Murder on Emerald Princess

[floridalover5623]

To be honest, you do not know whether those rooms were occupied or not because you do not have access to that information. You can tell whether that room is available or not but you cannot tell whether it is occupied because you simply do not have access to such information.

 

 

Tom

Just ask the steward if anyone's in the cabin. ;)

[swedish weave]

To be honest, you do not know whether those rooms were occupied or not because you do not have access to that information. You can tell whether that room is available or not but you cannot tell whether it is occupied because you simply do not have access to such information.

 

 

Tom

It doesn't seem right. to dispute someone who is on thee ship.

 

They may have met the guests who are in the cabins.

[Pierlesscruisers]

It doesn't seem right. to dispute someone who is on thee ship.

 

They may have met the guests who are in the cabins.

 

See my comment below.

 

 

Tom, I understood it to be this person is on the cruise this week and has seen people in the cabin?

 

My assumption maybe...

 

(I'm so nosey/such a snoop If I were on that cruise, I would walk by to see...)

 

If they are on the cruise then, yes, they would obviously be able to tell if the room was occupied. I didn't get that they were on the cruise out of the message but I see how that could be the case. I know that there was nobody in that cabin on the sailing after the death occurred. Thanks for the head's up.

 

Tom

[triptolemus]

It doesn't seem right. to dispute someone who is on thee ship.

 

They may have met the guests who are in the cabins.

 

If they met the guests in the cabin, then perhaps they should state as much so the intent of their message here is communicated properly.

 

For someone so interested in FACTS, you sure do inject a good deal of supposition into the discussion.

Edited August 8, 2017 by triptolemus

[Aquahound]

Given it is a federal issue, it can be tried in any federal court. The initial venue will be the closest to the incident site, but either prosecution or defense could request a move to another venue for logistical or jury pool reasons. That would not surprise me in this case if it goes to trial (I would be VERY surprised if it did - based strictly on the criminal complaint and some experience with federal law enforcement, I would suspect a final plea to some level of manslaughter).

 

If witnesses are required, typically the side calling them covers transportation and lodging (which would be a valid reason for change of venue if needed given Alaska's remote nature and the likelihood that no actual witnesses other than FBI agents would be in that area at time of trial). Recorded depositions are usually not sufficient in a criminal trial, at least for the prosecution as the accused has a general right to challenge their accuser(s).

 

Just one slight correction to this. When a venue is changed due to convenience, it's at the motion of the defendant. The prosecution can't change venue for the government's convenience. For reference, this is known as Rule 21 - Transfer for Trial.

 

The other reason for venue change is prejudice, such as in very high profile media cases where the local jury pool is likely tainted. Again, this is a motion that has to be requested by the defendant.

 

The reason prosecution can't request venue change is because the defendant has a constitutional right to a trial in the district where the offense was committed.

[sfaaa]

Just ask the steward if anyone's in the cabin. ;)

 

Like in the dead of the night?

[jym626]

Well here's a little fun fact: If there was to be a trial (doubtful) and if it were to be held in Juneau- you cannot get to Juneau by land. No roads in. Can only get into Juneau by boat or plane. So, maybe they can get another cruise out of it :) Well,then again......

[KimmieTN]

I served on a grand jury. We met one day a week for eight weeks. We sometimes heard 120+ cases in a day. Police officer, sheriff, drug agent, etc., read the police report and we were allowed to ask questions. When the officer, etc., left the room, we voted to either send to trial or dismiss. During my time in grand jury - we dismissed only one or two cases. There's really no discussion, just voting and majority rules. Hope that clarifies. I personally found serving on grand jury very interesting.

[swedish weave]

If they met the guests in the cabin, then perhaps they should state as much so the intent of their message here is communicated properly.

 

For someone so interested in FACTS, you sure do inject a good deal of supposition into the discussion.

 

I read their post and understood it.

 

Apparently you did neither.

[Tubafone]

To clarify, yes, I'm on the ship right now about to leave Ketchikan. There are names posted by each door who is staying there. This morning I saw a couple leaving one of the rooms, but I'm not going to freak them out by asking if they are aware of the recent events.

[Colo Cruiser]

[quote name=Tubafone;53743261

Security won't talk to crew about details' date=' probably because of upcoming legal cases and not wanting to influence testimony.[/quote]

 

 

Security wouldn't talk to you/crew or anyone else about any security incidents onboard.

Not to mention it's none of their or your business.

Why would they?

They would be in jeopardy of losing their job.

[spleenstomper]

To clarify, yes, I'm on the ship right now about to leave Ketchikan. There are names posted by each door who is staying there. This morning I saw a couple leaving one of the rooms, but I'm not going to freak them out by asking if they are aware of the recent events.

 

Interesting, thanks for satisfying my curiosity.

