It is up to a jury now

[Tim R.]

Here is how I see it. Definitely poor judgement but Dinius would not be on trial here if it were not for Purdock. No one would be dead if not for Purdock.

Not condoning behavior but is it illegal to operate a boat in CA while over the limit? I think in Maine, they only prosecute if an accident results.

 

[John Nantz]

Exonerate Dinius to spite the crooked DA

If I was on the jury that's what I'd do, and I'm stickin' to it.

Sure, MAYBE, technically, Dinius might be guilty of BUI. After today's cross examination though, Dinius was taking orders from the owner of the vessel, so that "maybe" might get him off the hook.

I'm really getting to like the attorney for the defense. He's come up with some interesting tactics.

Once Dinius is exonerated, and he will be, (I have faith in the jury on this one), then we need to go after not only the former #2 sheriff but also the DA. Unfortunately, incompetence and stupidity is not illegal.

 

[John]

I wish it were only a matter of stupidity and incompetence.

 

[petersea]

"but is it illegal to operate a boat in CA while over the limit? I think in Maine, they only prosecute if an accident results. "
__________________

Tim R,

Yes it is illegal to operate a boat in California while over the limit. Lake County Sheriff's department ( a little late ) just did a BUI check on the lake recently and if I remember correctly did not make any arrest for BUI. I would guess that as in most states funding is an issue with enforcement and while they may only prosecute if an accident in Maine it is because they are required to and especially ,with an injury or property damage, the other party involved can claim the police did not do their job and make a complaint. I know in Connecticut the local police have made BUI arrest but admittedly very few. Only the very obviously intoxicated are even noticed and even then sometimes only if they are reported by someone else.
I doubt anyone would have been arrested if there had not been an accident in the Clear Lake case. Reality is a very small percentage of drunk drivers get caught or arrested and even a smaller percentage of drunk boaters do.


http://lakeconews.com/content/view/9867/764/

Interesting side note the attached article says an "open container" is legal on a boat. (California law)

Also of note the article says if a boat turned around at the first sign informing them of a BUI check ahead they were not pursued.

 

[Stu Jackson]

Interesting comment in Pete's link

from the discussion after the posted article:

"A bunch of whiners" are individuals with a point of view, an opinion which the constitution and the supreme court have also ruled on.
Testimony by a expert witness, in front of a jury, did conclude that Perdock was going too fast-40-50mph. Witnesses will testify to seeing Perdock drinking at Knocti. The handling of Perdock's BAC is dubious at best.
Alcohol didn't kill Lynn, a boater who had a higher degree of responsibility to know boating laws did. And to make it worse used his position to cover up his crime and evan worse pin it on Dinius who was injured in the crash. No one is blaming the cops the blame rests with the Sheriff.

I particularly like the "alcohol didn't kill..." part. Goes a long way to support the point of view (not "whining" now...) of the "sitting duck" theory.

 

[petersea]

Stu,
Just as a clarification the link was to a news article about the BUI check held on Clear Lake. It was not intended do be more then information on the BUI check that was conducted. Any comments or discussion after were not intended to be a response to Tim R's question of if it is illegal to operate a boat while under the influence in California. As I stated yesterday I will not argue the point any longer. My comments about the open container and warning signs were not intended to rehash anyone's quilt or innocence. I will patiently await the verdict.

 

[Stu Jackson]

I understand what the link was for

Pete, and thanks for posting it. Yes, the comment was from the discussion after that article in the online newspaper.

I also understand your position that you won't rehash it. My comments are not always about your posts, and I may choose to continue my rantings about the stupidity of anyone who thinks Bismarck is guilty of anything.

 

[DanW9494]

I think the alcohol issue is more complicated. While it wasn't attacked by the defense, there is a chain of custody argument about Bismark's blood sample. Deputy Sheriff Perdock had a key to the room and the refrigerator where Bismark's sample was kept until tested. How do we really know what his blood alcohol level was. There is no evidence of impairment in the control of the boat. If his blood alcohol level was a lawful 0.07 and Perdock had tainted it, would your opinion change. He does deserve the benefit of the doubt.

As to a proper watch, the testimony of the fishermen was that they shined a strong lantern at the powerboat, which changed direction and promptly hit the sailboat. The sailors could have disregarded the powerboat because of a different, nonconverging course and then not heard it approaching after it changed course just before impact.

