It is up to a jury now

[John Nantz]

Petersea: I don't know what you clicked on

Went back to my post #215 in this series and clicked on the link in the post which gets one to a picture of Jon Hopkins, with the caption "Jon Hopkins, Prosecuting innocent men since 2007. And Loving It."

This much is repeatable which means the web page URL hasn't been changed as of this post.

If you got this, then so far, so good.

Next I clicked on the word "Next" located in the upper right corner of the picture which gets one to the "Russel perdock (lower case "p" for the little guy} what I did on vacation" picture that you apparently got.

Then I clicked on the word "Next" again, as per instructions, which takes one to the proper page. Why the URL doesn't match up I don't know but this is the only way I could do it.

Now for the comments:

The picture in the ad is not the same as perdock's boat, sure, so big deal. perdock's boat is undoubtably and older model and the guy probably couldn't find an old ad so you could see matching pictures. The real point here is that purdock's boat IS made by the same company!

If one looks at ads for things like a Hummer, Harley, Hunter, Catalina, J-Boat, etc., they all have a "target audience" and tailor their ads accordingly. This company has this kind of ad to appeal to their clientel and that is the point.

The picture of the boat with the torn up bow just above perdock's picture is HIS ACTUAL BOAT. Yes, it is different that the one in the ad but that is HIS BOAT.

Am I trying to convince a jury here? I don't think so. Am I trying to change anybody's mind here? No. And, am I unbiased here? Hell no! They got the wrong guy in the hot seat and he deserves to be acquitted and I sure hope he will be.

The next step is to find some way to hang DA Jon Hopkins and pedrik, and maybe even the county sherif.

 

[Tim R.]

John, you can right click on the original image and copy the location into your clipboard. Next use the insert image button(

) to insert it into your post.

 

[John Nantz]

Thanks Tim! But I have an old laptop .....

..... (about 10 yrs old) without a mouse. ugh! It's about time for an upgrade.

As I write this I have the knowledge that the jury already found the accused innocent and I feel vindicated. The jury recognized a setup and did the proper thing.

Several years ago I was on a jury for a guy who was stopped (his car had a tail light out and he was weaving plus speeding). The trial was for possession of marijuana. The trial ran for two days and into the evening of the second day. We, the jury, adjourned but one of the jurors had to go to the restroom. After a short discussion while the one juror was doing his thing we all agreed the guy was guilty. The next thing was to select a foreman - so.... guess who got selected. Yup, when he came out we notified him of his new position and asked him what his view was. A minute or so later we went back into the courtroom and gave the verdict to the bailiff. If you would have seen the trial you'd understand.

I think this jury was probably close to ours. Sometimes it is just so obvious what is right (correct) and what isn't.

In the case of perdock and the DA jon whats-his-name, the two guilty parties who are trying someone else in an attempt to divert blame and responsibility, and that is what it is, they BOTH need to stand trial.

The DA should have recrused himself because he works very closely with the sheriff's office proscuting offenders and, consequently, has a close working relationship with them, and purdock being the #2 guy, he probably has the closest relationship with. This is non other than conflict of interest.

An interesting thought, since purdock can't claim he was under the influence and fein it was the restaurant's fault, he can now be tried as being sober!

And the county sheriff supported this action all along but didn't take any real action until just a week or two ago about replacing purdock. And that, in my opinion, is mismanagement at the least, and maybe even potentially aiding and abetting for allowing this "other crime" to continue on for as long as it has.

The guy that was fired because he tried to get purdocks alcohol level needs to be re-hired and paid his back pay plus penalties, and even promoted for doing what is right and proper.

And on top of that, the Clear Lake sheriffs office probably needs a house cleaning.

 

[zeehag]

http://www.latitude38.com/lectronic/lectronicday.lasso?date=2009-08-20&dayid=314

 

[paulj]

It seems this thread should end here...

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/video?id=6975206

Goodnite Johnboy
paulj

 

[Ross]

The verdict is in : Not guilty on counts 1 & 2 jury hung on count 3 . DA drops count 3. Case closed for Defendant number 1. Unindicted others may yet be named.

 

[John]

Now the coast is clear for Perdock to be sued for everything he owns.

 

[petersea]

Well, I for one will have to accept the jury's verdict even thought I may disagree but that it the way it is. Interesting to note hung jury on count three of boating with a blood alcohol level over .08. DA dropped charge. I will admit my disappointment that Dinius was not found guilty of BUI.
As others mentioned I hope Purdock has a civil case brought against him as well and he is held responsible for his actions. I also hope the state of California will investigate this whole thing.
I do hope this incident has made people more aware of boating and drinking, Hopefully it may stop other people from doing something as foolish.

 

[Ross]

Well, I for one will have to accept the jury's verdict even thought I may disagree but that it the way it is. Interesting to note hung jury on count three of boating with a blood alcohol level over .08. DA dropped charge. I will admit my disappointment that Dinius was not found guilty of BUI.
As others mentioned I hope Purdock has a civil case brought against him as well and he is held responsible for his actions. I also hope the state of California will investigate this whole thing.
I do hope this incident has made people more aware of boating and drinking, Hopefully it may stop other people from doing something as foolish.

