Think the CEOs are toast for Carnival/HAL and others?

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

Just now, Aquahound said:

 

I don't understand what you're getting at.  What do you mean "who gets away with crime" regarding elections?  Again, what crime?  We can't just make up domestic crimes because we don't like the scenario of crew being stuck on foreign flagged ships, and because an ambulance-chaser attorney is up to his regular shenanigans. 

 

If you think a crime is being committed, please show me the statute and I'd be happy to opine on it.   

The Department of Justice may give you some answers in December. Or not. 
(sort of depends on November)

 

[chengkp75]

10 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

I don't understand what you're getting at.  What do you mean "who gets away with crime" regarding elections?  Again, what crime?  We can't just make up domestic crimes because we don't like the scenario of crew being stuck on foreign flagged ships, and because an ambulance-chaser attorney is up to his regular shenanigans. 

 

If you think a crime is being committed, please show me the statute and I'd be happy to opine on it.   

Another person who thinks the DOJ is a personal tool of the President, and can make up charges without laws to back them up.  You ask for a statute, they say "we can bring charges".

 

And, yeah, Walker is up to his usual antics.  If he felt in the least bit sympathetic towards crew members stuck on ships, he would address the hundreds of thousands of cargo ship crews stuck on their ships, that dwarf the number of cruise ship crew in similar situations, but instead he wants to highlight the elephant in the room with the deepest pockets to enrich himself.

Edited May 16, 2020 by chengkp75

[Aquahound]

Just now, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

The Department of Justice may give you some answers in December. Or not. 
(sort of depends on November)
 

 

Again I ask; what criminal laws are being ignored right now? 

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

3 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

Again I ask; what criminal laws are being ignored right now? 

a) Reread previous answer. 
b) Repeat as necessary.

 

[Aquahound]

5 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

a) Reread previous answer. 
b) Repeat as necessary.

 

 

So, none.  Got it.   I'll patiently wait for a December DOJ to snap their fingers and make up federal criminal laws that don't exist today. 

 

Someone needs to go back and watch a certain Schoolhouse Rock episode. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Aquahound

[navybankerteacher]

3 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

Again I ask; what criminal laws are being ignored right now? 

If someone dies, or even just suffers material or physical harm, because of actions taken - or negligently not taken - by a corporation - even if the cause of death or harm was not intended, the management of that corporation can be charged with criminal negligence.

 

Yes - being negligent can be found to be criminal - and there are laws which contemplate commencing investigations into suspected cases of negligence.  And a corporate structure does not necessarily provide corporate officers with that famous Nazi excuse: “I was just following orders” - ever hear of “piercing the corporate veil”?

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

4 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

So, none.  Got it.   I'll patiently wait for a December DOJ to snap their fingers and make up federal criminal laws that don't exist today. 

 

Someone needs to go back and watch a certain Schoolhouse Rock episode. 

😇   There are some who'd say the May DOJ doesn't get to enforce the laws that do exist. Maybe the December status will remain quo ... or maybe not. Arison, Duffy, Fain and friends may well have some skin in the outcome. 
         

[Aquahound]

11 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

If someone dies, or even just suffers material or physical harm, because of actions taken - or negligently not taken - by a corporation - even if the cause of death or harm was not intended, the management of that corporation can be charged with criminal negligence.

 

Yes - being negligent can be found to be criminal - and there are laws which contemplate commencing investigations into suspected cases of negligence.  And a corporate structure does not necessarily provide corporate officers with that famous Nazi excuse: “I was just following orders” - ever hear of “piercing the corporate veil”?

 

Yes.  Read back to my post #60.  I already hit upon that. 

 

9 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

😇   There are some who'd say the May DOJ doesn't get to enforce the laws that do exist. Maybe the December status will remain quo ... or maybe not. Arison, Duffy, Fain and friends may well have some skin in the outcome. 
         

 

You mean the current status quo that hit Carnival Corp with a 60 million dollar fine...the highest ever...for environmental crimes as a result of a massive criminal prosecution brought against them in US District Court, and which was a collaboration of prosecutors under this and the previous administrations?  Whoever says the "May DOJ" doesn't get to enforce laws against cruise lines is highly ignorant.  I'm in the business and I can tell you first hand, US Attorneys love criminal charges against cruise lines. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Aquahound

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

If someone dies, or even just suffers material or physical harm, because of actions taken - or negligently not taken - by a corporation - even if the cause of death or harm was not intended, the management of that corporation can be charged with criminal negligence.