Colregs only apply to boats that can see each other, not the case here. Only unsafe speed applies here, because Perdock was going too fast to see anything, wasn't wearing his glasses, and had just lost what little night vision he had from the fishermen's lantern.

The judge is a visiting judge so not a GOB. But the DA has got to go.

Law enforcement officers are at jeopardy of losing their careers with every decision and action they make. But it is the coverup that cannot be tolerated.

Bismark should not have been punished anymore than if a lake patrol had done an inspection and found them drinking. The jury will hopefully realize that his actions didnot contribute to the death; that he has been punished enough; and will acquit him.

 

[Monty VM]

what is the status of the trial?

 

[Ross]

Go To Lake County California News.com

 

[Dave D]

So Stu, you're saying I'm stupid because in my opinion, and by definition, if (since) Bismarck was LEGALLY under the influence while operating a vessel he is guilty of BUI?

(edited to delete butt-head remark)

 

[petersea]

"But what you're missing, Petersea, is the possibility of lawsuits after this farce called a trial is over. If Dinius is found guilty, the implication will be that he was the one responsible, thus helping to let Purdock off the hook in any future lawsuits. "

John from Alameda,

John I think you make my case for me that there are enough intelligent people in California,such as yourself, that could make that distinction just as you have. You (nor do I) don't think Dinius is guilty of manslaughter,why do you think so many other people will ?? Especially when presented with the evidence.

 

[Alan]

In reading the transcript it appears that Sheriff Perdock had access to the test samples from Dinius Bismark and could have 'doctored' them prior to testing. Given this Sheriffs character and his less than honorable intentions we have to conclude that these test samples are not valid. Perdock was also one a handful of people that had access to changing the Sheriffs official reports. All this makes for a very smelly case indeed.

 

[MoonSailer]

Holding the tiller of a barely moving sailboat in the middle of a lake....is that truely operating a boat??? Some common sense might be usefull. Operating a speed boat at 30 mph can have results that are not possible in a small sailboat that is barely moving.

 

[John Nantz]

"Baja Outlaw" speedboat ad lives up to it's name

Truth in advertising! A few words from the "Baja Outlaw" boat company:

"... punishes anything and everything that gets in its way"

"Other boats can run but they can't hide from the Outlaw"

"Outlaws that break the rules and make their own rules"

Is this the kind of boat that Sheriff Perdock identified with???

Link to advertisement with annotated comments:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?p...70361397&aid=-1&id=1379890573&oid=92870361397 Edited comment: From this URL ink "page" click on "Next" TWO TIMES near the upper right hand corner to get to the proper picture. Don't know why the link doesn't go directly there to begin with.

 

[petersea]

John,

Talk about truth in advertising ! The second picture is NOT of the boats involved in the accident ! As the facebook page and caption would have you believe. Neiher boat are the same make or model as boats involved, so I don't get why the picture has any bearing on this case.

 

[Dave D]

Pete, I believe you failed t click on "next" a second time. That will bring you to a collage of the two boats involved along with the quotes mentioned above. Other pictures in the photo album are of different perspectives of the vessels and some random accident photos from the area.

 

[petersea]

No..... I clicked twice as instructed but the first picture is of a boating accident and the title is" Russel Purdock. - What I did on vacation" It then (second click) went to the Baha outlaw ad. The web site (a facebook page) clearly has a bias against Purdock (not that I disagree) but the picture would lead you to believe it is of Purdock's boat at the accident scene. John started his post by stating truth in advertising, John's link was to the web site and pictures. Clearly they were not accurate (at least that one) while there were several others that were, I still don't get the bearing on the picture in question. Was it put there intentional to mislead the viewer ??? If not why was it there ?? It was not a picture of either boat and was not even an accurate portrayal of the accident that Dinius and Purdock had. I'm lead to believe it was posted by someone who wanted to give you a negative portrayal of Purdock and did so by posting a fraudulent picture. It had no bearing on the case. I therefore think the facebook page is a poor reference to be using, anyway since when did facebook become a factual reference site. Since they in my opinion intentional mislead the viewer the whole thing gets zero in credibility. Why with all the other good sources did they have to post a picture like that ?? It clearly gives a overzealous attack that actual hurt the cause rather then helped it ! Why when the facts are clear does it need to be distorted ??

 

[petersea]

http://www.record-bee.com/ci_13155416

Link to clear lake record bee .................Jury is in deliberations...........

 

[Ross]

Now! Finally! it is up to the jury . By Friday we should all know the jury's answer.