Boating Accident/Death off Diamond Island - Page 3

wildwoodfam · 06-21-2008, 12:37 PM

Gotta love digital cameras and the ability to enlarge the photo, I can now see the dealer plate on the boat!

And my apologies - I said Channel and of course new it was Lakeport. That's what happens when you are on the other side of the lake, everything beyond the Weirs blurs together!

Still a very sad story unfolding here...

SAMIAM · 06-21-2008, 06:53 PM

Am I the only one confused ? as I scroll down ,I don't seem to find any order in the posts.Last post was on the 16th and I key onto "more replies below currant depth"...and still can't find todays post. I'm a 3 on a scale of 10 when it comes to computer skills.....guess I need someone to explain things to me.

Seadoo · 06-21-2008, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

Am I the only one confused ? as I scroll down ,I don't seem to find any order in the posts.Last post was on the 16th and I key onto "more replies below currant depth"...and still can't find todays post. I'm a 3 on a scale of 10 when it comes to computer skills.....guess I need someone to explain things to me.

Do not worry about it, it's all bull anyway.

Seaplane Pilot · 06-22-2008, 05:56 AM

This week's Gilford Steamer - a local news rag - (emphasis added) reported the boat driver's name as "Erica Buzzard". Totally disrespectful and unprofessional, even though it was most certainly unintentional. Now how difficult it is to get a fact like this right? Doesn't the editor proof read?

On top of this, several of the news articles over the past week spelled both Winnipesaukee and Gilford incorrectly. How are we supposed to believe these articles, when these media cannot even get simple facts correct? Embarrasing to say the least.

http://granitestatenews.com/pdf/GIL.2008.06.19.pdf See page 2.

Tank151 · 06-22-2008, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pats fan

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/709126805

Skip,
See paragraph 3 of the above Citizen article. I don't disagree with your comments above about Mr. Littlefield, but it certainly does seem to me that he was aquitted of being drunk. Do I think he probably was? Sure. But I think he was not found guilty of that charge.

Drunk conviction or NOT, Mr. Littlefield admittingly was drinking which was verified by receipt information at the Dockside Restaurant and by accounts of witnesses who observed him impaired!

His accident killed an person as well as put himself, his wife and children and friends lives in jeopardy. Let's not forget, he cowardly left the scene of the accident, leaving the injured and could have assited them with Medical assistance.

We don't have the FACTS on the Diamond Island accident, so these two incidents can't be compared!

SIKSUKR · 06-23-2008, 10:45 AM

I had a look at the crash site on Saturday.I stayed a good 500-700 ft away as not to bother the homeowner,although I did not see any indication of anyone there.It seems little doubt in my mind Erica was headed for Sleepers Island and crashed into Diamond.Obviously she did not see this very unlit island.It appears the the boat hit a 5-6 ft shear wall of granite that would be in the direct path to Diamond.Looking at that wall and also the damage to the boat,it would appear to me it would not take very much speed to result in the damage seen on her boat.The boat had to come to an immediate stop.This is ONLY my uneducated perception of what I've seen.Take it for what it is but I'll be very surprized that when the investigation is complete and if there is a speed determination that it will be more than 20-30 mph.Let me say again that this is just a pure guess on my part but I would think weather will turn out to be the main factor in the crash.

NHDOLFAN · 06-23-2008, 12:30 PM

I am very curious as to why Marine Patrol has taken this amount of time to make a statement. If the driver was impaired in anyway shape or form, I would think Marine Patrol would make a statement about the incident. If you think about crashes that take place and kill or seriously hurt someone, the police always make some statement about whether alcohol or drugs were a factor. This incident has been hush hush, which I don't understand.

chipj29 · 06-23-2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDOLFAN

I am very curious as to why Marine Patrol has taken this amount of time to make a statement. If the driver was impaired in anyway shape or form, I would think Marine Patrol would make a statement about the incident. If you think about crashes that take place and kill or seriously hurt someone, the police always make some statement about whether alcohol or drugs were a factor. This incident has been hush hush, which I don't understand.

The boats driver was in critical condition, I believe in an induced coma. They would most likely need to interview all parties involved before they can make a statement of any kind.

NHDOLFAN · 06-23-2008, 12:57 PM

I understand that the driver was seriously hurt. However, that would not prohibit Marine Patrol from taking blood samples. I would assume that Marine Patrol could do a lot for speculation, one way or the other.

Skip · 06-23-2008, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDOLFAN

I am very curious as to why Marine Patrol has taken this amount of time to make a statement. If the driver was impaired in anyway shape or form, I would think Marine Patrol would make a statement about the incident. If you think about crashes that take place and kill or seriously hurt someone, the police always make some statement about whether alcohol or drugs were a factor. This incident has been hush hush, which I don't understand.

This is an extremely serious & sensitive incident. And unlike motor vehicle fatalities, which hapen at an all too often pace even here in New Hampshire, boating fatalities remain a rare event.

The New Hampshire Marine Patrol has perhaps its best and most seasoned investigator at the helm of this investigation, Lt. Tim Dunleavy. I am confident that Dunleavy will conduct an accurate and thorough investigation, and the results of his labor will become fully public at the appropriate juncture.

I would rather the authorities involved, which are obviously the NHMP and most likely a review being conducted by the Belknap County Attorney's Office, take all the time possible to examine all the evidence before coming to any conclusion. Premature speculation on behalf of the investigating authorities could have extremely damaging effects on the victims.

Each case is diufferent. For example, a few weeks ago a woman was killed just over the border in Berwick, Maine in a hit & run accident. The authorities quickly identified the driver but have continued to investigate with no arrest imminent, even though the driver has been identified. Initially the family was upset and went to the media. But after a meeting between the family and the investigators the family is now satisfied with the case and willing to be patient.

There is a lesson to be learned here.

As long as the families directly involved are satisfied with the pace and scope of the investigation, maybe we, as curious spectators, should be respectful and patient as well.

NHDOLFAN · 06-23-2008, 01:12 PM

I comprehend your point and confident that Lt. Dunleavy will do the best job he can. While there are far less boating fatalities, nonetheless, this is not the 1st one. Do you think Marine Patrol has given info to the families involved? Of course not! They have given them bits and pieces but not the whole piece. I'm sure, at some point soon, one of the papers will file papers for the Right to know. If that happens, then they will have to make a statement vs. being proactive.

2Blackdogs · 06-23-2008, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Turtle Boy... and others!

Your way off base here. Until the experts weigh in on the accident, there is no proof that the Formula was exceeding the nighttime limit of 25MPH as proposed by HB-847. In fact I am willing to bet that the boat was more than likely traveling at speed less than 25 MPH. The Formula is a 15,000 lb fiberglass boat striking a 6' high vertical wall!

If the accident reconstruction team determines that she was in fact traveling less than the proposed 25 MPH limit, then essentially a speed limit would have done nothing to have prevented this tragedy.

At this point in time, this accident is just that... an accident! The causes of this tragedy will no doubt play out in a VERY public fashion.

Woodsy

Woodsy, everyone is calling for "no speculation", but you're already calling the speed under 25!

If you'd been at the scene, you'd see that the "6' vertical wall" is actually much less than that. If I'd been standing in a canoe, I'd be looking down at that "wall", not up, and I'm under 6' tall, I assure you.

Even now, as the summer continues to empty the lake, the lake is not at the same level as when I was there. If we're going to speculate as to speed, as SIKSUKR and Woodsy are here, it's really too late to see if the wall is really only 4' or even 3', and the boat well up on plane.

The existing boat could be put on a test sled, and see how far an unsecured anchor would fly.... to strike a wood target at deck height ....when the sled's forward momentum is arrested by cable or chain.

Now, why is it okay to speculate here today and to abandon the discussion already started at the Speed Limits sub-forum? "Hush-hush" seems to be the word of the day!

And isn't Lt. Dunleavy the officer who converted Littlefield's self-suggested 2800 rpms into 28mph?

A "fact" we've been stuck with all these years?

NightWing · 06-23-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

And isn't Lt. Dunleavy the officer who converted Littlefield's self-suggested 2800 rpms into 28mph?
A "fact" we've been stuck with all these years?

That speed of 28mph was not plucked out of the air but was confirmed in ways other than rpm claimed by the operator. It was determined by exhaustive testing and accident reconstruction by extremely qualified MP officers and personnel. To suggest other is inflammatory and disrespectful to those entrusted by the State to investigate. If LT. Dunleavy said 28mph, then that is what it was.

Skip · 06-23-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDOLFAN

I comprehend your point and confident that Lt. Dunleavy will do the best job he can. While there are far less boating fatalities, nonetheless, this is not the 1st one. Do you think Marine Patrol has given info to the families involved? Of course not! They have given them bits and pieces but not the whole piece. I'm sure, at some point soon, one of the papers will file papers for the Right to know. If that happens, then they will have to make a statement vs. being proactive.

Just a few final comments.

This is an active law enforcement investigation. As long as the investigation is ongoing the agencies investigating are not subject to disclosure under 91-A (Right to know law).

In many motor vehicle cases where preliminary results are released almost immediately it is because the individual charged was able to give a concious donation of blood, breath or urine and the resulted in immediate arrest. In cases where samples are taken for analysis relative to someone unable to give consent there usually is a much longer process involved. In very serious cases a subsequent charge, if the evidence so dictates, may not occur until an indictment is handed down by a grand jury. Let me add that in this particular case there has been no evidence yet released to indicate that any laws were violated.

Finally, I have no idea and no desire to speculate on what communications may have occured between the families and the investigating authorities. I only gave an example of a nearby case where weeks have passed and no arrest has yet been made, to show that the one week that has occured since this incident is neither unusual nor precedent setting.

The only thing I do know, and will repeat for the last time, is that I have full confidence that the assigned investigators will conduct a proper investigation and release all necessary information to the public in a timely, legal and fair fashion.

