Royal Caribbean Fights Back!

[bhchan]

I do not think he is in Maui. I think he is in Greece somewhere.

 

I vote for Constantinople because you know the old saw:

 

"Istanbul was Constantinople

Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople

....

Every gal in Constantinople

Lives in Istanbul, not Constantinople

So if you've a date in Constantinople

She'll be waiting in Istanbul"

 

and that's why they haven't found him yet.

[Leejnd4]

Hi folks,

 

I know a lot of you have spent a great deal of time and energy keeping well-informed and up to date on this whole topic. I've had some interest in this and done some reading...for example, I've read all of RCI's press releases etc. I've read at least some of this thread, and I think I've been able to weed through the mounds of rumor and disinformation here and elsewhere to learn at least some of what can actually be referred to as fact. But I admit there is much I don't know.

 

Last night this topic came up at Bunko, and the gals know I'm a big cruise afficianodo, so they were expecting me to know all the answers. I'm ashamed to say I didn't! So I was wondering if some of you well-informed folks in there could answer a couple of questions for me. (I could probably try to read this entire thread and perhaps find the answers, but I'm hoping someone will spare me that time committment!)

 

1. I recall that there was discussion about money in his cabin, perhaps in the safe, and that there was speculation that the Russian boys may have murdered him for that money. Was it ever determined if, in fact, money was missing from the cabin? Are the Russian boys still considered as possible suspects?

 

2. Since it's pretty clear now that no one will ever really know what happened to him based on the existing evidence and the results of the investigations, what exactly does Jennifer Hagel Smith want from RCI? Has she sued them yet? If so, what for? If not, do you know if she plans to, what her grounds might be, and what she wants from them?

 

Thanks for any insight! I promised my Bunko buddies I'd get back to them with what I learn.

 

LeeAnne

[1corona4u]

Hi folks,

 

I know a lot of you have spent a great deal of time and energy keeping well-informed and up to date on this whole topic. I've had some interest in this and done some reading...for example, I've read all of RCI's press releases etc. I've read at least some of this thread, and I think I've been able to weed through the mounds of rumor and disinformation here and elsewhere to learn at least some of what can actually be referred to as fact. But I admit there is much I don't know.

 

Last night this topic came up at Bunko, and the gals know I'm a big cruise afficianodo, so they were expecting me to know all the answers. I'm ashamed to say I didn't! So I was wondering if some of you well-informed folks in there could answer a couple of questions for me. (I could probably try to read this entire thread and perhaps find the answers, but I'm hoping someone will spare me that time committment!)

 

1. I recall that there was discussion about money in his cabin, perhaps in the safe, and that there was speculation that the Russian boys may have murdered him for that money. Was it ever determined if, in fact, money was missing from the cabin? Are the Russian boys still considered as possible suspects?

 

2. Since it's pretty clear now that no one will ever really know what happened to him based on the existing evidence and the results of the investigations, what exactly does Jennifer Hagel Smith want from RCI? Has she sued them yet? If so, what for? If not, do you know if she plans to, what her grounds might be, and what she wants from them?

 

Thanks for any insight! I promised my Bunko buddies I'd get back to them with what I learn.

 

LeeAnne

 

1. I recall that there was discussion about money in his cabin, perhaps in the safe, and that there was speculation that the Russian boys may have murdered him for that money. Was it ever determined if, in fact, money was missing from the cabin? (No.) Are the Russian boys still considered as possible suspects?(possibly, no one is saying)

 

2. Since it's pretty clear now that no one will ever really know what happened to him based on the existing evidence and the results of the investigations, what exactly does Jennifer Hagel Smith want from RCI? (good question, no one seems to know, money? cruises?) Has she sued them yet? (not yet....) If so, what for? If not, do you know if she plans to, what her grounds might be, and what she wants from them? (allegedly wrongful death--money)

But they all say they are suing RCI so that "other families don't have to go through this"....whatever...

[Leejnd4]

Thanks -- I knew you'd come through, you seem to be the resident expert! I'm surprised someone in this case hasn't hired you yet. :)

 

So about the money -- I find that intriguing. Forgive my lack of knowledge here, but is the problem that Jennifer doesn't KNOW if there was money in the safe that may have been stolen? Or is she just not saying?

 

To me, that seems a real key. If in fact money was missing, then that would certainly lead one to believe that there may have been foul play. If not, then everything I've read, including the overheard noises etc., seems to point to a simple drunken falling overboard. But again, I'm no authority on this...I'm just trying to do a little more weeding through rumor to find fact.

 

Thanks again!