 

Yes - being negligent can be found to be criminal - and there are laws which contemplate commencing investigations into suspected cases of negligence.  And a corporate structure does not necessarily provide corporate officers with that famous Nazi excuse: “I was just following orders” - ever hear of “piercing the corporate veil”?

Paul is not saying that corporations or corporate officers cannot be found to be criminally liable, but the situation under discussion is the possible "criminality" of disembarking passengers according to the current laws and regulations in force at the port in question, and the very slim possibility of criminality of someone downstream being infected by one of those passengers.  What Paul is asking is what law or even departmental rule was broken in this discharge of passengers.

[Cruzaholic41]

Oh boy, I love it when folks try to argue facts with our resident Chief Engineer and Special Agent in Charge (yes, that’s their true titles). Keep it going. I just made fresh popcorn. 😉

[CruiserBruce]

Wonder who many of the people in the New York area are going to sue? As most likely the outbreak there is probably due to the 2 million people who flew into the US in February from Europe...both returning US citizens, and visitors.

[navybankerteacher]

32 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Paul is not saying that corporations or corporate officers cannot be found to be criminally liable, but the situation under discussion is the possible "criminality" of disembarking passengers according to the current laws and regulations in force at the port in question, and the very slim possibility of criminality of someone downstream being infected by one of those passengers.  What Paul is asking is what law or even departmental rule was broken in this discharge of passengers.

It is absurd to ask what law has been broken - or to insist that cited law has been broken before starting some procedure.

 

If that “very slim possibility”  plays out - that someone downstream became infected (and possibly died) due to what is subsequently found to be negligence on the part of a corporate officer, that officer can be charged with criminal negligence - and the statute which provides for prison time for criminal negligence will, in fact, be “the current law“.

 

 This is what criminal negligence is about - of course the corporate officer did not knowingly break a specific law — but if it is subsequently found, that through his negligence, (yes, second guessing ) that harm was done - then the law which penalizes criminal negligence is the law which he has run afoul of.

 

 

 

[Aquahound]

26 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It is absurd to ask what law has been broken - or to insist that cited law has been broken before starting some procedure.

 

If that “very slim possibility”  plays out - that someone downstream became infected (and possibly died) due to what is subsequently found to be negligence on the part of a corporate officer, that officer can be charged with criminal negligence - and the statute which provides for prison time for criminal negligence will, in fact, be “the current law“.

 

 This is what criminal negligence is about - of course the corporate officer did not knowingly break a specific law — but if it is subsequently found, that through his negligence, (yes, second guessing ) that harm was done - then the law which penalizes criminal negligence is the law which he has run afoul of.

 

The allegation was made that laws are being ignored, and that the US is willfully turning a blind eye to criminal conduct that has already been committed.  So no, it is not absurd to ask what law was broken when someone makes such a bold statement.

 

You're changing the context to a hypothetical.  In the case of your hypothetical, yes, if a person loses his/her life and it appears, even in the slight, to be due to negligence on the part of a ships officer or corporate executive, my team would be on that allegation like sauce on pizza.  But even if that were to play out, it is very difficult to prove what a person knew at the time of the sailing that leads to criminal neglect; not that we wouldn't try.  But if the outcome isn't what we like, it does not equate to the aforementioned allegations that it's being ignored.  Public opinion does not equate to criminal neglect.

 

What's not a hypothetical is the fact several have died on ships.  If anyone thinks every single one of those deaths aren't being looked at closely, let me be the first to say they are "dead" wrong. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Aquahound

[chengkp75]

24 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It is absurd to ask what law has been broken - or to insist that cited law has been broken before starting some procedure.

 

If that “very slim possibility”  plays out - that someone downstream became infected (and possibly died) due to what is subsequently found to be negligence on the part of a corporate officer, that officer can be charged with criminal negligence - and the statute which provides for prison time for criminal negligence will, in fact, be “the current law“.