EricP · 06-23-2008, 02:17 PM

Meanwhile, outside of this forum, the rumor mill is in full gear. I am not going to repeat what I have heard as it's all ridiculous and in some cases disrespectful. My point is look what happened when Moses went up the mountain. People don't change! I for one will wait for official communications.

Thank you Skip for your perspective, I couldn't agree more.

chipj29 · 06-23-2008, 02:38 PM

I would think that the person would have to be able to give permission to have blood taken and tested. In absense of that, I would think the police would have to obtain a warrant, and I am sure there would be some sort of court decision. Put it this way, if she were my daughter, I would not want someone taking her blood for anything other than a medical reason. I would fight that as hard as I could. Prove that she acted criminally, then we will talk. Innocent until proven guilty.

That's my opinion, whatever that may be worth.

ITD · 06-23-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NightWing

That speed of 28mph was not plucked out of the air but was confirmed in ways other than rpm claimed by the operator. It was determined by exhaustive testing and accident reconstruction by extremely qualified MP officers and personnel. To suggest other is inflammatory and disrespectful to those entrusted by the State to investigate. If LT. Dunleavy said 28mph, then that is what it was.

Estimated to be 28 mph, he estimated it.

codeman671 · 06-23-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

I would think that the person would have to be able to give permission to have blood taken and tested. In absense of that, I would think the police would have to obtain a warrant, and I am sure there would be some sort of court decision. Put it this way, if she were my daughter, I would not want someone taking her blood for anything other than a medical reason. I would fight that as hard as I could. Prove that she acted criminally, then we will talk. Innocent until proven guilty.

That's my opinion, whatever that may be worth.

From a medical standpoint, the hospital would already know at this point however with the medical privacy laws it would take a court order for the investigators to access them. Coming from somewhat of a medical background I can say that they would definitely have to do a full blood screening during the initial triage and for the ongoing treatment process. If there was alcohol, illegal drugs or prescription meds in her system they would have to know immediately as it could have serious effects with other meds used during treatment,

Skip · 06-23-2008, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

...I would think that the person would have to be able to give permission to have blood taken and tested. In absense of that, I would think the police would have to obtain a warrant, and I am sure there would be some sort of court decision. Put it this way, if she were my daughter, I would not want someone taking her blood for anything other than a medical reason. I would fight that as hard as I could. Prove that she acted criminally, then we will talk. Innocent until proven guilty...

First, let me reiterate that no evidence has been provided to the public indicating that any crime has taken place in reference to the discussed incident.

That said, I provide the following RSA to show that in the case we are discussing, mandatory blood testing must occur as required by State law. Consent is not optional.

265-A:16 Blood Testing of Certain Motor Vehicle Fatalities. – When a collision, boating accident, or OHRV accident results in death or serious bodily injury to any person, all drivers or operators involved, whether living or deceased, and all deceased vehicle, boat, or OHRV occupants and pedestrians involved shall be tested for evidence of alcohol or controlled drugs. A law enforcement officer, authorized agent, or peace officer shall request a licensed physician, registered nurse, certified physician's assistant, or qualified medical technician or medical technologist to withdraw blood from each driver or operator involved if living and from the body of each deceased driver or operator, deceased occupant, or deceased pedestrian, in accordance with RSA 611-B:14, II, for the purpose of testing for evidence of alcohol content or controlled drugs; provided that in the case of a living driver or operator the officer has probable cause to believe that the driver or operator caused the collision or accident. All tests made under this section shall be conducted by the forensic science laboratory established in RSA 106-B:2-a or in any other laboratory capable of conducting such tests which is licensed under the laws of this or any other state and which has also been licensed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1988, as amended. A copy of the report of any such test shall be kept on file by the medical examiner. The filed report is not a public record under RSA 91-A. However, the report shall be made available to the following:
I. Any highway safety agency for use in compiling statistics to evaluate the effectiveness of its program; and
II. Any person, including his or her legal representative, who is or may be involved in a civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding arising out of an accident in connection with which the test was performed.

chipj29 · 06-23-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

First, let me reiterate that no evidence has been provided to the public indicating that any crime has taken place in reference to the discussed incident.

That said, I provide the following RSA to show that in the case we are discussing, mandatory blood testing must occur as required by State law. Consent is not optional.

Thanks for clearing that up for me Skip...guess my logic is a bit off.

But please don't think I was insinuating a criminal act occurred in this instance. That was not my intent.

Skip · 06-23-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

Thanks for clearing that up for me Skip...guess my logic is a bit off.

But please don't think I was insinuating a criminal act occurred in this instance. That was not my intent.

Nope Chip, didn't think you were insinuating anything, and you raised a very good point....a belief that many folks share.

While most of us agree that rampant speculation and gossip can be harmful in a situation like this, an intelligent discussion of different points like you and others have raised provide an opportunity for each of us to educate ourselves on the issues pertinent to the incident.

jeffk · 06-23-2008, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671

From a medical standpoint, the hospital would already know at this point however with the medical privacy laws it would take a court order for the investigators to access them. Coming from somewhat of a medical background I can say that they would definitely have to do a full blood screening during the initial triage and for the ongoing treatment process. If there was alcohol, illegal drugs or prescription meds in her system they would have to know immediately as it could have serious effects with other meds used during treatment,

The test results used for medical purposes are not used by law enforcement. They require their own separate samples and process it in their own lab. My guess is that this preserves the chain of evidencebecause only law enforcement approved people access the samples and removes any legal wrangling as to whether the hospital should have shared personal medical information with law enforcement. It also removes ethical problems for doctors who are supposed to treat patients vs. aiding in their prosecution.

I agree with Skip, let's agree that this is a tragedy and wait for the professionals to evaluate what happened.

My prayers for all involved and their families.

NightWing · 06-23-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ITD

Estimated to be 28 mph, he estimated it.

Given, but it was based on the accident reconstruction and investigation. Don't roll your eyes so much. They may stick that way. (OWT)

The Big Kahuna · 06-23-2008, 06:19 PM

It might have been Erica's boat, but who says she was driving? Maybe she was letting someone else drive, that may explain a lot.

codeman671 · 06-23-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffk

The test results used for medical purposes are not used by law enforcement. They require their own separate samples and process it in their own lab. My guess is that this preserves the chain of evidencebecause only law enforcement approved people access the samples and removes any legal wrangling as to whether the hospital should have shared personal medical information with law enforcement. It also removes ethical problems for doctors who are supposed to treat patients vs. aiding in their prosecution.

I agree with Skip, let's agree that this is a tragedy and wait for the professionals to evaluate what happened.

My prayers for all involved and their families.

Somewhat true, but in the case of alcohol where the BAC drops steadily when not being "supplemented" a sample taken later is useless (thus Littlefield's flight). Try waking a judge at 3am on a Sunday morning to get authorization to get a sample. In this case it would have to come from tests done at the hospital.

My post in no may is insinuating any thoughts or speculation of alcohol being related.

Skip · 06-24-2008, 05:15 AM

Substantial information surrounding the crash is now being investigated, including the possibility that alcohol was involved.

Latest developments in this morning's CITIZEN.

VtSteve · 06-24-2008, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

Substantial information surrounding the crash is now being investigated, including the possibility that alcohol was involved.

Latest developments in this morning's CITIZEN.

I hope this wasn't the case, but just an unfortunate accident.

SIKSUKR · 06-24-2008, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

Substantial information surrounding the crash is now being investigated, including the possibility that alcohol was involved.

Latest developments in this morning's CITIZEN.

From my standpoint,Dunleavy is doing the right thing here.All of these items and circumstances must be investigated.It does not infere these occupants were inpaired but it does need to be confimed or not.As hard for me as it is to see implications of DWI,I believe it has to be looked at.

AC2717 · 06-24-2008, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wildwoodfam

You didn't see the numbers because - THERE WAS NO BOW REMAINING!!!

I continue to read these posts - many while shaking my head, some get my attention enough to call someone else over to read the post to make sure I am not misreading or misunderstanding.....SURELY you are kidding about the bow numbers?????

Unbelievable!!

Again,

Clearly some people that read the forum do not read the whole posting when they feel someone is wrong, As I would like to draw attention to the last line of my post in big capital letters.
To continue this though: if I am not mistaken the bow letters are supposed to be above the Rub rail, hence the reason for my post. Just a mere pointing out of what i saw in the photo and that is it.

NHDOLFAN · 06-24-2008, 10:12 AM

Wow. This article shows that someone was drinking. Now, whether the person(s) were impaired is a different story. At what speed would a boat need to be traveling to be on plane? I'm sure that Formula could answer this question. Only time will tell but it does not look good.

EricP · 06-24-2008, 10:49 AM

Those several empty beer cans could have already been in the boat or from earlier in the day/evening.

UncleRay · 06-24-2008, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDOLFAN

Wow. This article shows that someone was drinking. Now, whether the person(s) were impaired is a different story. At what speed would a boat need to be traveling to be on plane? I'm sure that Formula could answer this question. Only time will tell but it does not look good.

According to the tests on this hull, it looks to plane off at about 19/20 mph.

http://www.boattest.com/oem/general-...381#TestResult

If you care to run the math, this will get you close:

Minimum Planing Speed in Knots:

2.3 x ((32.2 x (all up displacement in pounds)^0.333)^0.5)/1.6889

For example, an 18' boat at 2,323.2 pounds (including crew) may plane at 13.902 knots.

The formula has no input for the shape of the hull. It just calculates the speed required to lift 2300 pounds. It also does not indicate how difficult it will be to get the hull to 13.9 knots. However, in my ignorance, I believe it may be somewhat representative. If the boat was surfing down a wave at 13.9 knots, it may very well be planing.

2Blackdogs · 06-24-2008, 11:25 AM

Looks like Uncle Ray got "called in".

A rule of thumb is that the larger the city, hospital, emergency room, fire department or police force, the more sophisticated the attention to official inquiry. Europe, I'm reading today, has the technology to find fingerprints on anything made of metal, even if it's old or submerged. European laboratories are far better funded than US laboratories.

