probation or community service would be a slap on the wrist. :mad:

 

I don't care if his lawyer says nobody was injured, the fact is that many people could have been seriously hurt and the ship could have had serious damage done.

 

I like the suggestion that he write individual letters too.

[dewong2008]

I've got to sympathize with him. After all, he is an American on a Dutch flagged ship. He had every right to expect that the button would be labeled "DROP ANCHOR" in Dutch, but when it was in English. how could he resist? OK, I realize that he was American and the labeling was in English, but wasn't it Shaw that admitted that we were separated by a common language?

 

 

Seriously??????

[world~citizen]

Fines can be pretty onerous and enough of a deterrent to would be copycats, which seems to be the concern of some on this thread. Community service is a favourite of mine also. If he does do time, I have no problem with 3 to 6 months, but more...I don't know.

 

In the old days they might have whipped or keel-hauled him. We are so much more civilized now.;)

 

I'm sure cruise lines have taken steps to prevent future occurrences.

 

Smooth sailing...

[blue-noser]

I happened to read this and it caught my interest. I've been a marine electrician for 40 years having sailed on many types of ships. Dropping an anchor is at the least, a three man evolution under normal conditions. If, and it's a big if, he released the anchor all by his lonesome, than HAL had better look at the machinery and their SOP for anchor release. There are some major issues there. What he did, if he did it, was reckless no argument there. However, doing it by oneself, I don't think so, something about this smells. Just my .02Cents

[world~citizen]

I happened to read this and it caught my interest. I've been a marine electrician for 40 years having sailed on many types of ships. Dropping an anchor is at the least, a three man evolution under normal conditions. If, and it's a big if, he released the anchor all by his lonesome, than HAL had better look at the machinery and their SOP for anchor release. There are some major issues there. What he did, if he did it, was reckless no argument there. However, doing it by oneself, I don't think so, something about this smells. Just my .02Cents

 

Holy cow.

 

Smooth sailing...

[broberts]

It is an interesting case.

 

The defendant's lawyer says actually, no law was broken. :eek:

 

Nevertheless there will be a guilty plea. I would agree there will be a fine and some sort of probation or community service.

 

I guess the lawyer is not terribly well versed in maritime law. Of course he broke the law of the sea. He also broke his cruise contract which is quite specific about obeying ship rules.

[world~citizen]

I guess the lawyer is not terribly well versed in maritime law. Of course he broke the law of the sea. He also broke his cruise contract which is quite specific about obeying ship rules.

 

Not being a lawyer, I saw this as something akin to the twinkie defense.

[Bearnaise]

Not being a lawyer, I saw this as something akin to the twinkie defense.

It should be a twinkie defense to some extent, except that the twinkie here is a bunch of martinis or whatever. The passenger got drunk on a HAL ship, presumably with HAL's complicity (either by directly purchasing drinks or by drinking unlimited amounts of in-cabin brought-aboard wine). Just as a good host should take away a drunk's car keys, HAL should "take away" any sort of implements of destruction that a drunk could get his/her hands on during a cruise. Allowing a drunken passenger free access to the mechanisms of deploying an anchor is just as bad as allowing the same drunk access to the bridge and piloting the ship. It's an "attractive nuisance" if drunks can be considered the same as children.

[world~citizen]

It should be a twinkie defense to some extent, except that the twinkie here is a bunch of martinis or whatever. The passenger got drunk on a HAL ship, presumably with HAL's complicity (either by directly purchasing drinks or by drinking unlimited amounts of in-cabin brought-aboard wine). Just as a good host should take away a drunk's car keys, HAL should "take away" any sort of implements of destruction that a drunk could get his/her hands on during a cruise. Allowing a drunken passenger free access to the mechanisms of deploying an anchor is just as bad as allowing the same drunk access to the bridge and piloting the ship. It's an "attractive nuisance" if drunks can be considered the same as children.

 

I never thought of that. :eek:

 

Now, more than ever I am interested in the sentence. Things are seldom as straight forward as they seem, are they?

[jtl513]

Allowing a drunken passenger free access to the mechanisms of deploying an anchor is just as bad as allowing the same drunk access to the bridge and piloting the ship.

As I said in post #4, the door can't be locked because it's an emergency exit. The mechanism could be locked somehow, though, and maybe now they are.

[woodofpine]

Some more details in this article:

 

Anchor Dropper Agrees to Plead Guilty

 

His attorney seemed to be grasping at straws... But what are you going to do under the undisputed facts present. He needed a top drawer federal criminal defense attorney with heavy experience in admiralty (small crowd - even without trial a six figure defense bill minimum). But the conviction was pretty much a slam dunk so...

 

So now he faces sentencing... He won't get 20 years. Federal cases (like most state cases) are 'scored' using a point system in sentencing. He'll get some credit for lack of prior criminal history, 'cooperation' [not going to trial], and not causing severe injuries... But a federal 'PSI' (pre-sentence investigation) will be submitted in advance that reads a lot like the most damning attachments (it might even include 'altercations at the yatch club' and other stuff we've never seen). The US Attorney will argue that this is a high profile case, with high (necessary) public deterence value - where extreme public danger was knowingly created (he/we just 'got lucky').