 

LeeAnne

[kenf333]

Thanks -- I knew you'd come through, you seem to be the resident expert! I'm surprised someone in this case hasn't hired you yet. :)

 

So about the money -- I find that intriguing. Forgive my lack of knowledge here, but is the problem that Jennifer doesn't KNOW if there was money in the safe that may have been stolen? Or is she just not saying?

 

To me, that seems a real key. If in fact money was missing, then that would certainly lead one to believe that there may have been foul play. If not, then everything I've read, including the overheard noises etc., seems to point to a simple drunken falling overboard. But again, I'm no authority on this...I'm just trying to do a little more weeding through rumor to find fact.

 

Thanks again!

 

LeeAnne

 

I'm not sure she knew how much they had.

[ccg1957]

I think she was too drunk to know! Or maybe she just can't remember? Ha!

Cathy

[rcicruiser]

1. I recall that there was discussion about money in his cabin, perhaps in the safe, and that there was speculation that the Russian boys may have murdered him for that money. Was it ever determined if, in fact, money was missing from the cabin? (No.) Are the Russian boys still considered as possible suspects?(possibly, no one is saying)

 

2. Since it's pretty clear now that no one will ever really know what happened to him based on the existing evidence and the results of the investigations, what exactly does Jennifer Hagel Smith want from RCI? (good question, no one seems to know, money? cruises?) Has she sued them yet? (not yet....) If so, what for? If not, do you know if she plans to, what her grounds might be, and what she wants from them? (allegedly wrongful death--money)

But they all say they are suing RCI so that "other families don't have to go through this"....whatever...

 

They just want money. They say so other people will not go through what they went through. They need to get a life. They where the ones who cut of communications with the cruiseline then complain the are not getting an information from them. The lawyers do not care about George Smith they just want the money.

 

I would be innterest in who contact who. Did the Smith's find the lawyers or did the lawyers find the Smith's.

[Cape Cruiser 2007]

Moneys gone (IMO) because they drank it away.

Did I get it right??

[canucks4]

IMO, he (and likely she) gambled it and then some, didn't want to face the music, mommy and daddy paying his bills; the embarassment, so he jumped (poorly), landed on the canopy and then just kept going. The Smith family appear to be living the adage, "the best defence is a good offence"...my guess is they know exactly what happened and want to lash out at Royal Caribbean for allowing baby to fritter his $$ and they want it back. This case is getting so cold...

[laraoke2]

The silence is deafening...

 

I think of this case every so often and check the boards, unfortunately, the longer the days go on, the more the case will be classified "accidental". If I were George's parents, I would push my attorney to get all the details.

 

One more thing...when Clete's testimony of what he heard that night was questioned (after Greta's testing of the sound in the cabin..,and lack of hearing anything), I do want to say that it IS possible to hear sounds coming from the next door cabin. On a past cruise we heard sounds coming from the cabin next door in the early morning (jumping and laughing, etc) when a family and their kids were next door to us. So I tend to believe his testimony and the Lawlers (sp?)

[laraoke2]

FYI...I thought this was an interesting read...

 

Safe and sound at sea?

 

Disappearances and pirates may give you pause, but statistics show a ship trip is safe.

 

Mary Lu Abbott

Cruise News

 

February 19, 2006

 

ON Jan. 5, a 15-year-old Irish girl was seen falling or jumping from Costa Cruises' Costa Magica, which was sailing toward Cozumel, Mexico. She has not been found.

 

On Dec. 10, a 59-year-old Canadian woman was reported missing by her husband as their ship, Royal Caribbean International's Jewel of the Seas, approached Nassau, Bahamas. She has not been found and is presumed to have gone overboard.

 

These recent disappearances received little publicity, unlike the case of George A. Smith IV, a 26-year-old Connecticut man who disappeared in July from the Royal Caribbean's Brilliance of the Seas while on his honeymoon in the Mediterranean. As the ship docked in Turkey, blood was spotted on a canopy beneath the balcony of the newlyweds' cabin. His disappearance remains a mystery, and foul play is suspected.

 

These cases, along with the attack last fall of Seabourn Cruise Line's Spirit by pirates off Africa, have put the cruise industry under scrutiny and raised this question: Are cruise ships safe?

 

Members of one popular cruise website believe they are.

 

Cruise Critic, an online cruise guide, surveyed its members in mid-January on its website, http://www.cruisecritic.com . Its editors posed such questions as: Are you more worried about safety after recent reports? Will you still cruise in light of recent events?

 

The site received 1,700 responses in four days, said Carolyn Spencer Brown, its editor. Among the findings:

 

• 94% of respondents considered cruise ships safe.

 

• 74% are not more worried about safety at sea.