[mek]

Security wouldn't talk to you/crew or anyone else about any security incidents onboard.

Not to mention it's none of their or your business.

Why would they?

They would be in jeopardy of losing their job.

 

Thank you Colo - my thoughts exactly. It's one thing for us to speculate or even chat with people on the ship and another to actively seek out people who might have been involved or are currently staying in the cabin - beyond intrusive and inappropriate, IMHO.

[Thorncroft]

I served on a grand jury. We met one day a week for eight weeks. We sometimes heard 120+ cases in a day. Police officer, sheriff, drug agent, etc., read the police report and we were allowed to ask questions. When the officer, etc., left the room, we voted to either send to trial or dismiss. During my time in grand jury - we dismissed only one or two cases. There's really no discussion, just voting and majority rules. Hope that clarifies. I personally found serving on grand jury very interesting.

 

Interesting scheduling. The GJ I was on met for 3 weeks straight. Weekends off, of course. We went through over 1100 cases, no billed about 400 and sent about 700 on to trial. Most that we no billed were weak, drug cases that no reasonable person could find any compelling evidence. They were so boring because they were all the same; just insert different names. Some of the cases the prosecutor would request that we no bill, for whatever reason, and we did. We even went on a field trip to inspect the county/metro jail. Every TV in the jail was on Jerry Springer while we were there. They were a happy bunch. LOL. A GJ will really open your eyes to all the crud and corruption that goes on in your community that you never hear about on the news.

[DRPWDunIL]

In my experience, federal grand juries can be a very different animal than others.

 

Sent from my SM-N910V using Forums mobile app

[Loonbeam]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. If the prosecution and the defense agree on the change of venue request (the prosecution can request this of the court and the defense because it may make sense for them as well - in this case if the defense was planning to call a lot of local character witnesses), it generally is granted. I wasn't specific on who would request from whom.

 

 

That said, I would still be shocked if this went to trial, given the facts in the criminal complaint.

 

 

Just one slight correction to this. When a venue is changed due to convenience, it's at the motion of the defendant. The prosecution can't change venue for the government's convenience. For reference, this is known as Rule 21 - Transfer for Trial.

 

The other reason for venue change is prejudice, such as in very high profile media cases where the local jury pool is likely tainted. Again, this is a motion that has to be requested by the defendant.

 

The reason prosecution can't request venue change is because the defendant has a constitutional right to a trial in the district where the offense was committed.

[Loonbeam]

I am actually very surprised the cabins may be reoccupied this soon. The damage must not have been as bad as speculated (physical damage can be repaired fairly quickly, biologicals take longer to do properly if not contained to a small area). 1 week plus seems awfully fast to do it well.

[swedish weave]

I am actually very surprised the cabins may be reoccupied this soon. The damage must not have been as bad as speculated (physical damage can be repaired fairly quickly, biologicals take longer to do properly if not contained to a small area). 1 week plus seems awfully fast to do it well.

 

Hospitals do it very quickly.

[Colo Cruiser]

Hospitals do it very quickly.

 

 

Murder scenes in hospitals? Ok.

[Tubafone]

I saw the carpet today as I walked by and the door was open. It looked new, and was even the same pattern as the carpet in my room. Not all the rooms have the same pattern.

 

A cabin steward said there was no damage to the room other than blood. No furniture or fixtures had to be replaced other than possibly the bunk ladder.

[mek]

I saw the carpet today as I walked by and the door was open. It looked new, and was even the same pattern as the carpet in my room. Not all the rooms have the same pattern.

 

A cabin steward said there was no damage to the room other than blood. No furniture or fixtures had to be replaced other than possibly the bunk ladder.

 

Do I correctly understand from your first post that you were booked in this cabin but called Princess and changed it?

[akeasley]

Murder scenes in hospitals? Ok.

 

 

Guessing they don't mean murders taking place in hospitals. When I read the comment, I pictured giving birth and the quick turn around that takes place after the baby is born.

[Colo Cruiser]

Guessing they don't mean murders taking place in hospitals. When I read the comment, I pictured giving birth and the quick turn around that takes place after the baby is born.

 

 

I understand but thats a controlled environment. ;)

[swedish weave]

Murder scenes in hospitals? Ok.

 

The post I quoted said BIOLOGICALS.

 

OK?????

[Loonbeam]

If that was the case and the biomatter did not seep through the rug or contact other surfaces (from initial reports this did not sound like the case) then a specialty crew was not needed and the cabin could be turned around much faster. Whether it should have been is a different question.

 

I saw the carpet today as I walked by and the door was open. It looked new, and was even the same pattern as the carpet in my room. Not all the rooms have the same pattern.

 

A cabin steward said there was no damage to the room other than blood. No furniture or fixtures had to be replaced other than possibly the bunk ladder.