 

The defense will argue... He's really a 'swell' guy, remorseful (you bet), and he promises not to do it again... As OP said - you are so screwed.

 

I don't know the scoring structures... But I got to believe that he will do years plural in custody (more than 5?) with major fines and restitution even if the judge is sympathetic to 'white collar' alcoholism. If the judge feels 'an example needs to be made' - the anchor dropper will have a lot of time to work on his memoirs. Being Federal - where they hit hard and don't let go (he'll do 80% of the time sentenced - even with good behavior, etc.)

 

I was on Ryndam that night and morning... Just makes you wonder what mental chaos is in your midst at any given time. What was he thinking??

[broberts]

I was on Ryndam that night and morning... Just makes you wonder what mental chaos is in your midst at any given time. What was he thinking??

 

Liked the part I cut out. I'm curious, were passengers generally aware that something was happening at the time or shortly thereafter?

[MARYVB]

Normally I would let this go but I do have to point out that a ship is full of "attractive Nuisnaces". Should HAL remove swimming pools because a drunk will go swimming and drown? Maybe they need to raise the guard rails another two feet because a drunk might fall over and drown while watching the sunset (or sunrise as the case may be)? Maybe they should never leave port because a drunk might fall down a staircase when the seas are high?

This person needs to take responsibility for their own actions. There is no excuse. The law does not allow drunkeness as an excuse when someone has a DWI car wreck. Doesn't a car qualify as an attractive nuisnace for a drunk? As for HAL playing the role of host and being in some way responsible to remove the car keys...that is just ridiculous. HAL may or may not have known that one of their 1400 passengers was drunk. If he was drinking in a bar then their obligation is to cut him off. Maybe he was drinking in the room, maybe he wasn't that drunk...The passenger is claiming he was drunk. I did not read anywhere that there was a breathlizier done. So what if this guy was sober and just being a smart a**. I realize it is incredibly hard to accept that anyone can be so stupid but we read it every day in the papers. The boozing defense is needed to make this guy look smarter and less criminal...How sad is that? For whatever reason, he entered a crew area, there are signs posted, and he proceeded to drop an anchor that MIGHT have brought harm to the ship and passengers. Thank God it did not. You know we call the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber terrorists even though their devices failed. This was a deliberate intent to harm property if not people. Why should it not be terrorism? Send the man to prison, he seems to have a fascination with heavy weights. He can use the barbells in the yard for awhile. That is my opinion, I realize it is a little hard by the standards I have read here on the board. But I for one, do not blame HAL. This guy did it, he admits it, I don't know if he was really drunk even though he claims it. I think he was playing terrorist. and I think he needs to go to prison. I apologize in advance to anyone I have offended with my opinion.

Let the arrows FLY!!!

[KirkNC]

Normally I would let this go but I do have to point out that a ship is full of "attractive Nuisnaces". Should HAL remove swimming pools because a drunk will go swimming and drown? Maybe they need to raise the guard rails another two feet because a drunk might fall over and drown while watching the sunset (or sunrise as the case may be)? Maybe they should never leave port because a drunk might fall down a staircase when the seas are high?

This person needs to take responsibility for their own actions. There is no excuse. The law does not allow drunkeness as an excuse when someone has a DWI car wreck. Doesn't a car qualify as an attractive nuisnace for a drunk? As for HAL playing the role of host and being in some way responsible to remove the car keys...that is just ridiculous. HAL may or may not have known that one of their 1400 passengers was drunk. If he was drinking in a bar then their obligation is to cut him off. Maybe he was drinking in the room, maybe he wasn't that drunk...The passenger is claiming he was drunk. I did not read anywhere that there was a breathlizier done. So what if this guy was sober and just being a smart a**. I realize it is incredibly hard to accept that anyone can be so stupid but we read it every day in the papers. The boozing defense is needed to make this guy look smarter and less criminal...How sad is that? For whatever reason, he entered a crew area, there are signs posted, and he proceeded to drop an anchor that MIGHT have brought harm to the ship and passengers. Thank God it did not. You know we call the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber terrorists even though their devices failed. This was a deliberate intent to harm property if not people. Why should it not be terrorism? Send the man to prison, he seems to have a fascination with heavy weights. He can use the barbells in the yard for awhile. That is my opinion, I realize it is a little hard by the standards I have read here on the board. But I for one, do not blame HAL. This guy did it, he admits it, I don't know if he was really drunk even though he claims it. I think he was playing terrorist. and I think he needs to go to prison. I apologize in advance to anyone I have offended with my opinion.

Let the arrows FLY!!!

 

No need to apologize, I agree.

 

Kirk

[vbmom87]

I apologize in advance to anyone I have offended with my opinion.

