Old Flares

[Paul D]

Stumbled across the Maritime and Coastguard agency website and read a few of the prosecutions pages. One was for firing a flare ( even after being told not to do it ! ).

 

 

 

Details as follows :-

 

 

Defendant: Harold William Smith

 

Date of Offence: 4th Nov. 2001

 

Offences: Improperly making a distress signal contrary to Regulation 3 of the Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collision) Regulations, 1996

 

Details: At a hearing on 8th July 2002 at Medway Magistrates' Court, Chatham, the owner of the vessel OCEAN MONARCH was convicted the above offence. The court heard how on the 4th of November 2001, Mr Smith contacted Medway Navigation Service and told the duty officer he wanted to fire a red flare to dispose of it. He was told in no uncertain terms not to, but fired the flare anyway, which was 3 years out of date. The flare was seen by a passing ship in the River Medway. The court was told of the potential dangers in firing time expired flares, the disruption to the rescue services caused by false alarms and the degree of recklessness shown, having been specifically told not to moments before firing the flare. There were legal arguments offered by the defence to the effect that this offence can only be committed whilst on board ship. However, these were discounted by the bench who accepted the prosecution argument that the offence is committed by the master whether or not he is on board his vessel. The question of the proximity of the master to his ship in relation to the offence would depend on the precise nature of the offence. In this case Mr Smith admitted to being on the pontoon next to his vessel.

 

 

 

 

Penalty: Conditional Discharge (for 12months) plus

[Maverick Martin]

Would that be a naughty boy or a stupid boy

 

It takes all sorts just a shame some are idiots

 

Martin