Commandeered to Cuba

[NPCampbell]

Through all these posts I haven't been able to figure out what possible motive there would be to commit this crime.

Financial? The suspect didn't end up with anything and didn't appear to plan to end up with anything. Insurance fraud maybe?

Concealment? Maybe there was another crime being covered up? Drug trafficking etc?

Revenge? Was the suspect wronged in some way?

Pathological? Maybe cabin fever?

There's just not enough info here to form an opinion here or even sympathize with the OP.

[Shrew]

Originally Posted by NPCampbell

Through all these posts I haven't been able to figure out what possible motive there would be to commit this crime.

Financial? The suspect didn't end up with anything and didn't appear to plan to end up with anything. Insurance fraud maybe?

Concealment? Maybe there was another crime being covered up? Drug trafficking etc?

Revenge? Was the suspect wronged in some way?

Pathological? Maybe cabin fever?

There's just not enough info here to form an opinion here or even sympathize with the OP.

Along these same lines. What leads up to a boat owner/captain grabbing a knife and speargun, retreating to their cabin and locking themselves in??

Once armed, unless the crew is equally armed, what would lead someone to feel their only option was to essentially abandon the boat and stand their ground behind a locked cabin door? That has to be a serious altercation!!!

Initially the captain locks himself in (which would infer he feels the need to protect himself from the crew). Then the crew-person locks the captain in by barricading the door from the outside (inferring that the crew-person needs to protect himself from the captain).

It's almost as if both parties lost their minds. Only hearing the story from one side, is like hearing only 1/3 of the story (Captains side, Crew's side, and the truth in the middle).

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Shrew

Along these same lines. What leads up to a boat owner/captain grabbing a knife and speargun, retreating to their cabin and locking themselves in??

Paranoid delusions?

[sanibel sailor]

DT's?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

According to Bill, the vessel in question is not a US documented vessel. It is registered in the state of Virginia. (Same as a car is registered.)

The purpose of documenting a vessel prior to leaving US territory is to provide protections, such as the unlawful seizure of a documented (US flagged) vessel.

Your claims as stated may likely be nothing more than a civil matter, not a federal case. A case for mutiny could likely never be proved, unless there is video showing he forcibly locked you in the room and stated on the camera that he was taking command of the vessel against your wishes. But, if this incident occurred outside US waters (> 12 nm)....jurisdiction may be problematic. It really seems it might come down to a he said / he said pissing contest.
. . .

WRT the boat...it is private property that was confiscated after illegally anchoring in Cuba. Since it is not documented the USCG may have no interest in the matter as it is technically not a US flagged vessel...it is property owned by a citizen of the US that was illegally taken into Cuba. If you really want to retrieve the boat you may likely need to hire a Cuban lawyer to petition the Cuban authorities to request permission to retrieve your private property. If the boat is not sail-able...you may also have to hire a tow vessel from Florida to make the journey down and back if they release the boat. . . .

A lot of incorrect legal information here.

First of all, it is not true that the lack of CG documentation necessarily makes the boat a non-U.S. vessel, that is, a vessel with U.S. nationality or U.S. "national character" (as UNCLOS calls it). A vessel has U.S. nationality if it is EITHER a CG documented vessel OR an undocumented vessel wholly owned by U.S. citizens (residency is irrelevant) which is (a) not required to be documented; and (b) is eligible to be documented other than tonnage; and (c) is not documented in another country. Undocumented U.S. vessels which are self-propelled must have a state-issued registration number (46 U.S.C.§ 12301(a)).

There are thousands of undocumented U.S. flag yachts roaming the world's oceans. The lack of CG documentation makes it harder to PROVE U.S. nationality of the vessel, which is a big disadvantage (a foreign state could refuse to recognize an undocumented vessel's U.S. nationality, and you would then have to prove it, where as CG docuentation is conclusive evidence of U.S. nationality). It's called "documentation", not registration, because CG documentation is intended to prove U.S. nationality, not create U.S. nationality, of the vessel.

A lot of confusion on this subject exists probably because of all the Delaware registered yachts, especially in the Eastern Med, which are not indeed U.S. vessels, because they are undocumented AND owned by non-U.S. citizens. These vessels are not entitled to wear the U.S. ensign. But the OP most likely was so entitled.

The second error concerns jurisdiction. U.S. courts have jurisdiction over all criminal matters arising from events which take place on a U.S. vessel in U.S. or international waters. For offenses committed on a U.S. vessel but in foreign waters, there is shared jurisdiction. Again, a U.S. vessel is any vessel with U.S. nationality as defined by U.S. law (international law leaves it up to every state to define nationality of its vessels according to its own laws), and not just CG documented vessels. But U.S. jurisdiction goes even further than that --18 U.S.C. § 7 provides for U.S. jursidiction ("special maritime and territorial jurisidiction") with respect to any vessel or aircraft which is even partially owned by a U.S. citizen, including U.S. legal persons, regardless of the registration or nationality of the vessel or aircraft.



There are a number of differences between the legal status of documented and undocumented U.S. vessels. For example, an undocumented U.S. vessel has to pay for consular services abroad; a documented U.S. vessel gets these services for free. But likely none of these differences would have any significance in this case.



And there is no question that U.S. courts (and law enforcement) will have jurisdiction to deal with any crimes which may have been committed on the OP's boat in international waters, if the facts are as he says.

[Thumbs Up]

OP never stated that he was a US citizen (He said he was from Costa Rica). Since we don't know all the facts we can only look at this from a hypothetical perspective. Someone buys a boat and takes amateur crew onboard to make a passage. There is a disagreement. The owner ends up in his cabin for days as the crew navigates the boat. They end up shipwrecked in Cuba. Legal question: Who is to blame?