When an agency has only a handful of annual investigations like this one (or even fewer), it's not going to be sophisticated at all. Worse, the investigation in a tourist-dependent state is subject to fierce political and economic community pressures.

Perhaps "the showing to the door" of Safety Director Dick Flynn will change that impression, but funding to the NHMP is already such a rarity that the radar guns, the radar survey, and officer's radar training were grieved as major expenses. Or so we were told here. The survey itself was widely criticized as unscientific, and suggested a political pressure at work to make the findings "turn out right".

The presence of alcohol evidence has turned this discussion to the real intent of the NHRBA, and that is to perpetuate a party-hardy atmosphere for Winni's cowboys. We haven't heard from the primary proponent of A.I.S. lately, especially with today's potentially embarrassing link to the NHRBA. It's too late to impeach the president of NHRBA now, but it could happen.

I hope you're wrong about the driver behind the wheel. That driver might be the one who cannot speak in defense.

chipj29 · 06-24-2008, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

...
The presence of alcohol evidence has turned this discussion to the real intent of the NHRBA, and that is to perpetuate a party-hardy atmosphere for Winni's cowboys. We haven't heard from the primary proponent of A.I.S. lately, especially with today's potentially embarrassing link to the NHRBA. It's too late to impeach the president of NHRBA now, but it could happen.

I hope you're wrong about the driver behind the wheel. That driver might be the one who cannot speak in defense.

Here you go again...yet one more COMPLETELY uncalled for post.

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-24-2008, 11:55 AM

Another story:

Jun 24, 10:48 AM EDT
Alcohol may have been involved in NH boat crash

GILFORD, N.H. (AP) -- Investigators are looking into possible criminal charges in a fatal boating accident on New Hampshire's Lake Winnipesaukee last week.

In court documents, the Marine Patrol said it is investigating whether the death of 34-year-old Stephanie Beaudoin, of Meredith, was a negligent homicide.

Court affidavits say a surviving passenger, 34-year-old Nicole Shinopulos, of Burlington, Massachusetts, told investigators she and the two other women on the boat had been drinking before they crashed into Diamond Island around 2:30 a.m. on June 15.

The boat's driver, 34-year-old Erica Blizzard, of Laconia, suffered serious injuries. Blizzard is the president of the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, which has opposed boating speed limits on the lake.

She is in stable condition at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...06-24-10-48-28
------------------

And, as I posted earlier, the boat was going too fast for the conditions.

Ryan · 06-24-2008, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

And, as I posted earlier, the boat was going too fast for the conditions.

Please don't take this the wrong way:

How fast were they going again? I don't recall reading what the investigators determined their speed to be?

As a general comment, enough with the speculation. We need to let the investigators sort this out before anybody jumps to conclusions.

COWISLAND NH · 06-24-2008, 12:43 PM

Can we get some hard facts please...like the Marine patrol accident log form last year...if any one wants to point fingers at who had the most accidents and why lets see who they really were. I can not stand the finger pointing at people apposed to the speed limit. SPEED???

Let's try someone making a bad judgment....plain and simple folks!

Skip · 06-24-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

...A rule of thumb is that the larger the city, hospital, emergency room, fire department or police force, the more sophisticated the attention to official inquiry...When an agency has only a handful of annual investigations like this one (or even fewer), it's not going to be sophisticated at all. Worse, the investigation in a tourist-dependent state is subject to fierce political and economic community pressures...

Normally I ignore deliberate attempts to troll, but I'll make an exception this time to reassure the readers that this invetigation is in safe & capable hands.

As has been noted by numerous public sources, the lead investigator is Lt. Tim Dunleavy of the NHMP. Dunleavy is a career full time law enforcement supervisor that is recognized by the New Hampshire Court system, Underwriters Labratory and the United States Coast Guard as an expert in boat accident reconstruction amongst a number of other qualifications & duties, and can and has succesfully testified to same.

He also has extensive experience in responiding to, investigating, and succesfully prosecuting numerous criminal violations of the State's boating regulations, including a fair share of the fatalities that have occured on our waters the last few decades.

Finally, numerous serious crimes occur throughout our State in various small locals on an annual basis. All Departments in this State utilize neighboring community experts, each County Attorney's Office, the State Attorney General's Office, the NH State Police, the State Police Crime Lab and a long list of private and federal agencies to assist in all levels of evidence gathering and criminal investigation and prosecution.

The root cause of this tragedy will be thoroughly investigated and the public will have timely and relevant material released at the appropriate juncture, just as today's new stories have proven.

While it takes only the ability to operate a keyboard to be a troll, rest assured that the folks in charge of this investigation are much more qualified than the naysayers at their respective craft.

Skip

VtSteve · 06-24-2008, 01:16 PM

Well Blackdogs, they are investigating anything and everything, as many assumed. Your constant insinuations, riddled with sarcasm and demeaning language, pretty much put you in the position of an agenda poster. Regardless of the outcome of this accident, most of us could pretty much predict what you'd write for each potential outcome.

One of the chief criticisms in the SL arguments is that many of us have read about numerous accident stories, seen the raw data, and tried to discuss solutions as we both participate in boating and care for ourselves and others. While others have distorted data, misinterpreted it, or even ignored it altogether.

In the end, all that counts is safety and reducing accidents. Something tells me that's not your number one goal here.

flyry49 · 06-24-2008, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UncleRay

According to the tests on this hull, it looks to plane off at about 19/20 mph.

http://www.boattest.com/oem/general-...381#TestResult

If you care to run the math, this will get you close:

Minimum Planing Speed in Knots:

2.3 x ((32.2 x (all up displacement in pounds)^0.333)^0.5)/1.6889

For example, an 18' boat at 2,323.2 pounds (including crew) may plane at 13.902 knots.

The formula has no input for the shape of the hull. It just calculates the speed required to lift 2300 pounds. It also does not indicate how difficult it will be to get the hull to 13.9 knots. However, in my ignorance, I believe it may be somewhat representative. If the boat was surfing down a wave at 13.9 knots, it may very well be planing.

i can tell you right now that this boat wont fully plane out till close to 30 mph but why don't we leave this investigation to the investigators? my thoughts and prayers are with the people involved

Waterbaby · 06-24-2008, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Looks like Uncle Ray got "called in".

A rule of thumb is that the larger the city, hospital, emergency room, fire department or police force, the more sophisticated the attention to official inquiry. Europe, I'm reading today, has the technology to find fingerprints on anything made of metal, even if it's old or submerged. European laboratories are far better funded than US laboratories.

When an agency has only a handful of annual investigations like this one (or even fewer), it's not going to be sophisticated at all. Worse, the investigation in a tourist-dependent state is subject to fierce political and economic community pressures.

Perhaps "the showing to the door" of Safety Director Dick Flynn will change that impression, but funding to the NHMP is already such a rarity that the radar guns, the radar survey, and officer's radar training were grieved as major expenses. Or so we were told here. The survey itself was widely criticized as unscientific, and suggested a political pressure at work to make the findings "turn out right".

The presence of alcohol evidence has turned this discussion to the real intent of the NHRBA, and that is to perpetuate a party-hardy atmosphere for Winni's cowboys. We haven't heard from the primary proponent of A.I.S. lately, especially with today's potentially embarrassing link to the NHRBA. It's too late to impeach the president of NHRBA now, but it could happen.

I hope you're wrong about the driver behind the wheel. That driver might be the one who cannot speak in defense.

No matter how many times I read this, I cannot make it relevant to this thread.....................please don't elaborate, I'm not sure it will help your cause.

Airwaves · 06-24-2008, 08:43 PM

The AP article that RI Swamp Yankee quotes is based on this article in the Laconia Citizen.

The AP story is heavily editied and the Laconia Citizen article relies exclusively on court documents filed to get various search warrants needed for the investigation.

To restate my point the AP article was based on the Laconia Citizen Article. The Citizen article was based on the reading of court documents. I did not see anywhere in the article where anyone involved in the investigation or accident was actually interviewed for the story.

This comes back to the ongoing reduction in newspaper workforce and the regurgitation of a marginal story as fact by other news organizations and drawing conclusions from it. It's going to get worse friends.

Newbiesaukee · 06-24-2008, 09:03 PM

Just a question. Is it the case that the bow letters are supposed to be above the rub rail? I am not the most experienced boatman, but this does not seem to be the case. What is the deal?

Turtle Boy · 06-24-2008, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

The AP article that RI Swamp Yankee quotes is based on this article in the Laconia Citizen.

This comes back to the ongoing reduction in newspaper workforce and the regurgitation of a marginal story as fact by other news organizations and drawing conclusions from it. It's going to get worse friends.

Whoa....marginal story? Outspoken proponent of "no limits needed" and head of NHRBA crashes boat at 2:30 AM, passenger says they were drinking at Wolftrap, M.P. states they were at planing speed and that beer cans found at scene? That's not marginal. Check out the Union Leader's article(and check out the letters...many NH citizens must view this as a state wide embarrassment).

http://www.theunionleader.com/articl...sh&articleId=1...

think this one over a bit further Airwaves. Very sad.

HUH · 06-24-2008, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Whoa....marginal story? Outspoken proponent of "no limits needed" and head of NHRBA crashes boat at 2:30 AM, passenger says they were drinking at Wolftrap, M.P. states they were at planing speed and that beer cans found at scene? That's not marginal. Check out the Union Leader's article(and check out the letters...many NH citizens must view this as a state wide embarrassment).

http://www.theunionleader.com/articl...sh&articleId=1...

think this one over a bit further Airwaves. Very sad.

I would say that its "Ironic" that she was the head of a lobbying group against a boating bill. But the Bill had nothing to do with drinking and the facts are not in as to whether speed was a factor/issue.

