A Strange Case of Justice

Except the Deputy claims he doesn't look for lights on boats, but silhouettes in the shoreline lights. So whether the stern light was working or not (opinions differ) the power boat operator wasn't looking for lights.

The whole thing is just odd.
 
Well, I know nothing about this case or anyone involved, but I have been a cop for 23 years . I work robbery and homicide and not crashes but the investigative techniques are similar. I would just point out that on hundreds of occasions over the years I have been involved in cases where I know the facts firsthand and what I read is nothing near the actual truth...I mean who would read and follow a story if all that was reported is that there was a boat accident and someone was charged with DUI. I suspect some of this is the usual "spin" by the media and defense, just a guess. I mean you already have two groups claiming the lights were on and off at the same time...someone wants the attention of being involved in this case or has a bad memory. The usual story is that the witness's on scene tell what they saw then the reporter goes out and looks for people not at the scene and gets them to "remember" the best headline he or she can come up with.

Also, here in Maryland, if you are committing any felony crime (DUI included as a felony in some states) and someone dies while you are committing that crime, there is a similar charge (felony murder). It might be a stretch in this case but say for example you rob a bank and when you are fleeing the scene you hit a pedestrian who is not in a crosswalk, so the accident is the pedestrian's fault...you still get the felony murder charge because it occurred while you were committing a felony.

In any event I have seen prosecutors load up on every conservable charge and then offer a plea to the charge that is MOST applicable. If the woman was drunk driving, weather she is at fault for the accident or not, she is still guilty of DUI regardless of the unfortunate circumstances.

All that aside, I will reserve judgement until this case goes to trial to see what was taken out of context and what is just plane not true. If some of those allegations do prove to be accurate than it sounds like some of the officers involved have some lumps coming to them also.

I know this probably comes across that I have picked a side but I really have not, I am just pointing out why I do not always buy into those kind of stories. You can say anything you want to a reporter and not worry about the repercussions. If you testify at trial and lie, than you have consciences.

as to expert witnesses...they are for the most part FULL of s#&t. The prosecutor will always find an expert who seems to agree with his theory and the defense will always find an "expert" to agree with their theory...in my experience, (cars not boats) if the filament is stretched, than the lights were on..even if a "millisecond" before the power was cut it would not cool enough not to stretch...that is pure BS.

So, if anyone cares, that's my two cents on the matter.
 
Some of us have been following this story from the first day (the day after the accident). There are a number of witnesses who say that the sail boat's lights WERE ON. Two experts testified that they were on (forensic evidence on the light filiments) at the time of impact. Even if the lights had been on, it is quite likely that the power boat operator would not have seen them, using his "technique" for seeing boats. This is occlusion of lights on the shore, rather than looking for lights on the water.

The stern light on the sail boat would have been on the stern, low to the water, and perhaps not very bright. (corrosion, fogged up lense, corroded lense etc).

The fact is that the power boat was traveling too fast for the conditions--that cannot be denied. That is the reason for the collision and deaths.

The logical way of handling this from the get go, would have been to call in the state police to do the investigation. This was not done for some reason--and defies reason.
 
I agree, an outside agency should have been contacted as soon as it was determined one of the operator's was connected to the department doing the investigation. I think many agencies have no problem in policing their own, however if nothing else you open the agency up to accusations of a cover up. A lot of people belive those things happen all the time. I can assure you there is always a prosecutor waiting for the publicity of charging a cop with a crime. Once he/ she gets her name in the paper, the run for office is in full cry.

Anyway, I don't like the speed boats any more than anyone else while I am putting along in my C-Dory. Maybe they should be required to at least be equipped with radar while operation at night because no matter the cause of this accident the result is a tragedy. If this is a crowded area he should not have been driving as fast as he is reported to have been going. If she was drunk, she should not have been driving the other boat,

I do all of my cursing so far on the Chesapeake bay. I always find a secluded spot, usually in a shallow creek to hold up in overnight, just because I have a fear of this kind of thing happening while I sleep.

If you are following this, keep us posted, I am interested in what comes out if this thing goes to trial, I am much too far away to see that story in the Washington Post.
 
Let me start by saying that I agree...this case just smells funny. Parts don't add up and Dr. Bob is spot on, an outside agency should have investigated the incident simply to avoid the hint of a cover-up.

That being said, let's not fool ourselves in thinking that Boat U.S. is simply reporting the facts. They are not a disinterested party as they represent the sailboat owner in this situation and are looking at substantial expenditures. Yes, they are a great boater resource and representative, but they are a for profit company.

Let me ask two questions out of curiosity (I understand there is a difference between my questions and the story):

1. If a boat is anchored and doesn't have its anchor lights on and is hit by a moving boat, who is at fault?

2. If a boat is anchored and does have its anchor lights on and is hit by a moving boat, who is at fault?

Personally, I think it all comes down to the lights. Speed would just be a contributing factor.

Alcohol impairment might play into....

1. the reason why the boat lights were possibly not on
2. the reason why one boater did not see the other boater
3. contributing to the speed of the boats

alcohol impairment is assumed above .08

What a tragic mess....
 