 

• Only 1% said they would not cruise because of recent events.

 

Cruise industry statistics seem to back passengers' confidence.

 

In 2004 and 2005, 13 people were reported missing from ships, said Michael Crye, president of the International Council of Cruise Lines, a trade association that represents lines that carry about 90% of the North Americans who cruise. In that time, more than 20 million passengers cruised. Fewer than one in a million went missing over two years, far fewer than the one in 2,800 people who go missing yearly on dry land in the United States, according to FBI statistics.

 

Nevertheless, the disappearances raise questions about cruise line security procedures, legal jurisdiction on ships and the safety consciousness of passengers.

 

Cruise lines usually won't reveal specific security procedures, but Crye shared some general information in an interview earlier this month.

 

A cruise ship is like "a secure building with a 24-hour security guard," Crye said. The public areas of the ship are patrolled by security personnel, who usually wear a cruise line uniform and badges identifying them as being part of the security force.

 

Ships also use surveillance cameras, although patrols and cameras focus more on public areas and are used less in private areas, such as cabins. Cruise lines need to balance "the need for security and the expectation of privacy on the part of passengers," Crye said.

 

All ship personnel — even entertainers — are trained on security procedures and have responsibilities, he said. "If they see someone climb on a railing, they take [preventive] action," he said.

 

"People should not assume because they're on a ship that somebody is going to be there always to take care of you. You are onboard a vessel with sometimes up to several thousand people, and not everybody on the ship is going to be your best friend."

 

But on land as well as at sea, vacationers often let their guard down and may do things they wouldn't do at home. On ships, vacationers may think they're in a safe zone because access is limited.

 

"This is a vacation, and people act differently on vacation than they do normally," said Art Sbarsky, consumer columnist for CruiseMates.com, an online cruise guide, and a former cruise line executive. "They party more, drink more and stay out later. Their whole behavior pattern is different."

 

Passengers may consume more alcohol than usual onboard a ship, he said: "People are onboard to have a good time, but common-sense behavior should apply wherever you are."

 

Drinking reportedly has been a factor in some disappearances. On land, driving laws prohibit bartenders from serving drinks to someone who is intoxicated, but at sea, there are no such laws.

 

"Each cruise line has training for wait staff for cutting off people who are intoxicated or are being disruptive or appear to be medically impaired or if it would be unhealthy to drink more, and they do follow policies," Crye said.

 

So what happens if a person disappears aboard a ship?

 

"U.S. law protects American passengers," Crye said. "The FBI, by virtue of federal statutes and long-standing legal precedent, has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of serious crimes on ships. This power specifically extends to incidents in international waters involving Americans."

 

While at sea, a few don'ts

 

Here are tips to reduce the chance of accidents and crimes at sea, from Michael Crye, president of the International Council of Cruise Lines trade association, and Art Sbarsky, a columnist for CruiseMates.com and a former cruise line executive.

 

• Don't hang over or climb on deck railings. Ships are not stationary; they roll and pitch.

 

• Don't leave valuables such as watches or purses unattended on deck.

 

• Don't drink so much that you lose control.

 

• Don't let your children wander the ship without some supervision and/or regular contact with you.

[marinerminglers]

Good for RC. This is a horrible situation and they need to get their side out there

[ILoveScotland]

That's the question Nancy Grace asks in a promo for her show tonight when she says George's family will speak out in an exclusive interview.

 

I guess we'll just have to tune in to find out.

[rcicruiser]

That's the question Nancy Grace asks in a promo for her show tonight when she says George's family will speak out in an exclusive interview.

 

I guess we'll just have to tune in to find out.

 

Is that tonight. Tuesday.

 

I find it interesting after Royal Caribbean makes an annoucement, that the next thing you know either the family or the lawyers are on TV.

 

Today they announced the godmother of the Freedom.

[rcicruiser]

FYI...I thought this was an interesting read...

 

Safe and sound at sea?

 

Disappearances and pirates may give you pause, but statistics show a ship trip is safe.

 

Mary Lu Abbott

Cruise News

 

February 19, 2006

 

ON Jan. 5, a 15-year-old Irish girl was seen falling or jumping from Costa Cruises' Costa Magica, which was sailing toward Cozumel, Mexico. She has not been found.

 

On Dec. 10, a 59-year-old Canadian woman was reported missing by her husband as their ship, Royal Caribbean International's Jewel of the Seas, approached Nassau, Bahamas. She has not been found and is presumed to have gone overboard.