Airwaves · 06-24-2008, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Turtle Boy
Whoa....marginal story? Outspoken proponent of "no limits needed" and head of NHRBA crashes boat at 2:30 AM, passenger says they were drinking at Wolftrap, M.P. states they were at planing speed and that beer cans found at scene? That's not marginal.

Yes, the story is marginal in its accuracy.

It was written based entirely on affidavits submitted to the courts in order to get a search warrant and not on any evidence uncovered or conclusions drawn by investigators. Just a routine justification by investigators for permission to search for evidence.

As I pointed out no one, not a single person appears to have been interviewed for the article to even question why the need for some of the items listed in the affidavit.

It appears to be an affidavit submitted by a good investigator looking for permission from the courts to tear the boat appart and not overlook anything but no reporter questioned why this or why that. It's much easier to just get the court documents and write your story based on them without doing any footwork, cheaper too!

Very very very poor reporting and it's regurgitated statewide through AP so it becomes "fact". The "Union Leader" article you provided a link to just proves my point. It is the same Laconia Citizen article under the AP title. The Union Leader did not do their own reporting on the story, just regurgitated a marginally accurate story.

It's going to get worse, and not just with this story unfortunately

Rinkerfam · 06-24-2008, 10:14 PM

I was half paying attention to WMUR's eleven o'clock broadcast when I thought I heard it stated that the NH Marine Patrol was leaning toward a negligent homicide case with regard to the incident at Diamond Island. Can anyone confirm or dismiss this?

EricP · 06-24-2008, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Whoa....marginal story? Outspoken proponent of "no limits needed" and head of NHRBA crashes boat at 2:30 AM, passenger says they were drinking at Wolftrap, M.P. states they were at planing speed and that beer cans found at scene? That's not marginal. Check out the Union Leader's article(and check out the letters...many NH citizens must view this as a state wide embarrassment).

http://www.theunionleader.com/articl...sh&articleId=1...

think this one over a bit further Airwaves. Very sad.

You are exactly the person the press is appealing to. I lost respect for the press many years ago. You still buy into it and believe everything they say is gospel.

VtSteve · 06-24-2008, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Whoa....marginal story? Outspoken proponent of "no limits needed" and head of NHRBA crashes boat at 2:30 AM, passenger says they were drinking at Wolftrap, M.P. states they were at planing speed and that beer cans found at scene? That's not marginal. Check out the Union Leader's article(and check out the letters...many NH citizens must view this as a state wide embarrassment).

http://www.theunionleader.com/articl...sh&articleId=1...

think this one over a bit further Airwaves. Very sad.

The state wide embarrassment Could be, that once again, speed limits have nothing to do with the accident. If you bark up the wrong tree too long, your neck will be permanently strained.

Airwaves · 06-24-2008, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Orignally posted by Rinkerfam
I was half paying attention to WMUR's eleven o'clock broadcast when I thought I heard it stated that the NH Marine Patrol was leaning toward a negligent homicide case with regard to the incident at Diamond Island. Can anyone confirm or dismiss this?

That was taken from the same Citizen/AP article that I've been talking about as not being very good reporting. In the Citizen article it says

Quote:

"In support of the search warrant Dunleavy said the department is currently investigating whether a negligent homicide occurred."

So if WMUR reported that the Marine Patrol is leaning toward a negligent homicide case it is further distortion of an initally badly reported, poorly written story.

See how easy it is when you don't do your own work?

2Blackdogs · 06-25-2008, 07:27 AM

Waterbaby wrote,

Quote:

No matter how many times I read this, I cannot make it relevant to this thread.

That's because, "You ain't going to learn what you don't want to know"

But that's my fault as well, for using an NHRBA abbreviation repeated most often at this Winni.com forum.

A.I.S. stands for "Alcohol Induced Stupidity", a term much repeated by the NHRBA. Didn't the NHRBA shoot itself in the foot with A.I.S., or what?

I also neglected to include the quotes I was answering. These were:

Big Kahuna's.

Quote:

It might have been Erica's boat, but who says she was driving? Maybe she was letting someone else drive, that may explain a lot.

A survivor, last described as "incoherent" at the scene, has confessed that everyone on board was drinking alcohol at a Wolfeboro bar scene. The driver was found at the helm. As of this morning, Big Kahuna's quote, therefore, is moot. (Note the correct spelling of moot, Skip. One could learn a lot from OSO's risk-takers, but safety for other boaters, expression of self, spelling, and grammar aren't among those things at OSO).

Wolfetrap may very well sell canned beer, but it's become painfully obvious that a Lake Winnipesaukee "party-hardy" atmosphere prevails among NHRBA officials.

They, in their self-congratulatory and collective stupors, conduct a not-so-stealthy endangerment upon us Winni boaters. Like Littlefield.

Skip wrote,

Quote:

All Departments in this State utilize neighboring community experts, each County Attorney's Office, the State Attorney General's Office, the NH State Police, the State Police Crime Lab and a long list of private and federal agencies to assist in all levels of evidence gathering and criminal investigation and prosecution.

And that's why Littlefield's prosecution turned out so swell?

Dick Flynn never saw a political pie he wouldn't stick his finger into.

If citizens don't hold the NHMP's feet to the fire in this case, the underfunded and disfunctional regime commanded by the former, mostly invisible, Safety Director will assure that PC will rule the waves instead of reason.

Lt. Dunleavy may not attribute his "shooting star" success to Dick Flynn, but you'll notice that Dunleavy, a personal and influental friend of some here, is being supported in this forum with full public access. That is to say, a politically-supported, bootlicking presence. PC run amok.

This disgraced "Safety Director" managed to throw in one last monkey wrench. You'll recall "The Survey" please.

And Nightwing's.

Quote:

If LT. Dunleavy said 28mph, then that is what it was.

Ditto for the above. Politically-supported PC run amok.

Now, where are the benefits of a "Rule 6" for Winni in this case?

And my much-criticized "rule of thumb" will have my family going to Boston for any major surgery, and not to Laconia.

In short, I hope this investigation is more thorough than Littlefield's.

COWISLAND NH · 06-25-2008, 07:59 AM

WOW 2Blackdogs you seem to be very angry. Why not hate the drunk drivers instead of the boaters who go faster then you? To categorize every boater who has a go fast boat as drunken reckless captains is just not right. Both highly publicized accidents that have been discussed on this thread are related to the operator under the influence (speculation). I just can not see your point on justifying a speed limit related to these accidents. Have you every seen a couple of teenagers not paying attention on their jet skies or an overcrowded boat full of excited kids with dad pulling them in a tube....accidents happen...I've seen it 1st hand!

kthy66 · 06-25-2008, 08:19 AM

2Blackdogs you really need to come out of your shell hon and tell us how you really feel...

More info this morning in the Citizen

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...824/-1/CITNEWS

SIKSUKR · 06-25-2008, 09:06 AM

FATJACK is Back

Skip · 06-25-2008, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

FATJACK is Back

You beat me to it.....I hereby nominate you Chief of the Missing Posters Bureau!

4Fun · 06-25-2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kthy66

2Blackdogs you really need to come out of your shell hon and tell us how you really feel...

More info this morning in the Citizen

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...824/-1/CITNEWS

It looks like they did not take samples for 9 hours after the crash. Is it possible to get an accurate reading after that amount of time passes?

I assume they took two samples an hour apart to determine the time but how accurate can that be?

Jeti · 06-25-2008, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Fun

It looks like they did not take samples for 9 hours after the crash. Is it possible to get an accurate reading after that amount of time passes?

I assume they took two samples an hour apart to determine the time but how accurate can that be?

Number of units drunk - Number of hours since last drink = Alcohol content

For example: A person drinks 6 pints of an ordinary strength beer (12 units), finishing drinking at 11pm. They start work at 8am the following day. (9 Hours later).

12 Units - 9 hours = 3. In this scenario, the person could still have 3-4 units of alcohol left in their body whilst driving to work the following day - risking both Police prosecution and the safety of others. 3-4 Units will bring most men to the USA legal driving limit of 80mg/dl and 3 units for most women.

Newbiesaukee · 06-25-2008, 10:59 AM

Although there is some variability, two points on the curve and knowledge of alcohol metabolism, etc. would allow you to extrapolate and come up with an accurate estimate of alcohol blood level at the time of the accident.

Skip · 06-25-2008, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Fun

It looks like they did not take samples for 9 hours after the crash. Is it possible to get an accurate reading after that amount of time passes?

I assume they took two samples an hour apart to determine the time but how accurate can that be?

Jeti & Newbi have answered your question correctly. The procedures utilized by the NHMP to obtain the two samples over a fixed time are well established and Court accepted practices.

Once again (hateful diatribes to the contrary) the NHMP appears to be following all accepted protocol in what appears to be a thorough and fair investigation.

Rose · 06-25-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

If citizens don't hold the NHMP's feet to the fire in this case, the underfunded and disfunctional regime commanded by the former, mostly invisible, Safety Director will assure that PC will rule the waves instead of reason.

If you're going to rip someone else a new one for their spelling, you better make certain all of yours is correct. Or maybe your spellchecker is dysfunctional.

Seaplane Pilot · 06-25-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

Once again (hateful diatribes to the contrary) the NHMP appears to be following all accepted protocol in what appears to be a thorough and fair investigation.

Well said Skip. The realists know it will be thorough and fair. However, the conspiracy theorists on this forum have already concluded that the results of the investigation (should said results not determine the outcome that said theorists hope for), will have been fixed. Atrocious.

chipj29 · 06-25-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rose

If you're going to rip someone else a new one for their spelling, you better make certain all of yours is correct. Or maybe your spellchecker is dysfunctional.

Atta girl!

Seaplane Pilot · 06-25-2008, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

FATJACK is Back

SS: Does Fat Jack = 2 Black Dogs?

VtSteve · 06-25-2008, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Well said Skip. The realists know it will be thorough and fair. However, the conspiracy theorists on this forum have already concluded that the results of the investigation (should said results not determine the outcome that said theorists hope for), will have been fixed. Atrocious.

