Costa Concordia Trial

[robpage]

in court this wek

Captain Francesco Schettino, the man accused of causing the Costa Concordia disaster, was entertaining his young lover – against the rules – on the ship’s bridge when the giant vessel struck a reef off the Italian coast, it emerged.

His former lover, the Moldavian dancer Domnica Cemortan, 26, admitted to an Italian court she was having an affair with the married 53-year-old captain, who is accused of allowing his showboating behaviour to cost the lives of 32 people after the giant vessel partially capsized off the island of Giglio in January 2012.

Prosecutors have alleged that the large number of superfluous people on the bridge at the time of the collision, particularly the presence of Ms Cemortan, “generated confusion and distraction for the captain”.

Previously, Ms Cemortan has said she had only been called up to the ship’s bridge after the accident in order to translate vital information that officers wanted to relay to Russian passengers.

However, under sustained questioning by a lawyer representing victims of the disaster, and after being threatened with contempt of court by the judge, Ms Cemortan said: “Yes I had an affair with the captain.” She also admitted through her interpreter that she was not on the official passenger list and was not in possession of a ticket, noting that her relationship with the captain had allowed her on board.

Captain Schettino, who has blamed his helmsman for the collision, is on trial for multiple manslaughter and causing a shipwreck.

The court heard that Captain Schettino had made a similar sail-by, very close to the island off the Tuscan coast, a week before the accident.

Antonello Tievoli, a ship’s waiter, said he had asked the captain to sail close to Giglio to salute his family who lived there. “The night of 6 January, I asked the commander if he could move closer to the island than usual, since we were still in the Christmas holidays. And he agreed, but was not satisfied with the distance. He thought it wasn’t close enough. He asked his second in command Ciro Ambrosio to repeat it the following week.”

Costa Concordia Captain Francesco Schettino (AP) Costa Concordia Captain Francesco Schettino (AP)
Ms Cemortan has defended Captain Schettino’s actions after the crash, portraying him as an officer in control of the situation. This notion was undermined, however, by the emergence of a video suggesting the reaction of officers on the bridge after the collision veered from initial complacency to panic.

Another of the ship’s waiting staff, Ciro Onorato, who had been invited to the bridge on the night of the crash, told the court that he went back down to the restaurant to help the passengers, but was then recalled to the bridge by Captain Schettino, who was already wearing a life jacket over his uniform. The captain told him: “Don’t leave me.”

Captain Schettino is also charged with abandoning ship before his passengers. He claims he slipped and fell into a lifeboat from which he was unable to extract himself.

I wonder if any UCL wingers ever thought of asking men like Captain Lloyd if they could get closer to the Isle of Wight , so they could wave to their mum , Answers please on a postcard to Arthur and Martha Winger 101 Berth Southampton Docks

[John Pruden]

ahh that's why the helmsman is doing time?the orders were ohh yes keep coming that's it faster?jp

[happy daze john in oz]

#33, I wonder what evidence will come from passengers as to the life boat incident, the plot certainly thickens as they say. Me thinks our captain wuill be walking the plank before too long if evidence such as this keeps coming to light.

Now Rob which Lloyd would that have been, Logger or Swivel Eye??

[robpage]

Which one would you have asked John , in fact any of the UCL passenger ship men , I sailed with three of them as a junior engineer and never saw a glimmer of humour

[Ivan Cloherty]

Which one would you have asked John , in fact any of the UCL passenger ship men , I sailed with three of them as a junior engineer and never saw a glimmer of humour

I think being Master in those days was a lonely life, and their social sphere was limited to Ch Eng and Ch Off, as they had to appear godlike in all circumstances and invariably were held as a font of all knowledge, regardless of subject. Nowadays it appears they all eat in the same mess using the same microwave and all play table tennis together, think I prefer the old system, but really not qualified to speak on it as never sailed with the new system. At least with the old system there was no doubt about who was in charge, I suspect some disrespect may have been the downfall of the CC

[robpage]

I wonder if modern communications , has eroded the aloofness and authority . Now if in doubt there is a 24 hour phone to the office , the ship seems to have devolved some of the Master's responsibilities to the Office . I am forming that opinion from the references to company policy , and Costa / Carnival office stated , Has the job changed that much ? If so it is a sorry state of affairs . Talking to an Ex Royal Navy friend he was telling me that in his time , the Skipper or the Squadron Commander had the authority to act , within certain criteria , now all action has to be Whitehall sanctioned . Maybe George Orwell was right , and Big Brother has taken over everywhere removing individual responsibility . Maybe the Ship's Master is now the office spokesperson on board .

[j.sabourn]

Rob, not so much the Master as regards supply vessels in the North sea and other places, but one well known company I was with had about 8 vessels and an Engineering supt. for each couple of vessels. It was standing instructions for the Ch Eng. to phone in each morning and report in , and in some cases be told what work he had to do ref the machinery. I thought at the time this was very demeaning and did not show much regard for the chief, maybe they were trying to justify their own positions. I only reported in when I felt like it. On the other hand on a foreign tramp vessel not too long before this the master phoned the office to ask for advice, and was told that he was there to handle problems and if couldn't cope they would get someone who could. In general ships are run more so from the shore than what they ever used to be, myself the less I had to do with them the better. Cheers John Sabourn

[j.sabourn]

Re same mess... I see nothing wrong with this, as a matter of fact it improved a lot of the bad habits of the past. People think in terms of the old type of mess, this is not correct to what I sailed with. It is a cafeteria system, worked on the basis like it is ashore, help yourself. If people want differentiation this is simply done by allotting certain seating areas to certain people. There is no stewards waiting on you, and if carried they are employed elsewhere. Behind the serving counters if necessary. Cheers John Sabourn

[John Arton]

Rob
The Master of any ship has a duty of care to protect his ship, crew, cargo and the environment. This is written into SOLAS conventions, STCW codes etc. etc. and has not changed since time began.
What has changed is the introduction of various other codes/regulations such as ISM, Work/Rest Hours and so forth but none of these can take away from the Master his ultimate responsibility for the ship. Modern communications and poor training, coupled with seafarers coming from non traditional seafaring nations and the crimilisation of Mariners for often minor infringements, has led to many of todays Masters forgetting that they are the guy in charge with the ultimate responsibility. There is no companies SMS System that will have a Master having to get permission from head office before he o.k.'s such items as Passage Plans and day to day Management of the safety of his vessel. There will be guidelines laid down and procedures to be followed but in all SMS there will be the clause "The Ultimate Responsibility of the Master".
Having a look see at a beach/house/waving to friends on the shore from a couple of hundred meters off,whilst zooming along at 20 knots on a huge passenger ship and at the same time having a bit on the side with an exotic dancer, clearly means that this guy has failed in his duty of care and no excuse regarding helmsman/equipment etc. can be used in his defence for the tragedy that occurred following his complete and utter disregard for his responsibilities as Master.
rgds
JA

[j.sabourn]

Some of these posts seem to refer back to the old saying of familiarity breeds contempt. I do not agree with this. We have earlier posts where people were even at this stage in their lives were wondering why they had to clear the focsle head out before transitting the suez canal. It would have been a simple matter for the master instead of maybe hiding behind his door curtain to come out and at least tell the bosun the reason. As an apprentice we were never allowed in the saloon until all the officers were out and were second servings, one of the excuses given was that we may have divulged to the crew certain things, if that was so do they not think the stewards would not do the same thing. Most of the old problems on ships go back to this secrecy thing, I would say unfamiliarity breeds contempt. All though common messing may have been brought out for the wrong reasons (saving money) it has been one way of breaking down this self imposed so called class barrier. Regards John Sabourn