Cruise Ship Case Closed: ‘Insufficient Evidence’

April 16, 2013

The case against the Bermuda registered cruise ship “Star Princess” has been closed due to “insufficient evidence to justify commencing criminal proceedings,” the Department of Maritime Administration said today.

The case involved an allegation that the Star Princess ignored a distress signal from a vessel, the ’50 Cent’ off the coast of Panama in March 2012 having been alerted to the vessel by passengers on board the ship – a group of bird watchers with photography equipment with telescopic lenses.

The small fishing boat was found adrift in the Pacific Ocean, and after 28 days at sea, only one of the three men who had been onboard was still alive. The other two died from lack of water and exposure.

A statement from the Government said, “The Bermuda Police Service carried out a thorough investigation which involved visiting the ship, interviewing witnesses who were on board the ship and reviewing the depositions of the survivor of the ’50 Cent’ which was recovered off the coast of the Galapagos Islands.

“In deciding not to bring a prosecution, the Department of Public Prosecutions noted that the passengers who were material witness to the case made a statement that the boat they had seen was not the same boat as the one recovered off the Galapagos Islands, and the survivor had stated that he had seen a large white ship in the morning of the day in question, whereas the passengers onboard the Star Princess had stated that they had seen a fishing boat in the afternoon.”

A civil case against Princess Cruises was filed in Miami by the Panamanian fisherman but was subsequently dismissed due to lack of evidence.

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (3)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Selective Amnesia says:

    sad…it is hard to tell who to believe. In any case a vessel in distress should not be ignored by another vessel who is capable of assisting.

  2. Victor says:

    How convenient for all but the fishermen…

  3. Malachi says:

    Typical “David” versus “Goliath” case!