I said earlier in this discussion that the jury has the right to decide if the defendants behavior rose to the level of the the charges. That would include the appropriateness of the charge. I can see where you may have been the twelth jurior on count number three. Sometimes viewing the world in strict black and white and not allowing for shades of grey can severely liimit our ability to allow people to be human.

 

[John Nantz]

Ross - Amen! on your statement.

That was exactly what I was thinking; did his behavior rise to the level of the charge and was it appropriate.

I said earlier in this discussion that the jury has the right to decide if the defendants behavior rose to the level of the the charges. That would include the appropriateness of the charge. Sometimes viewing the world in strict black and white and not allowing for shades of grey can severely liimit our ability to allow people to be human.

When the Exxon Valdez ran aground did they hang the guy steering the boat or the Captain? The Captain was in his stateroom sleeping off his drunken overhang. [this was several years ago and I don't know the details but it was something like that]. I think they went after the Captain as #1 and if they did anything with the guy at the helm it was probably a lesser charge.

The US Navy sub that hit a more-or-less uncharted (or at least there was a question about the charting of it) underwater seamount a few years back did not have the Captain steering the boat but they nailed him! Don't know what happened to the helmsman.

 

[petersea]

John " think they went after the Captain as #1 and if they did anything with the guy at the helm it was probably a lesser charge.

The US Navy sub that hit a more-or-less uncharted (or at least there was a question about the charting of it) underwater seamount a few years back did not have the Captain steering the boat but they nailed him! Don't know what happened to the helmsman. "

Big difference here as both were tried in the a maritime courts as well as in the case of the sub by the Navy regulations. Pretty sure the guy at the helm of the sub was sober, can you imagine what the Navy would have done to him had he not be sober !! and don't remember the detail of the Valdez helmsman but both boats operate at a higher degree of rules and responsibility then the pleasure boater.

Ross, maybe I see more black and white then grey but when it comes to driving a vehicle or vessel it is very black and white with regards to alcohol blood level. If my views limit my abilities to see people as human so be it but since when is it a human right to operate a vessel when drinking. Next time a car load or boat load of people ride past you all liquored up just remember they are being human. Was Purdock just being human ? ? Yes, Ross I could have very well been the 12th juror ! I'm am personally proud of the one juror who understood what his or her job was. All this "grey area " is nothing more then lowering the human race to the lowest common denominator when we accept DUI or BUI as OK.

I will let this issue rest as it has probably run it course and deserves to end.

Thanks to everyone who contributed.

 

[Cpt. Jon]

Thanks to the admins for allowing this thread to continue on even when it got "heated". I too appreciate all the contributions to this thread. I think that it definately raised some awareness, and most of the debate was healthy. Though I don't agree with everyones opinion on the subject, I appreciate the participation.

 

[John]

Agree

Thanks to the admins for allowing this thread to continue on even when it got "heated". I too appreciate all the contributions to this thread. I think that it definately raised some awareness, and most of the debate was healthy. Though I don't agree with everyones opinion on the subject, I appreciate the participation.

I agree with the thanks to the administrator. Although this thread is not strictly about sailing, it's important - kind of a gray area. As far as the verdict - which is more important: That Dinius gets nailed for what was at worst an accidental violation (I don't think he had planned to be at the helm, but it was difficult to refuse), or that the corrupt law enforcement department in Lake County gets nailed? As for me - I don't have any doubts on that one. and I hope the prosecutor is duly humiliated, and then some.

 

[Ross]

Re: Agree

This story will continue to play for a few more years. Even if the statue of limitations runs out damages and wrongful death suits can start from the trial date.

 

[Jim Boernge]

My boat is for cruising. The rule of law on my boat is no drinking until the boat is at anchor... for all aboard. That way if conditions change, all on board are fully capable of turning to.

I am very pleased that the jury voted the way that they did and that Mr. Dinius is off the hook. I hope that Verizon gives him his job back.

 

[kenn]

...I will admit my disappointment that Dinius was not found guilty of BUI.

Escaping the BUI is a response to how the offense was discovered. For example, if the police conduct a search of a residence without a warrant or grounds, and they discover a joint on the coffee table, they probably couldn't successfully prosecute the resident with possession, because the search was illegal.

I don't like the idea of BUI either, but Dinius likely wouldn't have been found out and charged if a speedboat driven by a police officer hadn't impaled the sailboat. So I think that result is just. You can probably bet that if Dinius ever sets foot on a boat again, he'll think twice about helming if he's had a few. I know I will...And we all know the story now. So the deterrence effect is still quite strong.

 

[paulj]

If you live long enough some time things seem to........


http://lakeconews.com/content/view/13921/919/



paulj :troll:

 

[Ross]

The wheels of justice grind slowly but exceeding fine.

 

[HukilauMike]

Thanks for the update Paul.

 

[zeehag]

this is old news--dinius was acquitted and nothing still has been done against perduck, except lose his job......