They pretty much have to, they're only concerned about one issue, and it's become very apparent that their only real focus is a certain boating niche. Since the Littlefield accident is usually part of every heated discussion by a couple of these "concerned citizens", I can only think that that accident blinded them permanently. Speed wasn't a biggie in that case, alcohol was. The fact that he was piloting a Baja made their eyes permanently red whenever they see a GF boat. Regardless of all the boating accidents that happen resulting from alcohol, the only dangerous boaters in their mind are the GF crowd. It's more of a vendetta for a select group, some others just joined because it seemed like the thing to do. But when you talk about enforcement and existing laws being broken, they all clam right up.

There are some very good and decent people on board that support the speed limits. There are a couple of real flakes that appear to be blinded by hate. Reason be darned. Their comments from the beginning of this developing story are downright sickening.

Steveo · 06-25-2008, 01:03 PM

The reports stated that she was traveling southeast headed toward Sleepers. I'm trying to understand two things, First, where on the island did she hit. Was she attempting to go between Diamond and Rattlesnake and hit on the north side of the island or was she attempting to go betwen Diamond and the mainland and hit the west side. And second, was she coming from Wolfeboro (Wolfetrap) or from Pentleton Beach at the time.

VitaBene · 06-25-2008, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Waterbaby wrote,

That's because, "You ain't going to learn what you don't want to know"

But that's my fault as well, for using an NHRBA abbreviation repeated most often at this Winni.com forum.

A.I.S. stands for "Alcohol Induced Stupidity", a term much repeated by the NHRBA. Didn't the NHRBA shoot itself in the foot with A.I.S., or what?

I also neglected to include the quotes I was answering. These were:

Big Kahuna's.
A survivor, last described as "incoherent" at the scene, has confessed that everyone on board was drinking alcohol at a Wolfeboro bar scene. The driver was found at the helm. As of this morning, Big Kahuna's quote, therefore, is moot. (Note the correct spelling of moot, Skip. One could learn a lot from OSO's risk-takers, but safety for other boaters, expression of self, spelling, and grammar aren't among those things at OSO).

Wolfetrap may very well sell canned beer, but it's become painfully obvious that a Lake Winnipesaukee "party-hardy" atmosphere prevails among NHRBA officials.

They, in their self-congratulatory and collective stupors, conduct a not-so-stealthy endangerment upon us Winni boaters. Like Littlefield.

Skip wrote,

And that's why Littlefield's prosecution turned out so swell?

Dick Flynn never saw a political pie he wouldn't stick his finger into.

If citizens don't hold the NHMP's feet to the fire in this case, the underfunded and disfunctional regime commanded by the former, mostly invisible, Safety Director will assure that PC will rule the waves instead of reason.

Lt. Dunleavy may not attribute his "shooting star" success to Dick Flynn, but you'll notice that Dunleavy, a personal and influental friend of some here, is being supported in this forum with full public access. That is to say, a politically-supported, bootlicking presence. PC run amok.

This disgraced "Safety Director" managed to throw in one last monkey wrench. You'll recall "The Survey" please.

And Nightwing's.

Ditto for the above. Politically-supported PC run amok.

Now, where are the benefits of a "Rule 6" for Winni in this case?

And my much-criticized "rule of thumb" will have my family going to Boston for any major surgery, and not to Laconia.

In short, I hope this investigation is more thorough than Littlefield's.

And the phrase that you have incorrectly used on at least 2 posts is "party hearty"

Bear Islander · 06-25-2008, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

They pretty much have to, they're only concerned about one issue, and it's become very apparent that their only real focus is a certain boating niche. Since the Littlefield accident is usually part of every heated discussion by a couple of these "concerned citizens", I can only think that that accident blinded them permanently. Speed wasn't a biggie in that case, alcohol was. The fact that he was piloting a Baja made their eyes permanently red whenever they see a GF boat. Regardless of all the boating accidents that happen resulting from alcohol, the only dangerous boaters in their mind are the GF crowd. It's more of a vendetta for a select group, some others just joined because it seemed like the thing to do. But when you talk about enforcement and existing laws being broken, they all clam right up.

There are some very good and decent people on board that support the speed limits. There are a couple of real flakes that appear to be blinded by hate. Reason be darned. Their comments from the beginning of this developing story are downright sickening.

I don't think the controversy that has taken place since the accident is pro-speed limit against anti-speed limit. The pro limit-regulars have not posted negative. This is mostly a new group more interested in the accident than in HB847.

An accident like this will draw a crowd. Like the crowds that hang around the court house when a big name trial is taking place. There is no courtroom yet so they hang around this forum. This thread has has 27,000+ views in a week and a half.

I personally believe we should wait for more information and let feelings cool before trying to dissect what happened. In any event it is only one accident. One accident should not make OR break speed limits no matter what happened.

I think Lt. Dunleavy will do his job and go where the evidence leads him.

codeman671 · 06-25-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steveo

The reports stated that she was traveling southeast headed toward Sleepers. I'm trying to understand two things, First, where on the island did she hit. Was she attempting to go between Diamond and Rattlesnake and hit on the north side of the island or was she attempting to go betwen Diamond and the mainland and hit the west side. And second, was she coming from Wolfeboro (Wolfetrap) or from Pentleton Beach at the time.

I believe they had been in Wolfeboro earlier, gone to Pendleton, and were heading south back to Sleepers. I think that as you are heading towards the northern end of Diamond, she hit on the left side of Dr. Rock's log cabin a few hundred feet down. I have not been to the scene as I see no reason to, but have been to Dr. Rock's place before.

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-25-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

.. How fast were they going again? I don't recall reading what the investigators determined their speed to be? ...

Correct, it hasn't been determined what the actual number was but whatever it was it was higher than the definition of safe speed. If the actual speed was lower than the safe speed, the operator would have been able to "take proper and effective action to avoid collision".

Safe Speed

A safe speed is a speed less than the maximum at which the operator can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and stop within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In establishing a safe operating speed, the operator must take into account visibility; traffic density; ability to maneuver the vessel (stopping distance and turning ability); background light at night; proximity of navigational hazards; draft of the vessel; limitations of radar equipment; and the state of wind, sea, and current.

Airwaves · 06-25-2008, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Orignally posted by RI Swamp Yankee
Safe Speed

A safe speed is a speed less than the maximum at which the operator can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and stop within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In establishing a safe operating speed, the operator must take into account visibility; traffic density; ability to maneuver the vessel (stopping distance and turning ability); background light at night; proximity of navigational hazards; draft of the vessel; limitations of radar equipment; and the state of wind, sea, and current.

That would be USCG NAV Rule 6, which doesn't exist in New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaeukee.

When I offered it up as a compromise to the useless 45/25 speed limit not a single supporter of speed limits went for it...now you're quoting it? Why?

VtSteve · 06-25-2008, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I don't think the controversy that has taken place since the accident is pro-speed limit against anti-speed limit. The pro limit-regulars have not posted negative. This is mostly a new group more interested in the accident than in HB847.

An accident like this will draw a crowd. Like the crowds that hang around the court house when a big name trial is taking place. There is no courtroom yet so they hang around this forum. This thread has has 27,000+ views in a week and a half.

I personally believe we should wait for more information and let feelings cool before trying to dissect what happened. In any event it is only one accident. One accident should not make OR break speed limits no matter what happened.

I think Lt. Dunleavy will do his job and go where the evidence leads him.

Well regarding your assessment, I agree with you BI. But if you look at the various posts from way back to current, you'll note that almost every single accident has one thing in common. That one thing is not speed.

Some people are pretty PO'd by this accident, well, not really. They are using the "WHO" to demonstrate their complete ignorance of boating accidents, past and present. They really do believe that this accident strengthens their pro speed limit case. I know they are really PO'd at the thought that the possible outcome will be that, once again, they are wrong.

They, have an agenda. Safety isn't that agenda. Kinda like the two party political system, birds of a feather may unite, but scoundrels often take center stage. You already know two of the scoundrels.

In case I haven't mentioned it specifically, I personally think you're good people.

2Blackdogs · 06-25-2008, 09:06 PM

It's not exactly a conspiracy, but why was this news conference been called in the middle of the week? Oftentimes, controversial bills are signed on a Friday to dumb-down the public's reactions to his signature over a weekend.

Nobody outside of government circles knows the BAC readings, but the Governor might have asked prosecutors today and called a news conference promptly upon hearing bad news.

That way, he has "culpable deniability" to an extreme BAC level returned by clinicians and can distance himself from that cloud of misery hanging over the NHRBA, with whom he probably has posed for pictures.

Skip, You missed on your guess. My treatment here doesn't rise to the level that another member has had to endure. Maybe fire your new Chief and pick up where you left off?
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...3&postcount=36

Kathy writes,

Quote:

2Blackdogs you really need to come out of your shell hon and tell us how you really feel...

So? I ran out of Decaf two days ago. Ingestion of certain liquids can have deleterious effects on the well-being of individuals and others.

And don't call me hon.

VtSteve · 06-25-2008, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

Correct, it hasn't been determined what the actual number was but whatever it was it was higher than the definition of safe speed. If the actual speed was lower than the safe speed, the operator would have been able to "take proper and effective action to avoid collision".

Safe Speed

A safe speed is a speed less than the maximum at which the operator can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and stop within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In establishing a safe operating speed, the operator must take into account visibility; traffic density; ability to maneuver the vessel (stopping distance and turning ability); background light at night; proximity of navigational hazards; draft of the vessel; limitations of radar equipment; and the state of wind, sea, and current.

As usual, let me interject the What If. Drunks don;t generally pay attention to those type of things. Not making a judgement, but it has become the norm for many years of accidents.

VtSteve · 06-25-2008, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

It's not exactly a conspiracy, but why was this news conference been called in the middle of the week? Oftentimes, controversial bills are signed on a Friday to dumb-down the public's reactions to his signature over a weekend.

