39 replies to this topic

[Landlocked Dive Nut]

I am SSI certified and we were told constantly during training to never hold our breath, to blow bubbles, etc. This was absolutely drilled into us with big capital letters! My SSI class did not have beginning, OW divers ditch their gear and surface - not in the pool and not during checkout dives - at least, not at my LDS. I can't speak globally. We did remove the gear & put it back on, with reg in, like SucbaSis did.

And, how deep is this pool, anyway, that this even happened? In pool sessions, we were never down very long - did a lot of yo-yo in the pool - and it was only 12 feet deep max, but most of our stuff was done 6 feet or less. Not even 1 atmosphere, so how much can the air expand in 12 feet? I don't know the math.....

That said, it seems that in the USA nobody is responsible for their own actions anymore. It's always somebody else's fault, or because their childhood sucked, or whatever. I signed for the responsibility of my own life when I signed up to get certified. I've told my daughter that if I die diving, it's probably my own fault and I agreed to the risk.

If the student did not follow instructions, then it's tragic but it should not be considered the instructor's fault, especially if other students can confirm they were trained to never hold their breath, IMHO.

[PerroneFord]

...but of course no one on the jury can be a diver or have ever known one!

What? How do you come by this bit of info.

Hey PF, I think what LA is saying is that due to the nature and methodology used to select jury members, any prosecuting attorney is going to automatically dismiss anyone who might be sympathetic to the dive instructor, which basically includes anyone who has ever dove or has friends that dive. I would agree with him here, I think the jury will end up being a bunch of people who know little or nothing about diving and to me that's not particularly fair and IMHO it's not really a jury of peers either.

You can't just throw anyone you want off a jury. The number of peremptory challenges is limited (often to 3) and just because someone is a diver doesn't mean they can be challenged for cause. Being a diver doesn't necessarily indicate bias. In fact, depending on how the prosecutors case is structured, a diver may be the prosecutors best chance if they intend to prove the instructor acted in a manner not consistent with proper instructing. A diver would know that the instruction was lacking.

[BubbleBoy]

As an instructor I'm a little confused. In what beginning class do you leave the gear at the bottom of the pool and surface? I am both a NAUI and PADI Instructor and I have never done that in my open water courses. The first time I ever ditched my gear at the bottom of the pool was either in my Master Diver or Divemaster class.

Taking the gear off and returning to the surface without it was common practice in the old PADI/YMCA classes of the early 70's when I worked as a DM. The student would then dive back down, turn on the air, put on weight belt and clear the mask before doning the rest of the gear.

Yep, we did that in my NAUI course back in the early 70's too. We did it in the ocean because they wanted us to ditch at 30ft of more. We were also diving with J-Type reserve valves (which nobody could ever figure out what the off and on settings really meant), and CO2 cartridge inflators on our BCD's (which thank God nobody ever released).

I think they finally gave up the ditch and recovery practice when they decided it was usually safer in almost every kind of emergency to keep your gear with you instead of dropping it.

[ev780]

There is so much here we don't know. There has to be more to the story.

[JimG]

As an instructor I'm a little confused. In what beginning class do you leave the gear at the bottom of the pool and surface? I am both a NAUI and PADI Instructor and I have never done that in my open water courses

I'm not aware of any agency that requires ditch and don at the OW level. However, many agencies allow their instructors to exceed standards, by encouraging them to use additional confidence-building elements in the basic OW course. I was under the assumption that NAUI was such an agency - is that not true? At any rate, this appears to have been the case with this particular incident, which if I am not mistaken, occurred during an SSI sanctioned course.

One other thing to be aware of regarding this incident. It was reported to have occurred during a University course that was being taught for credit. University SCUBA courses often require anywhere from 2-3 times the number of contact hours of a typical dive shop course. The time has to be filled up somehow, and it's not uncommon to have students doing additional skills above and beyond what an "industry standard" course requires. These typically take the form of "challenge skills" (such as bailouts or ditch/don) or "pool games" (mask scramble, etc). Obviously these elements would be done much later in the course, after the students had demonstrated mastery of all the basic skills.

I have heard several "rumors" about what happened on this particular incident. I am not one to spread such things, but I am guessing that the criminal charge doesn't have anything to do with how many times the instructor told the students "never hold your breath". I can think of several other considerations that might have played into the Grand Jury's decision to proceed with an indictment. The problem is we just don't know any details at this point (and may not ever know). So any discussion here would be nothing more than idle speculation.

-JimG

[Latitude Adjustment]

...but of course no one on the jury can be a diver or have ever known one!

What? How do you come by this bit of info.

Hey PF, I think what LA is saying is that due to the nature and methodology used to select jury members, any prosecuting attorney is going to automatically dismiss anyone who might be sympathetic to the dive instructor, which basically includes anyone who has ever dove or has friends that dive. I would agree with him here, I think the jury will end up being a bunch of people who know little or nothing about diving and to me that's not particularly fair and IMHO it's not really a jury of peers either.