 

These recent disappearances received little publicity, unlike the case of George A. Smith IV, a 26-year-old Connecticut man who disappeared in July from the Royal Caribbean's Brilliance of the Seas while on his honeymoon in the Mediterranean. As the ship docked in Turkey, blood was spotted on a canopy beneath the balcony of the newlyweds' cabin. His disappearance remains a mystery, and foul play is suspected.

 

These cases, along with the attack last fall of Seabourn Cruise Line's Spirit by pirates off Africa, have put the cruise industry under scrutiny and raised this question: Are cruise ships safe?

 

Members of one popular cruise website believe they are.

 

Cruise Critic, an online cruise guide, surveyed its members in mid-January on its website, http://www.cruisecritic.com . Its editors posed such questions as: Are you more worried about safety after recent reports? Will you still cruise in light of recent events?

 

The site received 1,700 responses in four days, said Carolyn Spencer Brown, its editor. Among the findings:

 

• 94% of respondents considered cruise ships safe.

 

• 74% are not more worried about safety at sea.

 

• Only 1% said they would not cruise because of recent events.

 

Cruise industry statistics seem to back passengers' confidence.

 

In 2004 and 2005, 13 people were reported missing from ships, said Michael Crye, president of the International Council of Cruise Lines, a trade association that represents lines that carry about 90% of the North Americans who cruise. In that time, more than 20 million passengers cruised. Fewer than one in a million went missing over two years, far fewer than the one in 2,800 people who go missing yearly on dry land in the United States, according to FBI statistics.

 

Nevertheless, the disappearances raise questions about cruise line security procedures, legal jurisdiction on ships and the safety consciousness of passengers.

 

Cruise lines usually won't reveal specific security procedures, but Crye shared some general information in an interview earlier this month.

 

A cruise ship is like "a secure building with a 24-hour security guard," Crye said. The public areas of the ship are patrolled by security personnel, who usually wear a cruise line uniform and badges identifying them as being part of the security force.

 

Ships also use surveillance cameras, although patrols and cameras focus more on public areas and are used less in private areas, such as cabins. Cruise lines need to balance "the need for security and the expectation of privacy on the part of passengers," Crye said.

 

All ship personnel — even entertainers — are trained on security procedures and have responsibilities, he said. "If they see someone climb on a railing, they take [preventive] action," he said.

 

"People should not assume because they're on a ship that somebody is going to be there always to take care of you. You are onboard a vessel with sometimes up to several thousand people, and not everybody on the ship is going to be your best friend."

 

But on land as well as at sea, vacationers often let their guard down and may do things they wouldn't do at home. On ships, vacationers may think they're in a safe zone because access is limited.

 

"This is a vacation, and people act differently on vacation than they do normally," said Art Sbarsky, consumer columnist for CruiseMates.com, an online cruise guide, and a former cruise line executive. "They party more, drink more and stay out later. Their whole behavior pattern is different."

 

Passengers may consume more alcohol than usual onboard a ship, he said: "People are onboard to have a good time, but common-sense behavior should apply wherever you are."

 

Drinking reportedly has been a factor in some disappearances. On land, driving laws prohibit bartenders from serving drinks to someone who is intoxicated, but at sea, there are no such laws.

 

"Each cruise line has training for wait staff for cutting off people who are intoxicated or are being disruptive or appear to be medically impaired or if it would be unhealthy to drink more, and they do follow policies," Crye said.

 

So what happens if a person disappears aboard a ship?

 

"U.S. law protects American passengers," Crye said. "The FBI, by virtue of federal statutes and long-standing legal precedent, has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of serious crimes on ships. This power specifically extends to incidents in international waters involving Americans."

 

While at sea, a few don'ts

 

Here are tips to reduce the chance of accidents and crimes at sea, from Michael Crye, president of the International Council of Cruise Lines trade association, and Art Sbarsky, a columnist for CruiseMates.com and a former cruise line executive.

 

• Don't hang over or climb on deck railings. Ships are not stationary; they roll and pitch.

 

• Don't leave valuables such as watches or purses unattended on deck.

 

• Don't drink so much that you lose control.

 

• Don't let your children wander the ship without some supervision and/or regular contact with you.

 

 

Maybe someone should send this post to the Smith's and there lawyers.

[ILoveScotland]

Is that tonight. Tuesday.

 

I find it interesting after Royal Caribbean makes an annoucement, that the next thing you know either the family or the lawyers are on TV.

 

Today they announced the godmother of the Freedom.

 

Yes, tonight, Tuesday, February 21st. I've set it to record since I have a meeting tonight. And, like you, I find the timing interesting.

[rcicruiser]

Yes, tonight, Tuesday, February 21st. I've set it to record since I have a meeting tonight. And, like you, I find the timing interesting.