Nobody outside of government circles knows the BAC readings, but the Governor might have asked prosecutors today and called a news conference promptly upon hearing bad news.

That way, he has "culpable deniability" to an extreme BAC level returned by clinicians and can distance himself from that cloud of misery hanging over the NHRBA, with whom he probably has posed for pictures.

Skip, You missed on your guess. My treatment here doesn't rise to the level that another member has had to endure. Maybe fire your new Chief and pick up where you left off?
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...3&postcount=36

Kathy writes,

So? I ran out of Decaf two days ago. Ingestion of certain liquids can have deleterious effects on the well-being of individuals and others.

And don't call me hon.

So what if the skipper's BAL was 2.0? What's you smart arse reply to that? Maybe they should pass a law sting it's too high to drive a boat?

Give it a rest Blackdog. You're not a positive influence for anyone's side. You obviously have an axe to grind, and could give a darn about any facts.

Resident 2B · 06-25-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I don't think the controversy that has taken place since the accident is pro-speed limit against anti-speed limit. The pro limit-regulars have not posted negative. This is mostly a new group more interested in the accident than in HB847.

An accident like this will draw a crowd. Like the crowds that hang around the court house when a big name trial is taking place. There is no courtroom yet so they hang around this forum. This thread has has 27,000+ views in a week and a half.

I personally believe we should wait for more information and let feelings cool before trying to dissect what happened. In any event it is only one accident. One accident should not make OR break speed limits no matter what happened.

I think Lt. Dunleavy will do his job and go where the evidence leads him.

BI,

Great words, great advice and a great post!

Folks, please wait for the facts and trust that the authorities will do a thorough and complete job. We all need to be fair and react to facts, not speculation.

Things are in good hands and we should not jump to any conclusions.

R2B

NASCARNH · 06-25-2008, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steveo

The reports stated that she was traveling southeast headed toward Sleepers. I'm trying to understand two things, First, where on the island did she hit. Was she attempting to go between Diamond and Rattlesnake and hit on the north side of the island or was she attempting to go betwen Diamond and the mainland and hit the west side. And second, was she coming from Wolfeboro (Wolfetrap) or from Pentleton Beach at the time.

I took these pictures the morning of the crash. I was fishing out of Ames Farm and could see that there had been a mishap on Diamond.

kthy66 · 06-26-2008, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

And don't call me hon.

hmmm,, touchy touchy...
Better than calling you what you truly are (webmaster doesnt like those words)
bahahahahaha,,

codeman671 · 06-26-2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NASCARNH

I took these pictures the morning of the crash. I was fishing out of Ames Farm and could see that there had been a mishap on Diamond.

Great shots. I thought it hit to the other side of Dr. Rock's. I have not been down at all to see the scene.

Lake Boater · 06-26-2008, 10:04 AM

It is sad that the loss of human life in this tragedy as well as serious injuries are over shadowed by people shouting about their own agenda`s. I have painfully read all these comments and it just proves that humans are extremley more ignorant at times then compassionate. I have been boating on Winni since I was 5 years old and have had my own boat up there for the last 25 years. Yes the lake has changed and unfortunatly so have the people that live on it and use it. For the good or the bad it is what it is.90% of you people making these comments about speed/drinking/not paying attention or Erica Blizzards stand on issues and beliefs, should look at yourself in the reflection of such a beautiful lake we are so fortunate to have and ask yourself what if it was my family going through this.Lets turn our thoughts and prayers to the injured and the dead and let the politicians do what they are so good at, and that is being ignorant idiots carrying soap boxes and setting them where anybody will listen. Boaters as a whole are a big family so lets all stop the finger pointing and turn our efforts into helping with the healing process....... Again this is just my opinion.. and I am not afraid to sign my posts..

Rich Turcotte

2Blackdogs · 06-26-2008, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kthy66

hmmm,, touchy touchy...
Better than calling you what you truly are (webmaster doesnt like those words)
bahahahahaha,,

And don't call me hon should have been followed with a

. But I forgot.

2Blackdogs · 06-26-2008, 11:41 AM

Codeman, I have been to the scene. The details below are for the lower photo only.

The impact area is a bright pink smear, about the size of those plastic wading pools. It lies hidden mid-way between the twin-outboard boat and the blue crane in the lower photo. It lies hidden behind that boat, and is not 6' tall, as reported here on day one.

The anchor-strike location is a dent below the living room window at the end of the white, J-shaped, object which may be a canopy or awning of some sort. The photo is dark, so it could be the "radar bar" of the crashed boat.

(Or, the house's middle window of the three grouped above the twin-outboard boat).

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-26-2008, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

That would be USCG NAV Rule 6, which doesn't exist in New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaeukee.

Also referred to as International Rule 6. There is a watered down version in the NH boating license course, Chapter 3.

3 -Maintain a safe speed.
Safe speed is the speed that ensures you will have ample time to avoid a collision and can stop within an appropriate distance. Safe speed will vary depending on conditions such as wind, water conditions, navigational hazards, visibility, surrounding vessel traffic density, and the maneuverability of your boat or PWC. Always reduce speed and navigate with extreme caution at night and when visibility is restricted.

http://www.boat-ed.com/nh/course/p3-...ringothers.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

When I offered it up as a compromise to the useless 45/25 speed limit not a single supporter of speed limits went for it...now you're quoting it? Why?

I avoided that 45/25 "debate" like the plague. The very tragic accident in this thread brought to mind that rule from the course I took LONG ago.

sa meredith · 06-26-2008, 03:15 PM

...talk about a thread that many people are turning to, to find the latest information about a terrible event turning into mindless dribble.

webmaster · 06-26-2008, 03:40 PM

The comments on signing posts have been moved to their own thread.

Please don't hijack.

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-26-2008, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves
When I offered it up as a compromise to the useless 45/25 speed limit not a single supporter of speed limits went for it...now you're quoting it? Why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

I avoided that 45/25 "debate" like the plague. The very tragic accident in this thread brought to mind that rule from the course I took LONG ago.

Iintended to add:
With all the talk about what speed the boat was going and if it was over / under 25 there was a rule that had higher precedence. There does need to be a defined maximum that applies to ideal conditions. The condidions that night were not ideal so rule 6 applies.

Airwaves · 06-26-2008, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RI Swamp Yankee
The condidions that night were not ideal so rule 6 applies.

Unfortunately Rule 6 does NOT apply because it is not the law in New Hampshire. NH has not adopted it so it does not exist. I think it should, but it does not.

There has been much debate about the NH Boating Rules Guide and actual law and the language is different. The RSA covering what you are talking about deals with Negligent Operation of a boat. (I don't recall the RSA number off the top of my head) but it appears to fall short of Rule 6 which is why I advocated for the adoption of Rule 6 vs HB847. It would have added a tool to the Marine Patrol arsenal that would NOT cost additional money and addressed the safety issue that supporters of HB847 at least initally claimed was their concern.

At this point I agree with sa meredith, this thread is supposed to be for actual information regarding this tragic accident.

I am guilty of hijacking so I will refrain from other thoughts about Rule 6 until we actually know what happened.

If you'd like to start another thread to debate the merits of Rule 6 vs the NH RSA I'd love to take part in that!

AW

Waterbaby · 06-26-2008, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rose

If you're going to rip someone else a new one for their spelling, you better make certain all of yours is correct. Or maybe your spellchecker is dysfunctional.

All Right, Rose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-26-2008, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Unfortunately Rule 6 does NOT apply because it is not the law in New Hampshire. NH has not adopted it so it does not exist. ...

Absolutely correct, I worded that badly. I should have said, Rule 6 should apply if you are a prudent boater. All of my boating took place in waters where that rule did apply, seemed like common sense. Same as the paved highway, speed limit may be 65 but when the rain and fog set in a prudent speed may be 45.

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-26-2008, 10:15 PM

Added note: A version of rule 6 will go into effect 1-1-09 with HB847 (RSA 270)

Sandy Beach · 06-27-2008, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

BI,

Great words, great advice and a great post!

Folks, please wait for the facts and trust that the authorities will do a thorough and complete job. We all need to be fair and react to facts, not speculation.

Things are in good hands and we should not jump to any conclusions.
R2B

I agree with BI and R2B.

All we really know is that a terrible tragedy took place. I feel badly for all those touched by the event.

We do not know the cause. Some people and alleged news reporters are quick to judge and draw conclusions. They would rather sensationalize the story instead of reporting unbiased facts.

I'm not yet convinced that this is an accident! IMHO it is too much of a coincidence regarding the timing and people involved. It would be horrific if foul play was involved but it is a possibiliy.

It was a new boat with dealer plate. It could have been a malfunction. A magnet of some sort altering the compass. An electrical mis-calibration throwing the chartplotter off. Was there a failure of the throttle or steering or both? There are so many possibilities besides alcohol and speed. Let the authorities investigate and report.

In the meantime, pray for all those affected. Whatever the cause is, this is a sad event for everyone.

NHKathy · 06-27-2008, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa meredith

...talk about a thread that many people are turning to, to find the latest information about a terrible event turning into mindless dribble.

and as I said in an earlier post (on another page!):

This thread has gotten WAY out of hand...
This site is where to go for a source of valuable info about the Lakes Region, but every day when I log in lately, this thread is always there on top as having the newest post, and it's mostly (not all) just back and forth arguing - hardly any new, informative information...
There are almost 300! posts in this thread, and a handful or maybe a dozen or two, are actually informative!
My condolences go out to the families involved, and prayers for recovery to the 2 women that were injured.
Any new update on those injured?

RI Swamp Yankee · 06-27-2008, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandy Beach

... It could have been a malfunction. A magnet of some sort altering the compass. An electrical mis-calibration throwing the chartplotter off. Was there a failure of the throttle or steering or both? There are so many possibilities besides alcohol and speed. ....

