Jump to content

Solway Harvester Trial Collapses


The Old Git

Recommended Posts

Hang on, there are very few places that would go to the expense of firstly recovering the boat, secondly investigating what happened, and thirdly setting up a prosecution.

 

Let's keep some perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again the Isle of Man hits the headlines for the wrong reasons!

 

I don't know why you think it's for the wrong reasons.

I totally agree with Bill Posters

 

Let's keep some perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on, there are very few places that would go to the expense of firstly recovering the boat, secondly investigating what happened, and thirdly setting up a prosecution.

 

Let's keep some perspective.

I totally agree with Bill.

 

I remember when they retrieved all the men. It made so many people cry. I even telephone Donald Gelling and said Well Done!

 

The effort showed the very best of the island as it offered all it could to grant the wishes of the families of the lost men.

 

For a long time now we've had the deeply depressing sight of the vessel sitting in the harbour awaiting the outcome of this trial. The results may not be what everyone hoped for, but surely shame cannot be thrown at the island for that.

 

Maybe everything, including the Solway Harvester can be put to rest now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R.I.P.

 

SOLWAY HARVESTER CREW

Skipper Andrew Mills, 29, known as Craig

Robin Mills, 33, Craig's brother

David Mills, 17, Craig's cousin

Martin Milligan, 26

John Murphy, 22

David Lyons, 18

Wesley Jolly, 17

 

 

My thoughts are with their families, who have not got the resolution they sought :(

 

 

 

Acting Deemster Andrew Moran QC ruled there was no case to answer after five weeks of prosecution evidence.

 

Explaining his reasons, he criticised several aspects of the prosecution case.

 

"The evidence put before the jury is insufficient to establish that there was any lack of care, particularly regarding what was the common and accepted practice of the vessels at the time," he said.

 

"I have decided as a matter of law I have a duty to stop this case from proceeding any further and I must direct the jury to return verdicts of not guilty."

 

Under the circumstances, sadly, I don't see that there was any other option.

 

 

As to the vessel, herself, subject to the families wishes, I think she should be taken back out there and re-sunk. Hopefully marked as a 'grave' on subsequent maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was always the most likely outcome. The prosecution had to prove gross negligence of the owner.

 

All Mr. Gidney had to do was say that the skipper was experienced and it was his responsibility to keep the vessel in good order, which is what has happened.

 

Had it proceeded, it was always likely that the jury would have been swayed that way.

 

But it was a prosecution which had to be taken as far as possible and there should be nothing but pride that the Isle of Man achieved as much as they did in not only recovering the crew and the vessel, but in mounting a sturdy and justified prosecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wondered if the charge was too strong.

 

As owner he must carry some responsibilty for the seaworthiness of the craft just as any business owner has responsibilities.

 

The families wanted 'Closure', I feel that they have been let down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...