 

 

Thanks. I will tune in to see what they have to say.

 

My mother who loves to cruise and not has not followed the story, said the other day when she heard they are sueing because George got drunk said that is stupid they did not force the drinks down this throat he did that.

 

She also said if that where her son and he had been drinking so much he need help back to his room and the same thing that happened to George happened to him she would be mad at him not the cruiseline. It was not their fault.

 

She says that the Smith's are just looking for money. Why else would they not want to talk to the cruiseline right after it happened.

[cruiser_carol]

The fact that this man was drunk, immature and behaved irresponsibly, has nothing to do with having an investigation and finding the answers to the questions as to how he died and if foul play were involved. Take away the Smiths...and their bad behavior...would we still feel the same? Someone's son or daughter..having fun..off guard.. on vacation... innocently meeting up for drinks with the wrong person. It is very easy to be drugged in circumstances like this and appear to others as just being happily drunk with friends. We cannot just write every incident off as bad judgment by the victim, because of the Smith case. Nor can we blame the cruiseline for everything that happens. These cases, few and far between, must be looked into individually.. the same as if they happened on land.

 

The smiths have alienated themselves with the majority of the cruising public. It is clear from the posters on this site, the great dislike for the family. Mainly because of the behavior onboard...the way the widow portrays herself so coldly..and the fact that they are affluent and make themselves very public in their pursuit. Whether for money.. or answers..the motive is not clear. However, as Big corporations are mostly afraid of bad publicity and law suits.. Using lawyers and the media, could be a way they feel will get the attention necessary to solve this case. They certainly have succeeded in gaining that attention.

 

I don't.. as a mother of a son a similiar age... believe those persons on here that say.."I would never question the cruiseline if it were my son and he were partying like George Smith". Most young men, especially if in a group, drink a lot on vacation and let their hair down. We would ALL question if a loved one went missing or died. This doesn't mean we would try to cash in...but would certainly have questions needing answered. The fact this guy was on honeymoon and behaving this way, does in itself pose many questions. As does the wife being missing from the cabin. The story is very strange and makes little sense in many aspects. whether George is alive or dead..murdered or accident..remains to be seen.

 

RC are tops in my book. they do an excellent job in looking after their passengers and giving them first class treatment. Considering the millions that cruise each year..and how very few incidents that ever occur.. it is a real testimony to their safety and reliability.

 

But I do feel that it is a 50/50 situation when cruising. the passenger has a responsibility to behave sensibly, respect others and adhere to the rules onboard ship. But the staff and cruiseline also have a responsibility. They must enforce the rules and protect all passengers from seriously disruptive behavior and persons who could possibly pose a threat. If you read the above post from Cruise News...it outlines suggested safety lines for cruising and also states basic policies and standards of procedures used by various cruislines for different situations. One relates specifically to drinking.

 

It states "wait staff are trained in methods of cutting off from alcohol those who are overly intoxicated..those who are being disruptive...or those who are physically or medically impaired. Also those persons for whom it would be unhealthy to continue drinking." The cruiselines enforce this policy it says. Quite right..this seems like common sense. However, it appears, that in this one situation... RC did not enforce this policy. This is my only question regarding this case. why didn't security curb the rowdy partying and over drinking long before things got out of hand?

 

The Smiths', and the so called Russians, were drunk and disorderly for several nights. This was viewed by many.They disturbed a number of other passengers with their behavior and drunkedness. They drank illegal alcohol...which was brought onboard and into the lounge against RC policy...the bride and groom got into a public fight..and she kicked him. (police would have been called if it happened on land) The groom was carried away by 3 or 4 other men...( unchallenged by security or staff.).. who were also very intoxicated .. when George was unable to stand or walk. They were all then left to wander the ship at will..at sea..drunk..in the early hours of the morning. At 4 am they were reported to security for causing a major disturbance . Security came.. but did very little...finally, a few minutes later, The bride was found collapsed in a corridor. Next morning blood is found...George is missing. Yet nothing was ever done to avoid this situation. These people were never, as far as I am aware, spoken to by ships security.. or given an ultimatum regarding their bad behavior. It was simply allowed to carry on day after day.