I think that you would have to prove malice on the part of the crew. The crew could have locked him in his cabin because he had become deranged and dangerous. When things get rough at sea and start to spiral out of control, there is fatigue and seasickness and people don't always make the most rational choices. It could be called temporary insanity. An assault could have been akin to a rescue swimmer having to knock out a panicking person in order to save them both. Based on my understanding of the laws, unless you can prove malice, the boat owner would be the one that would be found legally responsible for the entire situation. Does anyone else here see differently?

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

SNIP

Based on my understanding of the laws, unless you can prove malice, the boat owner would be the one that would be found legally responsible for the entire situation. Does anyone else here see differently?

I see it differently. Just as the captain is responsible for the crew and their actions the crew is obligated to follow the captain's orders; there some exceptions like ordering criminal actions but there is no indication this happened here. The OP indicated at least terrible seamanship and theft of the dinghy to go ashore (stuff like screwing up the anchor, messing up the head sails, jib sheet caught in prop, probably some stuff I forgot).

I suspect there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by NPCampbell

Through all these posts I haven't been able to figure out what possible motive there would be to commit this crime.

Financial? The suspect didn't end up with anything and didn't appear to plan to end up with anything. Insurance fraud maybe?

Concealment? Maybe there was another crime being covered up? Drug trafficking etc?

Revenge? Was the suspect wronged in some way?

Pathological? Maybe cabin fever?

There's just not enough info here to form an opinion here or even sympathize with the OP.

Skipper forgot to pay the ISP account on time??

[Group9]

Schizophrenia?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by sanibel sailor

I believe mutiny applies to government/military vessels where there is a precisely defined and legally based command structure. This is probably chargeable as kidnapping if he was held against his will and taken to an unlawful location.
Coast Guard might see a crew insurrection aboard a recreational vessel as nothing more than an HR issue.

Piracy then? We can argue over the exact definition but if true, I think a lawyer would have no problem finding an appropriate crime to attach to it.

Locking the captain in his cabin and sabotaging the ship goes way beyond an HR issue.

If they have half the evidence suggested, there should be police and reporters waiting as the flight lands because it's just too juicy of a story.

Of course, there is way too much missing details to buy the story at this point. My best guess is if the OP comes clean on the full story, he holds a lot of fault and doesn't come off as a sympathetic figure.

PS: Assuming it's a US repatriation flight, you are responsible for the cost. We were on one out of Nepal and they made us sign a document stating that we would pay with the threat of taking away our passport among other things if we didn't.

[Boat Guy]

Well, this is an interesting one for sure...


Those of you that did the investigating on FB, perhaps a link or two would be helpful...


to the OP, care to share the backstory as to why this turn of events? Even if everything you said is true and factual, what precipitated the division? He just went crazy? Were there any drugs aboard?

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Boat Guy

Well, this is an interesting one for sure...


Those of you that did the investigating on FB, perhaps a link or two would be helpful...


to the OP, care to share the backstory as to why this turn of events? Even if everything you said is true and factual, what precipitated the division? He just went crazy? Were there any drugs aboard?

I would be interested in hearing the story from the Cubans. If they find drugs on a boat it is a big no no. They don't mess around with stuff like medical pot, and hard drugs mean hard time. They also are not understanding about entering the country on an inflatable after abandoning ship. They do tend to be understanding about a disabled vessel anchoring for a short time to get things in order and quickly leave.

Also would like to see a facebook link.

[oceanminifish]

This thread is riveting to be sure! OP, please please give us the back story of your interpersonal relationship with Tyler and how after 5 months of sailing tandem with him you didn't suspect a long crossing could be fraught with peril. Alcohol? Lack of Alcohol? Mental Illness? Drugs? Sexual advances? Bad Cooking? These types if episodes don't occur without serious lack of self control by one or both parties and all the legal advice in the world won't help unless you are willing to tell the Judge the WHOLE story. Please fill in the gaps.

[BBill]

Crazy stuff happens but I would get out of Cuba and never look back. I think many here are giving too much credit to enforcing legal protocol. Whether Cuba will follow that is like rolling dice. Just my opinion but the faster out of Cuba the better.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by tomfl

I see it differently. Just as the captain is responsible for the crew and their actions the crew is obligated to follow the captain's orders; there some exceptions like ordering criminal actions but there is no indication this happened here. The OP indicated at least terrible seamanship and theft of the dinghy to go ashore (stuff like screwing up the anchor, messing up the head sails, jib sheet caught in prop, probably some stuff I forgot).

I suspect there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

I would agree if the captain was a real captain and he had hired professional crew. If the captain was a total rookie who had never sailed a boat before and the crew was experienced would you expect the crew to follow orders? And if the rookie boat owner had hired an experienced sailor to help him deliver his boat, who would be considered the captain? How about if the boat owner had hired a professional captain and the boat owner agreed to be his crew, how would you look at insubordination? (if the owner didn't want to follow orders) If a boat owner were to hire or accept help from a non-professional to help move his boat, the person gets drunk, is argumentative and somehow causes damage or injury, who would be liable? Wasn't it the boat owner's responsibility to choose competent crew? The terms piracy and mutiny don't apply here (at least not the legal definitions). We don't know what happened but maybe it is good that we are looking at this from a hypothetical point of view because sometimes boat owners/captains have to deal with an irrational or deranged crew member and maybe should know what to expect if they try to pin any legal blame to that person. If there was no bad intent, then no crime was committed.