 

 This is what criminal negligence is about - of course the corporate officer did not knowingly break a specific law — but if it is subsequently found, that through his negligence, (yes, second guessing ) that harm was done - then the law which penalizes criminal negligence is the law which he has run afoul of.

 

 

 

The question is, how is "negligence" determined when all applicable laws, regulations, and requirements of all government agencies involved were met?

 

This site defines criminal negligence:  https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-negligence/

 

"Criminal negligence is conduct which is such a departure from what would be that of an ordinary prudent or careful person in the same circumstance as to be incompatible with a proper regard for human life or an indifference to consequences. "

 

So, would the "ordinary prudent or careful" person believe that if the Customs, Immigration, Coast Guard, and Public Health officials in a country said it was okay to do something, that they would be negligent if they didn't add additional safeguards?

 

If the law and local law enforcement says that the speed limit is 45 mph going around a turn, and you maintain 45 mph around the turn in good weather, but there is a deer in the road and you have an accident and your passenger is injured, are you negligent for not reducing your speed to 35 mph?  Sure, you are still responsible, but are you criminally negligent?

 

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by chengkp75

[K32682]

39 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It is absurd to ask what law has been broken - or to insist that cited law has been broken before starting some procedure.

 

If that “very slim possibility”  plays out - that someone downstream became infected (and possibly died) due to what is subsequently found to be negligence on the part of a corporate officer, that officer can be charged with criminal negligence - and the statute which provides for prison time for criminal negligence will, in fact, be “the current law“.

 

 This is what criminal negligence is about - of course the corporate officer did not knowingly break a specific law — but if it is subsequently found, that through his negligence, (yes, second guessing ) that harm was done - then the law which penalizes criminal negligence is the law which he has run afoul of.

 

This would seem to be the heart of the Congressional investigation into Carnival.  What did they know, when did they know it and what did they do about it may be awkward questions for them to answer.  

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/01/849177717/carnival-cruise-line-subject-of-congressional-investigation

 

 

[navybankerteacher]

42 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The question is, how is "negligence" determined when all applicable laws, regulations, and requirements of all government agencies involved were met?

 

This site defines criminal negligence:  https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-negligence/

 

"Criminal negligence is conduct which is such a departure from what would be that of an ordinary prudent or careful person in the same circumstance as to be incompatible with a proper regard for human life or an indifference to consequences. "

 

So, would the "ordinary prudent or careful" person believe that if the Customs, Immigration, Coast Guard, and Public Health officials in a country said it was okay to do something, that they would be negligent if they didn't add additional safeguards?

 

If the law and local law enforcement says that the speed limit is 45 mph going around a turn, and you maintain 45 mph around the turn in good weather, but there is a deer in the road and you have an accident and your passenger is injured, are you negligent for not reducing your speed to 35 mph?  Sure, you are still responsible, but are you criminally negligent?

 

 

It can certainly be argued that in the present circumstance:  faced with an unprecedented pandemic involving a rapidly spreading disease, for which there was no established treatment, your “ordinary prudent or careful” person charged with managing a transportation service, which he learns has become a vector for that disease, surely should consider the ramifications  —- it clearly was not a time for  business as usual.

[ontheweb]

3 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It can certainly be argued that in the present circumstance:  faced with an unprecedented pandemic involving a rapidly spreading disease, for which there was no established treatment, your “ordinary prudent or careful” person charged with managing a transportation service, which he learns has become a vector for that disease, surely should consider the ramifications  —- it clearly was not a time for  business as usual.

Could the same standard be applied to the CDC and Coast Guard that allowed passengers off the ship and to fly home on commercial airlines without any quarantine?

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It can certainly be argued that in the present circumstance:  faced with an unprecedented pandemic involving a rapidly spreading disease, for which there was no established treatment, your “ordinary prudent or careful” person charged with managing a transportation service, which he learns has become a vector for that disease, surely should consider the ramifications  —- it clearly was not a time for  business as usual.

But, again, you are going from one specific incident that a poster said was a "criminal act" (the disembarking of passengers without a quarantine that was not mandated) to "business as usual".  So, are airlines going to be subject to criminal negligence charges because a passenger on one of their flights, which were known to be transmission vectors, subsequently infected another person?  When the international travel ban went into effect, but did not include passengers returning to the US, or from various countries, can those passengers be considered to be criminally negligent if they subsequently infected someone?  Is everyone subject to charges if they have covid and downstream cases can be found through contact tracing?

