Did Crown Princess violate federal law today?

[mayleeman]

@LMaxwell "it has been removed from the forum"

 

Any idea why? I don't recall seeing anything violative. I have had a few removed and have no idea why. 

[LMaxwell]

29 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

@LMaxwell "it has been removed from the forum"

 

Any idea why? I don't recall seeing anything violative. I have had a few removed and have no idea why. 

 

Unsure; perhaps the image link was broken? Link will provide Cheng the full document anyways 

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

ChengP I answered your question with quotation from the Coast Guard; it has been removed from the forum.  Here is a link to the Coast Guard https://homeport.uscg.mil/Lists/Content/Attachments/62863/MSIB 20-001 COVID-19 Cruiseship Medical Capabilities_Signed.29Mar20.pdf

Yes, and I answered this, saying that since the cognizant COTP was present for the board hearing, I am wondering if she stated that the ship had either submitted a false or incorrect notice of health?  Given that this is a requirement, regardless of the current MSIB (which is just a clarification), and given the USCG's attitude towards improper reporting, if that had been the case, I'm quite confident that she would have stated so, and also that the ship would have been detained (armed USCG Sea Marshals boarding and keeping the ship at the dock or taking it to anchor for detention), or the Captain would have been removed by the USCG, or both.

[bluesea321]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, and I answered this, saying that since the cognizant COTP was present for the board hearing, I am wondering if she stated that the ship had either submitted a false or incorrect notice of health?  Given that this is a requirement, regardless of the current MSIB (which is just a clarification), and given the USCG's attitude towards improper reporting, if that had been the case, I'm quite confident that she would have stated so, and also that the ship would have been detained (armed USCG Sea Marshals boarding and keeping the ship at the dock or taking it to anchor for detention), or the Captain would have been removed by the USCG, or both.

 

I hesitate to get in the middle of this but FWIW the Captain of the Coast Guard was not at all effective at the meeting.  She hesitated, deferred, or waffled regarding most questions she was asked, appeared to not be informed, and "declined to officially" answer and perhaps get "in trouble".  On the podium she seemed more of a politician than an officer of the CG.  I wish you could see the video (I know you can't), that way you could judge for yourself.  I can tell you that she did not handle the comment I underlined above the way you or others would have handled it or the way that you expect her to have done.  LMaxwell can perhaps elaborate as well.

[chengkp75]

12 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

I hesitate to get in the middle of this but FWIW the Captain of the Coast Guard was not at all effective at the meeting.  She hesitated, deferred, or waffled regarding most questions she was asked, appeared to not be informed, and "declined to officially" answer and perhaps get "in trouble".  On the podium she seemed more of a politician than an officer of the CG.  I wish you could see the video (I know you can't), that way you could judge for yourself.  I can tell you that she did not handle the comment I underlined above the way you or others would have handled it or the way that you expect her to have done.  LMaxwell can perhaps elaborate as well.

Regardless of how the COTP reacts to public speaking, if there was a violation of the law, as I said, they would not have let the ship simply leave port again.  Could it be that her office failed to notify all relevant, or all parties that feel they are relevant in this situation?  Why should the blame fall immediately on the ship?

Edited April 3, 2020 by chengkp75

[bluesea321]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Could it be that her office failed to notify all relevant, or all parties that feel they are relevant in this situation?  Why should the blame fall immediately on the ship?

 

Yes, that is a possibility but impossible for me or you to know.  My guess is the issue is "over", they got other major concerns to deal with like the Zaandam, Rotterdam, and next, the Coral.

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

Yes, that is a possibility but impossible for me or you to know.  My guess is the issue is "over", they got other major concerns to deal with like the Zaandam, Rotterdam, and next, the Coral.

I agree, and that is why I fail to see why the blame gets placed anywhere, without all the facts.

[beg3yrs]

On 4/2/2020 at 5:44 AM, skynight said:

Carnival is a dual corporation with Carnival Corporation incorporated in the U.S. (Miami), and Carnival PCL incorporated in the UK. 

Most of the Princess fleet is flagged in Bermuda with a few ships being flagged in the UK. This allows for cost efficient construction and operation. Very few cruise and cargo ships are flagged in the U.S..

 

Carnival is incorporated in Panama with HQ in Doral, Florida. It is the only company listed on both the New York and London stock exchanges.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc

[Captain_Morgan]

On 4/2/2020 at 8:44 AM, skynight said:

Carnival is a dual corporation with Carnival Corporation incorporated in the U.S. (Miami), and Carnival PCL incorporated in the UK. 

Most of the Princess fleet is flagged in Bermuda with a few ships being flagged in the UK. This allows for cost efficient construction and operation. Very few cruise and cargo ships are flagged in the U.S..