 

It is one thing for the cruiseline to police the moves of every single passenger..but an entirely different matter to intervene when trouble breaks out amongst a handful of people and their behavior infringes on the safety and the enjoyment of all other passengers. What would happen if all 2500 passengers decided to get very drunk and behave this way? Would the staff just ignore all of them and let them run wild? There has to be law and order onboard. jmo

[rcicruiser]

The fact that this man was drunk, immature and behaved irresponsibly, has nothing to do with having an investigation and finding the answers to the questions as to how he died and if foul play were involved. Take away the Smiths...and their bad behavior...would we still feel the same? Someone's son or daughter..having fun..off guard.. on vacation... innocently meeting up for drinks with the wrong person. It is very easy to be drugged in circumstances like this and appear to others as just being happily drunk with friends. We cannot just write every incident off as bad judgment by the victim, because of the Smith case. Nor can we blame the cruiseline for everything that happens. These cases, few and far between, must be looked into individually.. the same as if they happened on land.

 

The smiths have alienated themselves with the majority of the cruising public. It is clear from the posters on this site, the great dislike for the family. Mainly because of the behavior onboard...the way the widow portrays herself so coldly..and the fact that they are affluent and make themselves very public in their pursuit. Whether for money.. or answers..the motive is not clear. However, as Big corporations are mostly afraid of bad publicity and law suits.. Using lawyers and the media, could be a way they feel will get the attention necessary to solve this case. They certainly have succeeded in gaining that attention.

 

I don't.. as a mother of a son a similiar age... believe those persons on here that say.."I would never question the cruiseline if it were my son and he were partying like George Smith". Most young men, especially if in a group, drink a lot on vacation and let their hair down. We would ALL question if a loved one went missing or died. This doesn't mean we would try to cash in...but would certainly have questions needing answered. The fact this guy was on honeymoon and behaving this way, does in itself pose many questions. As does the wife being missing from the cabin. The story is very strange and makes little sense in many aspects. whether George is alive or dead..murdered or accident..remains to be seen.

 

RC are tops in my book. they do an excellent job in looking after their passengers and giving them first class treatment. Considering the millions that cruise each year..and how very few incidents that ever occur.. it is a real testimony to their safety and reliability.

 

But I do feel that it is a 50/50 situation when cruising. the passenger has a responsibility to behave sensibly, respect others and adhere to the rules onboard ship. But the staff and cruiseline also have a responsibility. They must enforce the rules and protect all passengers from seriously disruptive behavior and persons who could possibly pose a threat. If you read the above post from Cruise News...it outlines suggested safety lines for cruising and also states basic policies and standards of procedures used by various cruislines for different situations. One relates specifically to drinking.

 

It states "wait staff are trained in methods of cutting off from alcohol those who are overly intoxicated..those who are being disruptive...or those who are physically or medically impaired. Also those persons for whom it would be unhealthy to continue drinking." The cruiselines enforce this policy it says. Quite right..this seems like common sense. However, it appears, that in this one situation... RC did not enforce this policy. This is my only question regarding this case. why didn't security curb the rowdy partying and over drinking long before things got out of hand?

 

The Smiths', and the so called Russians, were drunk and disorderly for several nights. This was viewed by many.They disturbed a number of other passengers with their behavior and drunkedness. They drank illegal alcohol...which was brought onboard and into the lounge against RC policy...the bride and groom got into a public fight..and she kicked him. (police would have been called if it happened on land) The groom was carried away by 3 or 4 other men...( unchallenged by security or staff.).. who were also very intoxicated .. when George was unable to stand or walk. They were all then left to wander the ship at will..at sea..drunk..in the early hours of the morning. At 4 am they were reported to security for causing a major disturbance . Security came.. but did very little...finally, a few minutes later, The bride was found collapsed in a corridor. Next morning blood is found...George is missing. Yet nothing was ever done to avoid this situation. These people were never, as far as I am aware, spoken to by ships security.. or given an ultimatum regarding their bad behavior. It was simply allowed to carry on day after day.

 

It is one thing for the cruiseline to police the moves of every single passenger..but an entirely different matter to intervene when trouble breaks out amongst a handful of people and their behavior infringes on the safety and the enjoyment of all other passengers. What would happen if all 2500 passengers decided to get very drunk and behave this way? Would the staff just ignore all of them and let them run wild? There has to be law and order onboard. jmo

 

 

 

As far as the 50/50 I agree but the family of George Smith is blaming everyone else but him. Maybe the cruiseline is concerned yes maybe they should have cut George Smith off, but he could have gone back to his cabin and gotten what he had in there or someone could have brought them drinks. But the family is blame everyone else except George even though he was partial to blame.

 

Over 1 million people cruise a year. It is only the ones who do stupid things that get in trouble. You drink until you are drunk and something happens you should be responsiable for yourself. You drink and get on the rail of the ship and fall over yes that is stupid. At two in the morning you agree to take a tour or go to a crews quarters stupid. Does that mean that they should have been harmed no but think about it you are doing something stupid.