Mr. Dinius is, frankly, screwed - and most if it is of his own making...
He was at the helm of a boat (even if drifting) while intoxicated... The result is a dead passenger... Someone has to pay for that, and he is it, as the owner, captain, and helmsperson... Not much to be outraged over...

The assumption is that if the officer had been charged with BUI, etc. then Mr. Dinius is home free... Not so... Both would/will be responsible for the death...

Where the outrage lies is with the responding officers protecting one of their own... It happens - frequently... Lest you think that is just emotions or hot air, let me note that I have been a police surgeon and county coroner... I have witnessed it... And while I understand the thin blue line mentality, I do not condone it... The deputy was, at least under the circumstances, likely to have alcohol in his blood stream... He was given a pass - improperly...

Actually, I have little criticism of the prosecutor... He has to work with what he is given as sworn statements by the investigating and arresting officers... He is sworn to prosecute violations of the law... The courts place on him the burden to prosecute those charges for which he is likely, in his professional judgment, to get a conviction... Prosecuting every charge he can dream up will quickly get him into hot water for misfeasence once the case starts falling apart - as happened in the college case...

Do I feel sympathy for Mr. Dinius? Yes..
Do I feel he is an innocent victim of a corrupt prosecutor? No...
 
I just went back and reread this article and saw something I guess did not sink in on first glance. The Sergeant on scene said he was ordered by the Sheriff not to give a breath test. That is a problem.

I see that this guy is the Chief Deputy ( #2 in the agency). This aspect of the case does smell bad. We in Law enforcement do consider a sheriff a law enforcement officer, they are simply a politician, in one county I am familiar with the sheriff was a school teacher who ran and won the office. Nice guy but the things he does are from a law enforcement prospective, outrages. Anyway, I might guess that the problem here is that a politician got involved. A Chief Deputy is also usually an appointed position and again does not have to have any law enforcement experience in the jurisdictions I am familiar with. This is the position created for the Sheriff to give to a crony if that is what he chooses to do. This is an issue for another site and not this one but I have always said that sheriff's departments as apposed to police departments are a bad system. You can let a police chief go for poor performance, a sheriff is there until next election period. Anyone with half a brain will pick an experienced police officer as a chief of police, unlike the popularity contest that results in a sheriffs election.

enough off topic ranting, sorry for the detraction to the issue. If the Sheriff used his authority to impede the accident investigation then I say he should be charged. As to the accident itself, I will wait to see what facts come out at trial not what someone can tell a reporter so their family and friends can see them on the 6 o'clock news.
 
narcdawg,
I am aware that there are jurisdictions in the U.S. where the County Sheriff has no law enforcement background.
Fortunately for those of us in Snohomish County and our neighboring counties in Western Washington, the Sheriff is a seasoned law enforcement officer. Some of them have had political careers as well or pursue them after being a County Sheriff, however they have had distinguished law enforcement careers. (and yes they are elected). Knowing how our law enforcement agencies operate, they are very expedient in having other law enforcement agencies do investigations that could lead to any improprieties.
I'm not in law enforcement but over my career have worked closely with several different law enforcement agencies in our county and have been very impressed with their command as well as their officers.
 
Same here in King County, Dave. We do investigate our own use of force/shootings etc. But I'd be confident to assume/believe that anything like this, that occurred OFF DUTY w/ a member of the dept involved, would be investigated by an outside agency so as to eliminate any suggestion of impropriety.
 
Guys,

I didn't mean that as a sweeping indictment of all sheriff's departments by any means. I am aware that many sheriffs across the country are from within the ranks. I was pointing out the exceptions not the rule, for it is the exceptions that cast doubt on the whole system. In the Washington DC area, most sheriff's departments are small and only serve court orders, warrants, evictions and the like and are not the primary law enforcement in a county. In Virginia, most are run by sheriff's departments and it is there that I have seen the situations I spoke of. I also have a home in southern Va. I have met many sheriffs over the years from different parts of the country but I don't know the politics inside thier departments. I once had a deputy tell me the entire department was not allowed to do traffic enforcement or write tickets for 6 months because each ticket was a vote the sheriff would lose.

Again, sorry for going off topic everyone.
 
narcdawg":1dq4dcvf said:
Again, sorry for going off topic everyone.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't feel that you went off topic at all. Just as everything else in the particular case we are discussing, we don't know all that has or has not occurred because I'm certain there is a lot of information that we are not privy to (and may never know).

I'm glad that you reminded us, that not all jurisdictions are operated in the same way that we in our county are accustomed to enjoy....ie: having real law enforcement officers as heads of our departments.

The good thing about the opinions that have been discussed here is, that it is truly a reminder to all of us of the laws that do exist on the water and the consequences for not abiding by these rules. Whether all the "violations" that have been discussed did or did not occur, we've all been reminded of them in particular and it has been a great "table top discussion".

Most certainly, I would not have wanted to be on either of these vessels!