 

 

None of the Princess ships are flagged in the UK....each and every one of their fleet is flagged in Bermuda

 

P&O and Cunard (UK based) are flagged in Bermuda as well with the exception of Britannia and soon to be Iona (P&O) which are flagged in the UK

[LMaxwell]

17 hours ago, bluesea321 said:

 

I hesitate to get in the middle of this but FWIW the Captain of the Coast Guard was not at all effective at the meeting.  She hesitated, deferred, or waffled regarding most questions she was asked, appeared to not be informed, and "declined to officially" answer and perhaps get "in trouble".  On the podium she seemed more of a politician than an officer of the CG.  I wish you could see the video (I know you can't), that way you could judge for yourself.  I can tell you that she did not handle the comment I underlined above the way you or others would have handled it or the way that you expect her to have done.  LMaxwell can perhaps elaborate as well.

I thought she was some mid-level spokesperson. She did not impress during the meeting with tap dancing no answers.  She was not specifically asked about the Crown at the meeting. 

[ShipsAreTheBest]

8 hours ago, Captain_Morgan said:

 

None of the Princess ships are flagged in the UK....each and every one of their fleet is flagged in Bermuda

 

P&O and Cunard (UK based) are flagged in Bermuda as well with the exception of Britannia and soon to be Iona (P&O) which are flagged in the UK

Actually, Majestic, Diamond, Sapphire, and Golden are registered in the UK.  All the other Princess ships are registered in Bermuda.  And, IIRC, the P&O Ausralia fleet is registered in the UK as well.

Edited April 4, 2020 by ShipsAreTheBest

[bluesea321]

5 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

I thought she was some mid-level spokesperson. She did not impress during the meeting with tap dancing no answers.  She was not specifically asked about the Crown at the meeting. 

 

She was introduced as a Captain in the Coast Guard and was wearing the uniform but I agree with your comments, she tap danced (a better description than what I previously used) and provided little or no answers.  

[Aquahound]

23 hours ago, bluesea321 said:

 

I hesitate to get in the middle of this but FWIW the Captain of the Coast Guard was not at all effective at the meeting.  She hesitated, deferred, or waffled regarding most questions she was asked, appeared to not be informed, and "declined to officially" answer and perhaps get "in trouble".  On the podium she seemed more of a politician than an officer of the CG.  I wish you could see the video (I know you can't), that way you could judge for yourself.  I can tell you that she did not handle the comment I underlined above the way you or others would have handled it or the way that you expect her to have done.  LMaxwell can perhaps elaborate as well.

 

35 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

She was introduced as a Captain in the Coast Guard and was wearing the uniform but I agree with your comments, she tap danced (a better description than what I previously used) and provided little or no answers.  

 

I know CAPT Burdian.  I can assure you she is a great officer and has the background and experience to perform her duties.  That said, unlike senior law enforcement officials who get extensive training in media relations and public speaking, the CG falls a little short in preparing their senior officers in that manner.  I too cringed a little when she was in the hot seat but I really think nerves got to her.  I assure you she knows what she's doing otherwise.  

Edited April 4, 2020 by Aquahound

[Aquahound]

5 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

I thought she was some mid-level spokesperson. She did not impress during the meeting with tap dancing no answers.  She was not specifically asked about the Crown at the meeting. 

 

She is the Commanding Officer of USCG Sector Miami.  As such, she is designated as Captain of the Port.  There are senior officers above her, who command over the entire 7th District, but she is in charge of all operations in Miami's AOR.  

Edited April 4, 2020 by Aquahound

[Aquahound]

On 4/1/2020 at 8:14 AM, chengkp75 said:

And this linked document shows that the ship did not make an accurate ENOA, or violated the law in any way?  Would still like to see a statement from the USCG, not an elected politician before I make a conclusion.

 

I'm speaking from the opposite coast, so I don't have all the facts.  That said, I'm not sure Crown submitted a false ENOA.  I heard the allegations made by the Broward County Commission, but I never actually heard the USCG confirm that claim.

 

To answer the OP's question, if someone on the Crown intentionally filed a false ENOA, it could be federally charged under 18USC1001 (false claims).

 

Here is a link to that statute:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

[Steelers36]

In today's situation, this thread about the CROWN reminds me of something:

 

"Ilsa, I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people one cruise ship don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world".

[mayleeman]

I suspect anybody representing the US in any meeting is aware that whatever they say, it will be highly scrutinized by media, affected parties, and the Administration. Without WH guidance, I would only give name, rank, and serial number.