Let the arrows FLY!!!

 

No arrows here either. I, for one, do not believe he was drunk. He may have had a few drinks, but if he were drunk he could not have masterminded this prank. I, too, think he deserves jail time but doubt he will get it. It is the way our criminal justice system works.

[Cruising-along]

Maryvb, very well said!!

 

I just don't think a hefty fine would be that much of a deterrent. This idiot had more money than brains, and unfortunately he isn't the only one out there.....:rolleyes:

I'd like to see him do some real time.

[Copper10-8]

Normally I would let this go but I do have to point out that a ship is full of "attractive Nuisnaces". Should HAL remove swimming pools because a drunk will go swimming and drown? Maybe they need to raise the guard rails another two feet because a drunk might fall over and drown while watching the sunset (or sunrise as the case may be)? Maybe they should never leave port because a drunk might fall down a staircase when the seas are high?

This person needs to take responsibility for their own actions. There is no excuse. The law does not allow drunkeness as an excuse when someone has a DWI car wreck. Doesn't a car qualify as an attractive nuisnace for a drunk? As for HAL playing the role of host and being in some way responsible to remove the car keys...that is just ridiculous. HAL may or may not have known that one of their 1400 passengers was drunk. If he was drinking in a bar then their obligation is to cut him off. Maybe he was drinking in the room, maybe he wasn't that drunk...The passenger is claiming he was drunk. I did not read anywhere that there was a breathlizier done. So what if this guy was sober and just being a smart a**. I realize it is incredibly hard to accept that anyone can be so stupid but we read it every day in the papers. The boozing defense is needed to make this guy look smarter and less criminal...How sad is that? For whatever reason, he entered a crew area, there are signs posted, and he proceeded to drop an anchor that MIGHT have brought harm to the ship and passengers. Thank God it did not. You know we call the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber terrorists even though their devices failed. This was a deliberate intent to harm property if not people. Why should it not be terrorism? Send the man to prison, he seems to have a fascination with heavy weights. He can use the barbells in the yard for awhile. That is my opinion, I realize it is a little hard by the standards I have read here on the board. But I for one, do not blame HAL. This guy did it, he admits it, I don't know if he was really drunk even though he claims it. I think he was playing terrorist. and I think he needs to go to prison. I apologize in advance to anyone I have offended with my opinion.

Let the arrows FLY!!!

 

Excellent!

[whogo]

Terry Pratchett said it best in Thief of Time: "Some humans would do anything to see if it was possible to do it. If you put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying 'End-of-the-World Switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH', the paint wouldn't even have time to dry."

[blue-noser]

I'm still following this story because it is unbelievable. The stupidity of people and wanton disregard for others. Quite sure the smell wasn't booze, just the smoke coming from between his ears. Amazing, absolutely amazing!!

[vbmom87]

I'm still following this story because it is unbelievable. The stupidity of people and wanton disregard for others. Quite sure the smell wasn't booze, just the smoke coming from between his ears. Amazing, absolutely amazing!!

 

I have subscribed to this thread, hoping to find out the final outcome.

[kazu]

Normally I would let this go but I do have to point out that a ship is full of "attractive Nuisnaces". Should HAL remove swimming pools because a drunk will go swimming and drown? Maybe they need to raise the guard rails another two feet because a drunk might fall over and drown while watching the sunset (or sunrise as the case may be)? Maybe they should never leave port because a drunk might fall down a staircase when the seas are high?

This person needs to take responsibility for their own actions. There is no excuse. The law does not allow drunkeness as an excuse when someone has a DWI car wreck. Doesn't a car qualify as an attractive nuisnace for a drunk? As for HAL playing the role of host and being in some way responsible to remove the car keys...that is just ridiculous. HAL may or may not have known that one of their 1400 passengers was drunk. If he was drinking in a bar then their obligation is to cut him off. Maybe he was drinking in the room, maybe he wasn't that drunk...The passenger is claiming he was drunk. I did not read anywhere that there was a breathlizier done. So what if this guy was sober and just being a smart a**. I realize it is incredibly hard to accept that anyone can be so stupid but we read it every day in the papers. The boozing defense is needed to make this guy look smarter and less criminal...How sad is that? For whatever reason, he entered a crew area, there are signs posted, and he proceeded to drop an anchor that MIGHT have brought harm to the ship and passengers. Thank God it did not. You know we call the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber terrorists even though their devices failed. This was a deliberate intent to harm property if not people. Why should it not be terrorism? Send the man to prison, he seems to have a fascination with heavy weights. He can use the barbells in the yard for awhile. That is my opinion, I realize it is a little hard by the standards I have read here on the board. But I for one, do not blame HAL. This guy did it, he admits it, I don't know if he was really drunk even though he claims it. I think he was playing terrorist. and I think he needs to go to prison. I apologize in advance to anyone I have offended with my opinion.

Let the arrows FLY!!!

]

 

My arrows are for him not for you - very well said and I totally agree!!!