(P.S. ....even if you had gone "off topic", you would have fit in with many of the rest of us that have been known to do that....that's why some of us are "brats"... :roll: )
 
This afternoon Dinius walked out of the courthouse a free man. He was found "not guilty" on the first two charges, and the 3rd charge was dismissed by the judge--the Jury was 11 not guilty and one guilty of boating with an alcohol greater tha 0.8.

The details and transcripts of the trial have not been released, but in my opinion justice is served for Dinius, but there is still no action taken against the real culpert--the Deputy.
 
thataway":43esug4f said:
...

The details and transcripts of the trial have not been released, but in my opinion justice is served for Dinius, but there is still no action taken against the real culpert--the Deputy.
Click to expand...

And no action taken for the people who appear to have covered things up for the deputy. I think there needs to be a new sheriff in town, in fact a whole bunch of them...
 
Nice to hear a positive outcome, sometimes the little guy wins. This should never have been touched by the local sheriffs office, normally this is immediately turned over to the highway patrol. This was pretty much a sham from day 1.
 
Don and Brenda":3urygvjh said:
Nice to hear a positive outcome, sometimes the little guy wins. This should never have been touched by the local sheriffs office, normally this is immediately turned over to the highway patrol. This was pretty much a sham from day 1.
Click to expand...

Agreed!

Probably nothing will be done about the obvious sham/cover-up/misuse of the system, though.

The Lake County Grand Jury would, I think,be the one to initiate an investigation into the matter, but probably wouldn't have the fortitude to take on the Sheriff's Office :?:

Joe. :teeth :thup
 
Hi,
I wonder if the insurance company is going to just roll over and pay for the boat/s. The sailboats owner's main squeeze died right? maybe a civil suit? I would be surprised if it ends here. The poor guy who had his hand on the wheel got off, Sounds like a great advertisement for an autopilot.
D.D.
 
The Civil suit preceeded the criminal suit. In the settlement of the civil suit: "Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Perdock ( deputy who was driving the boat)was ordered to pay Lynn Thornton’s estate $299,999. Dinius (happend to be holding the tiller) also was ordered to pay the estate $299,999 while Weber (boat owner) was ordered to pay $99,999. A passenger on Perdock’s boat, James Walker, was ordered to pay $61,000."

The statuate of limitations has now run out, and Perdock cannot be charged under criminal codes (if that would ever happen).

The travesty of this entire issue, is that the speed of the motor vessel was unsafe, and the primary cause of the accident--there were other contributing factors--and those can be in dispute. Perdock had admitted that his boat was going at least 45 to 50 mph (later he recanted and said only 35 to 40 mph--on a dark night).

[/i]
 
I'm cross-posting a message from the T&T list about this:

A more complete and balanced account of the acquittal, corruption, and cover-up can be found at:

http://tinyurl.com/l79kx8

Although the jury found the man at the tiller not guilty, those jurors interviewed were more concerned with the failure of the corrupt DA to charge all involved than with the Inland Rules as expressed in California Boating Law. The DA tried to confuse everyone by talking about the case as those it was an automobile accident in which someone was killed instead of a marine accident. Liquor and whether navigation lights were on further complicate the case.

The story is filled with corrupt judges, conflicts of interest, and the purposeful running-out of the statute of limitations so that the principal deputy sheriff, responsible for the accident, could escape prosecution. This case gained worldwide attention and is the sorriest example of American justice I have ever seen - except for the jury. Many blame it all on a Good Old Boy network protecting its own. There is now a citizens' movement to get rid of the Sheriff and the DA through recall and/or the next election in rural Lake County.

Use the site's links to read ABC TV News investigative coverage and the Lake County News. Ignore the biased Record Bee coverage, but do read their readers' forums. The real issues center upon the Inland Rules at night and the definition and responsibilities of the Master and helmsman. California uses the term operator in lieu of Master or owner. Again, this confuses automobile law with marine law.

Ron Rogers
Click to expand...
 
Warren,
Thank you for sharing the reference site for this tragic event. After reading all of the references made on that site, the last one I read was the one entitled "Dan Noyes Writes About Lynn Thornton". This is a most poignant article about this case. (Lynn Thornton is the young lady who tragically died in this event).

In the article (for those who don't wish to read it in its' entirety), it is noted that Lynn had just retired after almost 30 years as a peace officer for the State of California, her most recent assignment was Senior Investigator for the Dental Board. "In light of Lynn's law enforcement background", Carol Stambuk (Lynn's close friend) said, Lynn would be upset about the boat crash case. Lake County District Attorney Jon Hopkins is blaming the man steering the sailboat at the time, arguing that the boat's running lights were off, instead of blaming the Sheriff's official, Russell Perdock, who was driving his powerboat a reported 40-55 miles an hour at night." Stambuck writes, "......the travesty of a case has been an absolute insult to her. Lynn would be outraged that an innocent man has been charged and she would be disgusted by the actions of Perdock and the disgrace he brings to law enforcement by hiding behind his badge. Lynn was a Peace Officer as well, and she did her job with integrity, honesty and dignity -- something in my opinion that is severely lacking wth the D.A. and the L.C.S.O. in Lake County".
 
Back
Top