[chengkp75]

6 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

I'm speaking from the opposite coast, so I don't have all the facts.  That said, I'm not sure Crown submitted a false ENOA.  I heard the allegations made by the Broward County Commission, but I never actually heard the USCG confirm that claim.

 

To answer the OP's question, if someone on the Crown intentionally filed a false ENOA, it could be federally charged under 18USC1001 (false claims).

 

Here is a link to that statute:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

Hey, Paul;

 

Was hoping you'd jump in here.  I kind of figured you knew the COTP from your days in the Keys.  I'm sure that she would not be shy about stating that the ship in fact did not state the true health of the ship on the ENOA, nothing to really waffle about there, and I know they take a hard line about it.

 

The recent "attestations of hazardous conditions" that are now required in more than just the 7th district are so widespread and succinct, that there were two that we had to submit for our recent port call, one for Delaware Bay, and one for Philadelphia, even though they both go to the same COTP.

[npcl]

22 hours ago, beg3yrs said:

Carnival is incorporated in Panama with HQ in Doral, Florida. It is the only company listed on both the New York and London stock exchanges.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc

It is dual incorporated.  In Panama as you indicated.  It is also incorporated in England.  This was the result of when it purchased P&O a few years back.  

[PhoenixCruiser]

Deleted

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

[FiredogCruiser]

After this situation is over, I think what needs to be done is a complete assessment by port municipalities relative to their emergency operations plans for dealing with cruise ship populations. Municipalities spend untold numbers of dollars in advertising to get vacationers to spend their money in their communities, but little to none in planning to insure they have the capability to protect those they attract to their community. And even in those cases where impressive plans might exist, one could question how well exercised they are. Anything more than an occational table top? When you host, and actually market,  facilities that can draw thousands at a time, you have a responsibility not only to your residents, but to the people you attract to be able to adequately service them during an emergency. Abandoning, or attempting to abandon, those in need because you do not have a well exercised plan of operation in my opinion borders on criminal, and cannot be blamed on the cruise ship lines or crews.

[Aquahound]

2 hours ago, FiredogCruiser said:

Municipalities spend untold numbers of dollars in advertising to get vacationers to spend their money in their communities, but little to none in planning to insure they have the capability to protect those they attract to their community.

 

Little to no planning?  Where in the World did you hear this?  

 

Authorities from the USCG, and state and local agencies have comprehensive plans in place to respond to major incidents at the ports, including incidents of mass casualties on ships.  They meet regularly, and routinely conduct tabletop and physical drills.  Daily, they expend money and assets to keep cruisers safe.  Ever see those USCG and local LE and fire boats escorting ships and floating around the harbor?  Ever notice how many CBP and local Sheriff's deputies are assigned to the ports?  That's but a mere fraction of the effort to keep people safe.  

 

The problem with this incident is we're dealing with a highly contagious infectious disease that we only just learned about a couple months ago, are are still learning about today.   

Edited April 5, 2020 by Aquahound

[FiredogCruiser]

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

 

Little to no planning?  Where in the World did you hear this? 

Authorities from the USCG, and state and local agencies have comprehensive plans in place to respond to major incidents at the ports, including incidents of mass casualties on ships.  They meet regularly, and routinely conduct tabletop and physical drills.  Daily, they expend money and assets to keep cruisers safe.  Ever see those USCG and local LE and fire boats escorting ships and floating around the harbor?  Ever notice how many CBP and local Sheriff's deputies are assigned to the ports?  That's but a mere fraction of the effort to keep people safe.  

 

The problem with this incident is we're dealing with a highly contagious infectious disease that we only just learned about a couple months ago, are are still learning about today.   

Ah, thanks. That explains wanting to deny passengers and crew access to the port. And here I thought they were afraid and didn't know what to do, because they were asking for a plan. Silly me.

[LMaxwell]

On 4/4/2020 at 1:58 PM, Aquahound said:

 

She is the Commanding Officer of USCG Sector Miami.  As such, she is designated as Captain of the Port.  There are senior officers above her, who command over the entire 7th District, but she is in charge of all operations in Miami's AOR.  

Thank you. I was referring mostly to her speaking performance. She was uncertain and not confident. Her answers vague and trying to placate. 

[LMaxwell]

1 hour ago, FiredogCruiser said:

Ah, thanks. That explains wanting to deny passengers and crew access to the port. And here I thought they were afraid and didn't know what to do, because they were asking for a plan. Silly me.

It's on the cruise line to submit a plan of action that satisfies the requirements of the Unified Command.  For Zaandam Carnival Corp had to hire private ambulances and give assurances not to take more than 15 Broward county hospital beds, for example.  The county had a chain of command, but the cruise lines entire plan can't be to just disembark and let it be the counties problem after.