You can't just throw anyone you want off a jury. The number of peremptory challenges is limited (often to 3) and just because someone is a diver doesn't mean they can be challenged for cause. Being a diver doesn't necessarily indicate bias. In fact, depending on how the prosecutors case is structured, a diver may be the prosecutors best chance if they intend to prove the instructor acted in a manner not consistent with proper instructing. A diver would know that the instruction was lacking.

I've only been in the jury pool a few times in my life and always dimissed because I had some first hand knowledge about what was being tried, either because I've been robbed, painted something, a paint store was being sued or owned a boat and a boat thief was on trial. Do you have any idea how hard it was to put a jury together in a beach town with no one who had ever owned a boat or has a friend with one! The whole jury pool of about 100 marched through that courtroom, maybe that 3 challanges is just in Florida?

Edited by Latitude Adjustment, 30 July 2008 - 10:58 AM.

[PerroneFord]

More a judge thing than a Florida thing...

[BubbleBoy]

One other thing to be aware of regarding this incident. It was reported to have occurred during a University course that was being taught for credit. University SCUBA courses often require anywhere from 2-3 times the number of contact hours of a typical dive shop course. The time has to be filled up somehow, and it's not uncommon to have students doing additional skills above and beyond what an "industry standard" course requires. These typically take the form of "challenge skills" (such as bailouts or ditch/don) or "pool games" (mask scramble, etc)...
-JimG

I took my NAUI course from a California State College when I was in high school. We played underwater soccer in the pool using a 2lb weight as the puck. It was a blast; my favorite part of the entire course.

[shadragon]

I was told by an instructor that if a student held their breath on a CESA it was permissible to strike their solar plexus to force the air out. <<< Always wondered if that were true. Instructors?

I was in a 13 foot pool and I practised a few CESA's leaving my gear behind on the bottom. Never tried it before outside of training (with gear on and reg in) and wanted to see what happened if I ever had to ditch gear. I found I had a lot of of air left after hitting the surface even after blowing bubbles all the way up.

[Bubble2Bubble]

As other divers have posted the Hard Facts are needed to pass judgment on this case.

1.Pool Depth
2. Bottom Time
3. Divers health history..aka scare tissue, weight and emotional state of mind.

IMHO

Mike

[Starfish Sandy]

As an instructor I'm a little confused. In what beginning class do you leave the gear at the bottom of the pool and surface? I am both a NAUI and PADI Instructor and I have never done that in my open water courses. The first time I ever ditched my gear at the bottom of the pool was either in my Master Diver or Divemaster class.

Taking the gear off and returning to the surface without it was common practice in the old PADI/YMCA classes of the early 70's when I worked as a DM. The student would then dive back down, turn on the air, put on weight belt and clear the mask before doning the rest of the gear.

I am YMCA certified (2001) and we did the same thing - it was called the ditch and dive - if you couldn't ditch your gear - go to to the top of the pool - grab a breath and get back to your gear - grab your reg and put your gear on - you weren't passed. I took the class twice due to that one!

[peterbj7]

And, how deep is this pool, anyway, that this even happened? In pool sessions, we were never down very long - did a lot of yo-yo in the pool - and it was only 12 feet deep max, but most of our stuff was done 6 feet or less. Not even 1 atmosphere, so how much can the air expand in 12 feet? I don't know the math.....

12' is ample for a fatal air embolism to occur. Two young boys who snorkelled into an air pocket under an overhanging rock at well less than that depth, chatted for a while then returned to the surface, were both dead on the surface. As snorkellers no-one had ever told them not to hold their breaths.

I am inter alia a BSAC instructor, and this sort of training used to be standard in BSAC basic courses, and is still permitted though not often done.

As to punching (not just "striking") in the solar plexus someone who's ascending and holding their breath, I've both done that and watched it done. Not just permitted but required in those circumstances.

On the charges there clearly have to be facts/circumstances we aren't being told, but despite that I'll be very surprised if the instructor is convicted. Her dive instruction career is over anyway, just by the charges being brought - who would employ her or book a course with her now? If she's acquitted I wonder if she can raise a charge of malicious prosecution?

This business of objecting to potential jurors is interesting. I've never been through the process in England but I don't believe counsel can have people removed from the panel as they can in the States. Perhaps someone legal in Britain can comment?

Edited by peterbj7, 30 July 2008 - 10:02 PM.

[shadragon]

- and it was only 12 feet deep max, but most of our stuff was done 6 feet or less. Not even 1 atmosphere, so how much can the air expand in 12 feet? I don't know the math.....

The math is easy.

(Depth/33) + 1 = ATA (Absolute Pressure) in sea water

(Depth/34) + 1 = ATA (Absolute Pressure) in fresh water

Assume a 12 foot deep pool. So (12/34) + 1 = 1.35 ATA

So if she left the very bottom of the pool with full lungs (1.0) it would have expended to just over one and a third at the surface (1.35). That's enough to hurt.

A 6 foot rise in a pool to the surface would be 6/34 + 1 = 1.176 ATA. Much lower... (Amended - Thanks Racer184...)