 

I work in the travel trade and have people stop cruising because of this NO. Must people when they bring up the Smith case, say it was his fault for getting drunk and acting they way he did. should he have died no. I have been on plenity of cruises and have seen people do things they should not be doing. Like letting their kids climb on the railings, sit there kids on the railings. I have see other people adults who als sit on the railings or hangover them. The ships move they could fall off, so who's fault would that be. I remember a guy who was on a Carnival ship leaving San Juan who was drunk when he came back to the ship. He stood on the rail to go to the bathroom and fell overboard. The ship was just off San Juan so he was able to swim back to the island.

 

I guess we have to come up with a law to protect people who do stupid things on cruise ships because I guess it is not there fault. So we have to protect them.

[rcicruiser]

I do have 2 questions, they may have been answered already and I just do not remember.

 

Clete Hyman report noises like furniture being throw or moved around in the Smith's cabin. Could that had been George upset because Jennifer was not in the cabin and he could not find her.

 

Also Clete report loud drinking like noises coming from the room, so why when he heard the thud did he not report that or even look outside to see what it was.

 

I remember being on a cruise and hearing a loud noise outside my cabin. I went out to check.

[jbond]

It is only the ones who do stupid things that get in trouble.

You don't know that. It's just another of your wild assumptions to help justify your RCI is totally blameless stance.

 

You drink until you are drunk and something happens you should be responsiable for yourself.

Maybe you didn't read carol_cruiser's post properly or you just chose to ignore the parts that were not supportive of RCI.

But I do feel that it is a 50/50 situation when cruising. the passenger has a responsibility to behave sensibly, respect others and adhere to the rules onboard ship. But the staff and cruiseline also have a responsibility. They must enforce the rules and protect all passengers from seriously disruptive behavior and persons who could possibly pose a threat. If you read the above post from Cruise News...it outlines suggested safety lines for cruising and also states basic policies and standards of procedures used by various cruislines for different situations. One relates specifically to drinking.

 

It states "wait staff are trained in methods of cutting off from alcohol those who are overly intoxicated..those who are being disruptive...or those who are physically or medically impaired. Also those persons for whom it would be unhealthy to continue drinking." The cruiselines enforce this policy it says. Quite right..this seems like common sense. However, it appears, that in this one situation... RC did not enforce this policy. This is my only question regarding this case. why didn't security curb the rowdy partying and over drinking long before things got out of hand?

 

The Smiths', and the so called Russians, were drunk and disorderly for several nights. This was viewed by many.They disturbed a number of other passengers with their behavior and drunkedness. They drank illegal alcohol...which was brought onboard and into the lounge against RC policy...the bride and groom got into a public fight..and she kicked him.

Maybe the Smith's are suing RCI because of RCI's lack of responsibility in enforcing their own guidelines. I hope that one thing that will come out of all this , as a benefit to all cruisers, is that over indulgence of alcohol in the public areas will be very closely monitored.

[caviargal]

I really do not agree with the 50-50 responsibility statement.

 

RCI has stopped allowing alcohol to be brought aboard for onboard consumption, except for 2 bottles of wine. Are they also supposed to open every piece of checked luggage to enforce their rules? We would still be waiting for our luggage to be delivered when we got to the first port!

 

As a travel agent and frequent cruiser, I believe that is only possible for the cruise to enforce behavior in certain circumstances. If a pax who is falling down drunk is ordering a drink at the bar, they should be cut off by the bartender or server as they could be a danger to themselves and others. If a pax calls to report loud noises or screaming in a cabin, this should be investigated and dealt with in an appropriate manner.

 

There are also many pax who seem to drink to excess on cruises. How should this be handled? Who is responsible to figure out if a particular pax is going to become disruptive or even violent? How in the world can RCI or any cruise line manage to predict behavior in an enviroment where booze and partying are prevalent?

 

And, how can a cruise line possibly be responsible for the consumption of alcohol taken aboard by pax against their policies? How can RCI be responsible for a passenger's choice to use illegal drugs? I cannot speak for anyone else but it is not all that uncommon to be walking the hallways or decks and smell pot.

 

It is not the fact that these folks are affluent that is offensive to me as one poster suggests. It is that they take no responsibility for the bad behavior of the adults involved.

 

It is not a 50 -50 proposition. It is the individual's responsibility to abide by the rules and behave accordingly and RCI's responsibility to see that the bad behavior of others (not limited to drunks) does not jeopardize the safety and enjoyment of the other passengers to a reasonable extent.

[jbond]

I really do not agree with the 50-50 responsibility statement.

I think 50-50 is just an expression, but you do appear to agree that there is a shared responsibility.

