安全事故被码头相机拍照留证之后。。。

来源：北英保赔协会@2019.3.25

 

近期发生在美国的一起事件表明，船舶在港口期间发生的事件很有可能被相机拍照而留存证据。

 

某船在美国东海岸一码头装载散装货物期间，货方指派一名检验人上船进行监装检验。因码头结构原因，检验人必须通过梯子而不是常规通道或者舷梯登轮。

 

检验人在离船时跌落，一名船员将事故报告给船长，船长立即赶到现场。船长看到检验人躺在船下约20英尺的混凝土码头前沿上，检验人的腿弯成了一个奇怪的角度，毫无疑问，检验人的腿伤势严重。

 

码头操作联系急救医务人员，受伤的检验人被救护车带走。船员对检验人躺在码头前沿以及被抬上救护车的情形进行拍照。

 

船长对事件发生时的当值船员进行询问，这些船员都对当时所看到的情况进行书面说明。目击者对于事件的回忆内容一致----检验人在马上到达梯子底部时失足，摔落一小段距离。船员都认为检验人是因为超重而摔倒的。

 

船东未在船舶开航前将此事通知保赔协会。

几个月后，受害方提起诉讼，船东将船员在事故发生时所做的书面声明递交保赔协会。由于这些声明倾向地表明此次事件的过错在于检验人本身，因此保赔协会起初主张不承担任何责任并据此抗辩。

 

证据揭示

然而，在搜诉讼证据披露的过程中发现码头安保系统包含一台闭路电视摄像机（CCTV），该摄像机记录了此次事件的整个过程。视频显示的情况与船员书面声明相悖，检验人是在梯子暂时脱离期间从梯子顶端跌落。检验人从大约20英尺处跌落，而不是如船员所讲述的只有一两步高度。

 

根据美国法律，船员的书面声明会在诉前揭示（开示）过程中提交给原告律师。由于这些声明显然的错误性，船员在审判过程中很容易被怀疑。这意味着该船舶可能无法再传唤任何可信的目击者对此案件进行辩护。

 

经验教训

我们可以从本案中吸取以下经验：

* 应假设在美国码头发生的任何事件都会被闭路电视摄像机记录下来。

* 请注意，虚假的书面声明会与无可辩驳的视频证据相互矛盾。

* 应将事故及时通知相关方，例如保赔协会当地通代，以便其在开航前尽快登船。通代可能会了解该码头是否有闭路电视摄像机安保系统，并且对船上方调查进行指导。

* 如果通代是律师，那么由通代准备的船员书面声明会因律师与当事人之间的保密特权而不会被揭示。

* 在案件调查过程中，船员拍摄的检验人腿部受伤的照片需要向对方披露，如果案件进入审判阶段，这些照片对提供方可能不会有所帮助。相反，这些照片会向陪审团揭示原告实际受伤的严重程度。需要吸取的经验是，拍摄的任何照片都需要公开，无论这些照片会使哪方当事人受益。

 

重要的是，发生事故时，尤其是在美国发生的事故，船长尽快通知船东和保赔协会以便进行必要调查。

 

通函内容，请以英文原文为准，汉语翻译仅供参考。 如您对上述内容有任何疑问，新乔十分乐意为您解答并提供帮助。

 

 

Caught on Camera

 

A recent incident in the United States highlights that when a vessel is in port and something happens, there is a chance it’s being caught on camera.

 

A vessel was loading bulk cargo at a terminal located on the east coast of the United States. A surveyor retained by cargo interests came on board to observe loading. Because of the configuration of the terminal, the surveyor had to access the ship via a stepladder rather than a customary gangway or accommodation ladder.

 

The surveyor fell when departing the vessel and a crew member alerted the Master who immediately attended on scene. He saw the surveyor lying on the concrete wharf apron about 20 feet below with his leg bent at such a grotesque angle that there could be no doubt but that it was badly broken.

 

The terminal operator contacted emergency medical personnel and the injured surveyor was taken away by ambulance. The ship’s crew took photographs of the surveyor as he lay on the wharf apron and as he was loaded into the ambulance.

 

The Master interviewed crew members who were on watch at the time and they all prepared written statements of what they had observed. The witnesses’ recollections were consistent – the surveyor descended to almost the bottom of the ladder when he lost his footing and fell a short distance. They all gave the opinion that the surveyor fell because of being overweight.

 

The P&I club was not notified of the incident before the ship sailed.

 

Several months later, litigation was commenced and the shipowner forwarded to their P&I club the written statements given by the crew at the time of the incident. Because these statements tended to indicate the fault for the incident lay with the surveyor, the club initially took the position there was no liability and proceeded to defend the case accordingly.

 

Discovery

However, during the course of discovery it was learned that the terminal had a closed-circuit television camera (CCTV) as part of its security system. The entire incident was captured on video.

The video showed, contrary to the written statements of the crew, that the surveyor fell from the top of the ladder when it became momentarily unhinged. He fell, not just a step or two as the crew witnesses had said, but approximately 20 feet.

 

Under United States law, the crew’s written statements would be produced to the plaintiff’s attorney in the course of pre-trial discovery. Because the statements were demonstrably false, the crew would have been easily discredited at trial. This means the ship would have been unable to call any credible eyewitnesses in an effort to defend the case.

 

Lessons Learned

There are several lessons to be learned:

* Always assume that any incident occurring at a terminal in the US has been captured by closed-circuit television cameras.

* Be aware that false written statements could conceivably be contradicted by irrefutable video evidence.

* Always notify the relevant parties, such as the P&I club’s local correspondent, as soon as possible so they can attend on board before sailing. The correspondent is likely to know if the terminal has a closed-circuit television security system, and their investigation would have been guided accordingly.

* If the correspondent is a lawyer, then any written crew statements prepared by the correspondent might be protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege.

* The photographs taken by the crew showing the badly broken leg of the surveyor would have to be disclosed to the other side during the discovery process and might not have been helpful had the matter proceeded to trial. To the contrary, they would have demonstrated to the jury how severe the plaintiff’s injury actually was. The lesson is that any pictures taken are disclosable, regardless of whose case they assist.

 

It is important that when any incident occurs - especially in the United States – the master notifies the shipowner and the P&I club as soon as possible so that the required investigations can be carried out.

 

通函地址：

http://www.nepia.com/insights/signals-online/people/caught-on-camera/caught-on-camera/?utm_campaign=931339_Horizon%20-%2026%2003%202019&utm_medium=email%2Cemail&utm_source=The%20North%20of%20England%20Protecting%20%26%20Indemnity%20Association%20Ltd%2CDotMailer&Ce=survey%40nwpni.com&cfn=PENG&cln=HOU&dm_i=3RZ1,JYMJ,2Y0UXV,25K62,1