No matter what the machinery it still boils down to the operator being responsible for the vessel and being able to stop or avoid within the visible distance. Speed was a factor.

chipj29 · 06-28-2008, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

No matter what the machinery it still boils down to the operator being responsible for the vessel and being able to stop or avoid within the visible distance. Speed was a factor.

While the first part is true, if a mechanical failure occurred at a point where it would have been impossible to change course, then speed would have nothing to do with it.
Speed may have been a factor, but the CAUSE of the accident would still be machanical failure.

kjbathe · 06-28-2008, 07:48 PM

I just saw the photos of the accident site above and my reaction is, wow, she didn't miss by much -- a hundred yards further to the right and she's clear. Easy mistake on a foggy night, but no less tragic

Sandy Beach · 07-01-2008, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

While the first part is true, if a mechanical failure occurred at a point where it would have been impossible to change course, then speed would have nothing to do with it.
Speed may have been a factor, but the CAUSE of the accident would still be machanical failure.

Mechanical failure could mean a kink or something in the throttle line somehow caused a sudden and unexpected increase in speed. The driver would not have intended to travel at that speed.

Still I am bothered by the "coincidence". I'm waiting for authorities to rule out foul play. The speed limit is a highly charged and passionate issue for some people. An extremely small percent of those people could be irrational enough or unbalanced (sick) enough to consider making their point by facilitating something like this. I would hate for that to be the case but we just don't know yet.

I pray for all those touched by the tragedy regardless of the cause.

VitaBene · 07-01-2008, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandy Beach

Mechanical failure could mean a kink or something in the throttle line somehow caused a sudden and unexpected increase in speed. The driver would not have intended to travel at that speed.

Still I am bothered by the "coincidence". I'm waiting for authorities to rule out foul play. The speed limit is a highly charged and passionate issue for some people. An extremely small percent of those people could be irrational enough or unbalanced (sick) enough to consider making their point by facilitating something like this. I would hate for that to be the case but we just don't know yet.

I pray for all those touched by the tragedy regardless of the cause.

I'm sorry, but I think this type of conjecture is uncalled for and somewhat ridiculous. This is far worse speculation than anything that has been written in previous posts (except your earlier little hand grenade you taossed in). For one thing, this family has access to dozens of boats, new and used-a person with malicious intent would have no clue what boat they were taking. Second, the boat had already travelled a good distance before the incident. Had the cause been tampering, it would likely have shown up well before it did.

As has been said time and time again, let's wait for the results before assessing any type of blame or casting aspersions against anyone. The only thing we know for sure now is that the boat was going too fast for the conditions.

twoplustwo · 07-01-2008, 07:49 AM

I'm sorry, but I think this type of conjecture is uncalled for and somewhat ridiculous. Dittoooooo.

The speculation surrounding this tragedy has been bad enough without conspiracy theorists, the grassy knoll, and Professor Plumb with the lead pipe in the ballroom.

4Fun · 07-01-2008, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoplustwo

I'm sorry, but I think this type of conjecture is uncalled for and somewhat ridiculous. Dittoooooo.

The speculation surrounding this tragedy has been bad enough without conspiracy theorists, the grassy knoll, and Professor Plumb with the lead pipe in the ballroom.

I wouldn't rule out foul play yet. It's possible some of the "speed limit" folks were on shore pointing magnets at her boat. That would certainly mess up the compass. Or maybe they painted a tunnel in the island like Wiley E. Coyote There were reports of an Acme delivery truck in the area that night.

2Blackdogs · 07-01-2008, 08:55 AM

VitaBene writes,

As has been said time and time again, let's wait for the results before assessing any type of blame or casting aspersions against anyone. The only thing we know for sure now is that the boat was going too fast for the conditions.[/QUOTE]
The problem with "wait", is that as soon as any legal charges are filed, the lawyers will have prepared statements saying,

Quote:

"We will demonstrate that they were not drinking, those weren't their beer cans, there is no evidence that they were in Wolfeboro, they were not legally drunk, that their instrumentation was not faulty, that they were lured to that location by abandoned magnetic Navy devices, that is was not their anchor that hit the house, that the wrong person was placed at the helm by inept police detectives....etc."

All the details that we can gather here from the scene will keep us from being dumbed-down for that media assault by trained......errrrrrrr......a trained team in the legal profession.

fatlazyless · 07-01-2008, 09:12 AM

Anyone remember when a different boat, about ten years ago or so, crashed into the dock and shoreline of Eagle Island in the nightime?

It was reported in the newspaper that when the fire department got there, the first words of the boat driver was something like: "This island is not supposed to be here. According to my gps, this island is in the wrong place!"

If I remember, his gps was running on a 'road' cartridge, and not a proper 'water' cartridge, or somethin, or other?

06-21-2008, 12:37 PM	#201
wildwoodfam Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: North Andover, MA & summers up at the BIG lake Posts: 285 Thanks: 5 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts	OK, I stand corrected on two counts... Gotta love digital cameras and the ability to enlarge the photo, I can now see the dealer plate on the boat! And my apologies - I said Channel and of course new it was Lakeport. That's what happens when you are on the other side of the lake, everything beyond the Weirs blurs together! Still a very sad story unfolding here...

06-22-2008, 05:56 AM	#204
Seaplane Pilot Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,177 Thanks: 662 Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts	Pathetic media reporting This week's Gilford Steamer - a local news rag - (emphasis added) reported the boat driver's name as "Erica Buzzard". Totally disrespectful and unprofessional, even though it was most certainly unintentional. Now how difficult it is to get a fact like this right? Doesn't the editor proof read? On top of this, several of the news articles over the past week spelled both Winnipesaukee and Gilford incorrectly. How are we supposed to believe these articles, when these media cannot even get simple facts correct? Embarrasing to say the least. http://granitestatenews.com/pdf/GIL.2008.06.19.pdf See page 2.

06-23-2008, 10:45 AM	#206
SIKSUKR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,075 Thanks: 215 Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts	Here's what I saw I had a look at the crash site on Saturday.I stayed a good 500-700 ft away as not to bother the homeowner,although I did not see any indication of anyone there.It seems little doubt in my mind Erica was headed for Sleepers Island and crashed into Diamond.Obviously she did not see this very unlit island.It appears the the boat hit a 5-6 ft shear wall of granite that would be in the direct path to Diamond.Looking at that wall and also the damage to the boat,it would appear to me it would not take very much speed to result in the damage seen on her boat.The boat had to come to an immediate stop.This is ONLY my uneducated perception of what I've seen.Take it for what it is but I'll be very surprized that when the investigation is complete and if there is a speed determination that it will be more than 20-30 mph.Let me say again that this is just a pure guess on my part but I would think weather will turn out to be the main factor in the crash. __________________ SIKSUKR

06-23-2008, 06:19 PM	#224
The Big Kahuna Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Gilford Posts: 148 Thanks: 0 Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Who was driving? It might have been Erica's boat, but who says she was driving? Maybe she was letting someone else drive, that may explain a lot.

06-24-2008, 05:15 AM	#226
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Was alcohol involved? Substantial information surrounding the crash is now being investigated, including the possibility that alcohol was involved. Latest developments in this morning's CITIZEN.

06-21-2008, 06:53 PM	#202
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,836 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	Am I the only one confused ? as I scroll down ,I don't seem to find any order in the posts.Last post was on the 16th and I key onto "more replies below currant depth"...and still can't find todays post. I'm a 3 on a scale of 10 when it comes to computer skills.....guess I need someone to explain things to me.

06-23-2008, 12:30 PM	#207
NHDOLFAN Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 73 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I am very curious as to why Marine Patrol has taken this amount of time to make a statement. If the driver was impaired in anyway shape or form, I would think Marine Patrol would make a statement about the incident. If you think about crashes that take place and kill or seriously hurt someone, the police always make some statement about whether alcohol or drugs were a factor. This incident has been hush hush, which I don't understand.

06-23-2008, 12:57 PM	#209
NHDOLFAN Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 73 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I understand that the driver was seriously hurt. However, that would not prohibit Marine Patrol from taking blood samples. I would assume that Marine Patrol could do a lot for speculation, one way or the other.

06-23-2008, 01:12 PM	#211
NHDOLFAN Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 73 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I comprehend your point and confident that Lt. Dunleavy will do the best job he can. While there are far less boating fatalities, nonetheless, this is not the 1st one. Do you think Marine Patrol has given info to the families involved? Of course not! They have given them bits and pieces but not the whole piece. I'm sure, at some point soon, one of the papers will file papers for the Right to know. If that happens, then they will have to make a statement vs. being proactive.

06-23-2008, 02:17 PM	#215
EricP Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 329 Thanks: 28 Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts	Meanwhile, outside of this forum, the rumor mill is in full gear. I am not going to repeat what I have heard as it's all ridiculous and in some cases disrespectful. My point is look what happened when Moses went up the mountain. People don't change! I for one will wait for official communications. Thank you Skip for your perspective, I couldn't agree more.

06-23-2008, 02:38 PM	#216
chipj29 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bow Posts: 1,874 Thanks: 521 Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts	I would think that the person would have to be able to give permission to have blood taken and tested. In absense of that, I would think the police would have to obtain a warrant, and I am sure there would be some sort of court decision. Put it this way, if she were my daughter, I would not want someone taking her blood for anything other than a medical reason. I would fight that as hard as I could. Prove that she acted criminally, then we will talk. Innocent until proven guilty. That's my opinion, whatever that may be worth.

06-24-2008, 10:12 AM	#230
NHDOLFAN Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 73 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Wow. This article shows that someone was drinking. Now, whether the person(s) were impaired is a different story. At what speed would a boat need to be traveling to be on plane? I'm sure that Formula could answer this question. Only time will tell but it does not look good.

06-24-2008, 10:49 AM	#231
EricP Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 329 Thanks: 28 Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts	Those several empty beer cans could have already been in the boat or from earlier in the day/evening.