RCI has stopped allowing alcohol to be brought aboard for onboard consumption, except for 2 bottles of wine. Are they also supposed to open every piece of checked luggage to enforce their rules? We would still be waiting for our luggage to be delivered when we got to the first port!

Agreed, they can only do so much and having read many postings on smuggling liquor, they have an impossible job.

As a travel agent and frequent cruiser, I believe that is only possible for the cruise to enforce behavior in certain circumstances. If a pax who is falling down drunk is ordering a drink at the bar, they should be cut off by the bartender or server as they could be a danger to themselves and others. If a pax calls to report loud noises or screaming in a cabin, this should be investigated and dealt with in an appropriate manner.

A true statement, and this is where RCI should be held partially responsible for the Smith's behaviour. They didn't enforce their own standards.

There are also many pax who seem to drink to excess on cruises. How should this be handled? Who is responsible to figure out if a particular pax is going to become disruptive or even violent? How in the world can RCI or any cruise line manage to predict behavior in an enviroment where booze and partying are prevalent?

They don't have to predict, just get involved when they do become abusive or falling down drunk.

 

And, how can a cruise line possibly be responsible for the consumption of alcohol taken aboard by pax against their policies? How can RCI be responsible for a passenger's choice to use illegal drugs? I cannot speak for anyone else but it is not all that uncommon to be walking the hallways or decks and smell pot.

Obviously it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce if this kind of behaviour occurred in one's cabin. It is another thing if it occurrs in a public area. Then RCI has a responsibility. I can't comment on the smell of pot, I wouldn't know what it smelled like, much to the amusement of my kids and grandkids.

It is the individual's responsibility to abide by the rules and behave accordingly and RCI's responsibility to see that the bad behavior of others (not limited to drunks) does not jeopardize the safety and enjoyment of the other passengers to a reasonable extent.

Agreed 100%, unfortunately in the Smith case, it didn't happen.

 

We have 184 days on RCI ships and in our experience, we haven't seen that many drunks. Lots of people that have a very happy buzz, but we don't recall any falling down drunks. After reading all the reports about the Smith's behaviour, I'm surprised that it was allowed to continue.

[bhchan]

They don't have to predict, just get involved when they do become abusive or falling down drunk.

Obviously it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce if this kind of behaviour occurred in one's cabin. It is another thing if it occurrs in a public area. Then RCI has a responsibility.

 

Last I checked, the guy disappeared from within his own cabin, not a public area. By your statement then, RCI should not have responsibility.

 

Or, do you propose that the cruise line starts patrolling the bars and club areas in orwellian fashion taking passengers out and putting them back in their cabin after 'x' amount consumed.

 

And if anyone complains about noise, have security bust into the cabin? If security heard nothing by the time they got to the door, do you still feel they are justified in going in?

What if it was your cabin? And potentially having a little fun time with your wife. Would you like it if security walked in (just because your neighbor wants to play a practical joke on you?)

 

Maybe the cruiselines should start telling the cabin stewards to rifle through everyone's luggage. "to look for smuggled alcohol"

Wouldn't that be fun for the passengers.

 

So, specifically, where do you suggest they draw the line then? What specific responsibility do you feel RCI should have done in this instance, before the 'incident' occured?

[Leejnd4]

See, I don't think that it's a black-or-white, all or nothing situation. I find things to agree with on both sides of this, and things to disagree with.

 

Here's my brief take on it:

 

RCI's responsibilities -- based on all of the descriptions, it sounds like George was probably noticably drunk beyond what they see from most passengers, so perhaps RCI should have intervened at some point and made sure he got back to his room safely. That doesn't suggest that RCI should be doing Orwellian bar patrols -- just that in THIS situation it does sound as if George was beyond the normal drunk, and that security could have done something. I don't believe they should have tried to go into his room based on the noise report -- I completely agree with those that think that Security made a reasonable decision that they couldn't barge into a room that was now quiet, based on one report of noise. But I do think that it's possible SOMEONE among RCI staff/crew could have seen the state he was in when he WAS in the public areas, and intervened, if only because it was so obvious that a passenger in that highly inebriated state would be in some danger just by the nature of his condition.

 

George's responsibility -- yes he did something stupid, and he himself should be held responsible for his behavior. It's terribly tragic that his irresponsible behavior cost him his life (we assume). But he made some very poor choices that put him in danger. Even if his drinks were spiked (and that's a HUGE if -- I haven't seen or heard of any evidence to that effect, it's all just speculation), he still made the choice to party heartily with people he did not know.

 

So I for one DO subscribe to the 50-50 theory of responsibility here.

 

LeeAnne