[clo]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Another person who thinks the DOJ is a personal tool of the President

Right.

[clo]

2 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Oh boy, I love it when folks try to argue facts with our resident Chief Engineer and Special Agent in Charge (yes, that’s their true titles). Keep it going. I just made fresh popcorn. 😉

Are you referring to someone who is never wrong?

[Aquahound]

22 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

It can certainly be argued that in the present circumstance:  faced with an unprecedented pandemic involving a rapidly spreading disease, for which there was no established treatment, your “ordinary prudent or careful” person charged with managing a transportation service, which he learns has become a vector for that disease, surely should consider the ramifications  —- it clearly was not a time for  business as usual.

 

At the time those ships sailed, most states were not yet in "stay at home" status, malls were open, amusement parks were open, airlines were flying full, etc, etc, etc.  Heck, the state first impacted by this mess, WA, didn't even issue stay-at-home for another 2 weeks after the cruise lines announced a pause in ops.  It is a very big stretch to, with a broad brush, make cruise lines criminally culpable while turning a blind eye to every other venue. 

 

And for the record, I'm still waiting for an answer from anyone who made such allegations, what federal laws are being ignored by Zaandam passengers debarking in Florida?  Considering there is no answer, I'll be waiting a long time. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Aquahound

[Jasawyer]

And there ya have it.... Impossible for many to separate politics from law,  reason and critical thinking. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Jasawyer

[Jasawyer]

24 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

But, again, you are going from one specific incident that a poster said was a "criminal act" (the disembarking of passengers without a quarantine that was not mandated) to "business as usual".  So, are airlines going to be subject to criminal negligence charges because a passenger on one of their flights, which were known to be transmission vectors, subsequently infected another person?  When the international travel ban went into effect, but did not include passengers returning to the US, or from various countries, can those passengers be considered to be criminally negligent if they subsequently infected someone?  Is everyone subject to charges if they have covid and downstream cases can be found through contact tracing?

Don't bother, this has drifted off into politics. Not worth wasting your time with... 

[rkacruiser]

What a disappointing series of posts to read!  

 

Who is to blame for what?  Who knew what when?  What should have been done?  And, when should it have been done?

 

Many entities, private, public, and political, have been caught with "their pants down" because of this pandemic.  There is no "playbook" for reference.  (Although, I do wonder if the lessons that should have been learned from the Spanish Flu epidemic have relevance during this time.)

 

I realize that it is comforting at times to "point fingers" for what one perceives as failings.  Just remember, for every finger that one points, there are 3 other fingers that are pointing at you.  

 

We are a very long way during this pandemic when we will hear "the fat Lady sing".  The end is not in sight.  

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

38 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

I realize that it is comforting at times to "point fingers" for what one perceives as failings.  Just remember, for every finger that one points, there are 3 other fingers that are pointing at you.  

 

    Actually, no - there are no fingers pointing at the folks who challenge the cruise executives & their online defenders here.
 
    Why is that?

     -- Because we didn't take on responsibility for tens of thousands of people ... and then botch the job catastrophically, generating back-to-back-to-back-to-back crises during a pandemic;

 

     -- The deaths from Zaandam, Diamond, Grand, Coral, Ruby, Luminosa, Solstice, Ovation, Voyager, Oasis, Eclipse, Fabulosa are not on our heads in any way whatsoever. Fain, Donald, Duffy and their executive teams cannot say as much;

 

     -- We haven't quietly stranded thousands of crew members for weeks and weeks, trying to sneak out of our obligations on the cheap & blame the CDC for the whole mess; 
 

     --  We didn't load our corporate websites with high-sounding platitudes about safety ... then sail one ship after another into chaos, jeopardizing passengers and crew alike;
 

     "Carnival Cruise Line’s highest responsibilities include the health and safety of our guests and crew."

     

     "At Royal Caribbean International, the safety and security of our guests and crew is our highest priority and fundamental to our operations."

     Yet ... as of April 23, the Miami Herald had the death count for Carnival & subsidiaries at 59, RCI at 10.  😲