06-24-2008, 11:25 AM	#233
2Blackdogs Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 115 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Looks like Uncle Ray got "called in". A rule of thumb is that the larger the city, hospital, emergency room, fire department or police force, the more sophisticated the attention to official inquiry. Europe, I'm reading today, has the technology to find fingerprints on anything made of metal, even if it's old or submerged. European laboratories are far better funded than US laboratories. When an agency has only a handful of annual investigations like this one (or even fewer), it's not going to be sophisticated at all. Worse, the investigation in a tourist-dependent state is subject to fierce political and economic community pressures. Perhaps "the showing to the door" of Safety Director Dick Flynn will change that impression, but funding to the NHMP is already such a rarity that the radar guns, the radar survey, and officer's radar training were grieved as major expenses. Or so we were told here. The survey itself was widely criticized as unscientific, and suggested a political pressure at work to make the findings "turn out right". The presence of alcohol evidence has turned this discussion to the real intent of the NHRBA, and that is to perpetuate a party-hardy atmosphere for Winni's cowboys. We haven't heard from the primary proponent of A.I.S. lately, especially with today's potentially embarrassing link to the NHRBA. It's too late to impeach the president of NHRBA now, but it could happen. I hope you're wrong about the driver behind the wheel. That driver might be the one who cannot speak in defense.

06-24-2008, 11:55 AM	#235
RI Swamp Yankee Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: North Kingstown RI Posts: 688 Thanks: 143 Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts	Another story: Jun 24, 10:48 AM EDT Alcohol may have been involved in NH boat crash GILFORD, N.H. (AP) -- Investigators are looking into possible criminal charges in a fatal boating accident on New Hampshire's Lake Winnipesaukee last week. In court documents, the Marine Patrol said it is investigating whether the death of 34-year-old Stephanie Beaudoin, of Meredith, was a negligent homicide. Court affidavits say a surviving passenger, 34-year-old Nicole Shinopulos, of Burlington, Massachusetts, told investigators she and the two other women on the boat had been drinking before they crashed into Diamond Island around 2:30 a.m. on June 15. The boat's driver, 34-year-old Erica Blizzard, of Laconia, suffered serious injuries. Blizzard is the president of the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, which has opposed boating speed limits on the lake. She is in stable condition at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...06-24-10-48-28 ------------------ And, as I posted earlier, the boat was going too fast for the conditions. __________________ Gene ~ aka "another RI Swamp Yankee"

06-24-2008, 12:43 PM	#237
COWISLAND NH Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 35 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Can we get some hard facts please...like the Marine patrol accident log form last year...if any one wants to point fingers at who had the most accidents and why lets see who they really were. I can not stand the finger pointing at people apposed to the speed limit. SPEED???Let's try someone making a bad judgment....plain and simple folks!

06-24-2008, 01:16 PM	#239
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	Well Blackdogs, they are investigating anything and everything, as many assumed. Your constant insinuations, riddled with sarcasm and demeaning language, pretty much put you in the position of an agenda poster. Regardless of the outcome of this accident, most of us could pretty much predict what you'd write for each potential outcome. One of the chief criticisms in the SL arguments is that many of us have read about numerous accident stories, seen the raw data, and tried to discuss solutions as we both participate in boating and care for ourselves and others. While others have distorted data, misinterpreted it, or even ignored it altogether. In the end, all that counts is safety and reducing accidents. Something tells me that's not your number one goal here.

06-24-2008, 08:43 PM	#242
Airwaves Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: I'm right here! Posts: 1,153 Thanks: 9 Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts	Not all news organizations/editors are created equally The AP article that RI Swamp Yankee quotes is based on this article in the Laconia Citizen. The AP story is heavily editied and the Laconia Citizen article relies exclusively on court documents filed to get various search warrants needed for the investigation. To restate my point the AP article was based on the Laconia Citizen Article. The Citizen article was based on the reading of court documents. I did not see anywhere in the article where anyone involved in the investigation or accident was actually interviewed for the story. This comes back to the ongoing reduction in newspaper workforce and the regurgitation of a marginal story as fact by other news organizations and drawing conclusions from it. It's going to get worse friends.

06-24-2008, 09:03 PM	#243
Newbiesaukee Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer Posts: 1,349 Thanks: 922 Thanked 569 Times in 295 Posts	Just a question. Is it the case that the bow letters are supposed to be above the rub rail? I am not the most experienced boatman, but this does not seem to be the case. What is the deal?

06-24-2008, 10:14 PM	#247
Rinkerfam Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 268 Thanks: 0 Thanked 14 Times in 8 Posts	I was half paying attention to WMUR's eleven o'clock broadcast when I thought I heard it stated that the NH Marine Patrol was leaning toward a negligent homicide case with regard to the incident at Diamond Island. Can anyone confirm or dismiss this? __________________ Education is hanging around 'til you've caught on - Frost

06-25-2008, 07:59 AM	#252
COWISLAND NH Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 35 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	WOW 2Blackdogs you seem to be very angry. Why not hate the drunk drivers instead of the boaters who go faster then you? To categorize every boater who has a go fast boat as drunken reckless captains is just not right. Both highly publicized accidents that have been discussed on this thread are related to the operator under the influence (speculation). I just can not see your point on justifying a speed limit related to these accidents. Have you every seen a couple of teenagers not paying attention on their jet skies or an overcrowded boat full of excited kids with dad pulling them in a tube....accidents happen...I've seen it 1st hand!

06-25-2008, 08:19 AM	#253
kthy66 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 60 Thanks: 7 Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts	2Blackdogs you really need to come out of your shell hon and tell us how you really feel... More info this morning in the Citizen http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...824/-1/CITNEWS

06-25-2008, 09:06 AM	#254
SIKSUKR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,075 Thanks: 215 Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts	FATJACK is Back __________________ SIKSUKR

06-25-2008, 10:59 AM	#258
Newbiesaukee Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer Posts: 1,349 Thanks: 922 Thanked 569 Times in 295 Posts	Although there is some variability, two points on the curve and knowledge of alcohol metabolism, etc. would allow you to extrapolate and come up with an accurate estimate of alcohol blood level at the time of the accident.

06-25-2008, 01:03 PM	#265
Steveo Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 523 Thanks: 47 Thanked 123 Times in 63 Posts	Some clarification please The reports stated that she was traveling southeast headed toward Sleepers. I'm trying to understand two things, First, where on the island did she hit. Was she attempting to go between Diamond and Rattlesnake and hit on the north side of the island or was she attempting to go betwen Diamond and the mainland and hit the west side. And second, was she coming from Wolfeboro (Wolfetrap) or from Pentleton Beach at the time.

06-26-2008, 10:04 AM	#279
Lake Boater Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 6 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Sad It is sad that the loss of human life in this tragedy as well as serious injuries are over shadowed by people shouting about their own agenda`s. I have painfully read all these comments and it just proves that humans are extremley more ignorant at times then compassionate. I have been boating on Winni since I was 5 years old and have had my own boat up there for the last 25 years. Yes the lake has changed and unfortunatly so have the people that live on it and use it. For the good or the bad it is what it is.90% of you people making these comments about speed/drinking/not paying attention or Erica Blizzards stand on issues and beliefs, should look at yourself in the reflection of such a beautiful lake we are so fortunate to have and ask yourself what if it was my family going through this.Lets turn our thoughts and prayers to the injured and the dead and let the politicians do what they are so good at, and that is being ignorant idiots carrying soap boxes and setting them where anybody will listen. Boaters as a whole are a big family so lets all stop the finger pointing and turn our efforts into helping with the healing process....... Again this is just my opinion.. and I am not afraid to sign my posts.. Rich Turcotte

06-26-2008, 11:41 AM	#281
2Blackdogs Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 115 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Codeman, I have been to the scene. The details below are for the lower photo only. The impact area is a bright pink smear, about the size of those plastic wading pools. It lies hidden mid-way between the twin-outboard boat and the blue crane in the lower photo. It lies hidden behind that boat, and is not 6' tall, as reported here on day one. The anchor-strike location is a dent below the living room window at the end of the white, J-shaped, object which may be a canopy or awning of some sort. The photo is dark, so it could be the "radar bar" of the crashed boat. (Or, the house's middle window of the three grouped above the twin-outboard boat).

06-26-2008, 03:15 PM	#283
sa meredith Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 986 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 32 Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts	My God... ...talk about a thread that many people are turning to, to find the latest information about a terrible event turning into mindless dribble.

06-26-2008, 03:40 PM	#284
webmaster Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 2,434 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 440 Thanked 3,726 Times in 824 Posts	Please note The comments on signing posts have been moved to their own thread. Please don't hijack.

06-26-2008, 10:15 PM	#289
RI Swamp Yankee Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: North Kingstown RI Posts: 688 Thanks: 143 Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts	Added note: A version of rule 6 will go into effect 1-1-09 with HB847 (RSA 270) __________________ Gene ~ aka "another RI Swamp Yankee"

06-28-2008, 07:48 PM	#294
kjbathe Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 281 Thanks: 3 Thanked 21 Times in 11 Posts	I just saw the photos of the accident site above and my reaction is, wow, she didn't miss by much -- a hundred yards further to the right and she's clear. Easy mistake on a foggy night, but no less tragic

07-01-2008, 07:49 AM	#297
twoplustwo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 456 Thanks: 51 Thanked 39 Times in 21 Posts	ditto that I'm sorry, but I think this type of conjecture is uncalled for and somewhat ridiculous. Dittoooooo. The speculation surrounding this tragedy has been bad enough without conspiracy theorists, the grassy knoll, and Professor Plumb with the lead pipe in the ballroom.

07-01-2008, 09:12 AM	#300
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,527 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 295 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Anyone remember when a different boat, about ten years ago or so, crashed into the dock and shoreline of Eagle Island in the nightime? It was reported in the newspaper that when the fire department got there, the first words of the boat driver was something like: "This island is not supposed to be here. According to my gps, this island is in the wrong place!" If I remember, his gps was running on a 'road' cartridge, and not a proper 'water' cartridge, or somethin, or other? __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!