Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Aquahound

Members
  • Content Count

    20,462
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Aquahound

  • Rank
    20,000+ Club

About Me

  • Location
    Conch Republic -> Big Easy -> Emerald City
  • Interests
    Cruising...duh!
  • Favorite Cruise Line(s)
    Changes with the tide
  • Favorite Cruise Destination Or Port of Call
    Anywhere on a Ship

Recent Profile Visitors

981 profile views
  1. Thanks Chief. While I am an expert in these matters pertaining to US law, I recognize other countries are different. If the act were to take place within the state waters of the US, regardless of ship flag or subject nationality, the US could exercise authority because the crime essentially occurred in the US. In fact, it would fall under the authority of the state, such as Florida. We've removed countless persons of varying nationalities from foreign flagged ships for crimes committed within state waters. Initial notification of flag state and subject state are merely customary. Ref international law, remember, IL is doctrine based on customs and treaties. It's not really enforceable. I'm not sure what treaties exist between Spain and Italy but being they are EU nations, a scenario like this is probably already pre-determined. Just a hunch though; I don't know for certain.
  2. I went back and read the article again. It's been updated with more info since the original article. The act allegedly took place at about 5 am as the ship approached Valencia. The ship docked at 7:35 am. The ship was sailing from Mallorca. This means the act took place in Spanish waters (I missed that the first time). I cannot blame MSC whatsoever for thinking this falls under Spanish authority and for turning the subject over to them in Valencia. In fact, this makes me question the Spanish judge's decision.
  3. This isn't some every day claim against them by an individual. This is the US government, who has already levied them the highest fine ever for this type of violation and placed them on probation. Continuing these actions, coupled with doing so inside a national park....yeah....Thorncroft had it right. Not rolling over would be a death sentence in this case.
  4. There's much more in play that would impact your math. Don't forget the Environmental Compliance Plan Carnival was made to enact in addition to the $40 million fine. Part of Carnival's "probation" was to take aggressive environmental actions such as reducing emissions, installing exhaust scrubbers, reducing waste, etc. These are ongoing efforts that come with a high, recurring price tag.
  5. We know that Spain let him go, but how do you know she isn't getting help from the flag state or from the cruise line?
  6. I agree this is a frustrating scenario but I have to agree with Dawg on this one. The ship will not and cannot hold the accused on board for an undetermined amount of time while venue and subsequent investigation is worked out between nations. They had no choice but to debark both parties. Besides, it's important to remember the suspect was arrested in Spain. By this very fact, someone at some point felt as though Spain could exercise jurisdiction. So it's safe to say the cruise ship probably did cooperate fully with a law enforcement entity who made them believe they could handle the case. So why would they pursue any further with any other nation? Being where this case is now, it is the burden of the victim to pursue this in the proper venue. They can work with their consulate in Spain or work with their state department at home. The suspect does not need to walk free.
  7. Sorry, but I still don't understand what you're saying. This did not fall under Spanish jurisdiction; therefore there was no law to apply.
  8. I've sailed both lines and this one isn't even close in my opinion. I would pick Celebrity Equinox without hesitation over anything Carnival.
  9. What law are you talking about? There are several jurisdictions who can handle this. Spain just isn't one of them.
  10. How is the law an ass? Spain cannot exercise jurisdiction over an Italian suspect and UK victim on a Panamanian flagged ship outside of Spanish waters.
  11. You are absolutely correct. Although its a foreign flagged ship committing an illegal act in the waters of another nation or on the high seas, the minute they enter US waters with a falsified Oil Record Book or an inactive ODME, they are committing a US crime. As the world saw with Princess, the fines are huge. This is what really frustrates me about Carnival Corp. They were under probation and they knew all ships under their umbrella would receive increased scrutiny for the next 5 years. Furthermore, as I'm sure you know, the incentives for whistleblowers are quite attractive. Carnival Corp should be the most squared away cruise corp right now ref environmental issues. For individual ships to continue this behavior and be so brazen about it, like dumping in Glacier Bay during this period of increased scrutiny, just blows my mind.
  12. As a CC Host, you should be ashamed at fueling a political debate and allowing this thread to go off topic in this manner.
  13. From what I read, the contracts go in to effect in October, 2019. RCCL (parent company) received the permits so I wonder if they're looking at Celebrity first. Here's a story on it. https://www.nps.gov/glba/learn/news/glacier-bay-issues-new-contracts-for-cruise-ship-services.htm
  14. How do you think I'm feeling right now? Sheesh. All I can do is shake my head at this corporation. Strike that. It's not "all" I can do. 😉
×
×
  • Create New...