Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry into the Anse Cochon boat crash, Mario Michel. (Photo credit: St Lucia Times)
Passengers who were aboard the two boats involved in the deadly Anse Cochon collision should not be blamed for what happened, Commission of Inquiry Chairman Mario Michel has stressed.
Michel used the opening minutes of Wednesday’s public hearing to address several concerns that had emerged following the first round of testimony, including criticism of witnesses, the commission’s questioning and the issue of legal representation.
Speaking directly to the surviving passengers who have already appeared before the commission, Michel said there was one point that did not require the inquiry to wait until its final report.
“The eight passengers who gave evidence before the commission, or the three passengers who died as a result of the collision, did absolutely nothing to cause the collision and the injuries and deaths which resulted from it,” he said.
“They went out to have a good time on Carnival weekend, and they had every right to do so.”
The inquiry was established following the July 18 tragedy off Anse Cochon, where the vessels Ocean Angel and Cazorla Jr collided while travelling in opposite directions, killing four people.
Michel referred to three passengers who died because the fourth deceased person, who had originally been captain of Ocean Angel, is being treated as part of the boat’s crew for the inquiry.
Michel acknowledged that some inconsistencies had emerged in the accounts given by witnesses, but said that was not unusual given the circumstances and the number of people involved.
“The fact that there were inconsistencies in the evidence given by some of the witnesses is to be expected when you put 11 different people on a witness stand,” he said.
He also pointed to the trauma many survivors may still be carrying, including the loss of friends, near-death experiences and physical injuries.
Michel thanked the passengers for coming forward and helping the commission piece together what happened.
“These people, these passengers on these two boats who have given evidence, deserve nothing more than our complete appreciation,” he said, adding that Saint Lucia owed them “a debt of gratitude”.
Michel made clear, however, that the position is different for the captains, owners and crew members who were aboard the vessels.
Unlike the passengers, he said, the inquiry is still examining whether any of them “may be or may not have contributed to or caused the occurrence of the collision”.
He thanked them for giving evidence, but noted that they could be recalled if further testimony makes that necessary.
Michel also addressed criticism over the way some witnesses had been questioned by commissioners.
“It would be remiss of me, though, if I did not acknowledge the vigorous questioning of some of the witnesses by commissioners,” he said.
But he rejected the suggestion that the approach was intended to disrespect those appearing before the inquiry.
“The vigour in the questioning by two of the commissioners in particular is reflective not of any intended disrespect or anything of the like for the particular witnesses,” Michel said. “It’s reflective, if anything, of no more than police questioning methods.”
Concerns had also been raised publicly about whether witnesses, particularly those whose actions are being examined, should have had legal representation.
Michel said witnesses had been asked whether they wanted counsel.
According to him, one of the two boat owners requested legal representation and had an attorney present while giving evidence. The other boat owner and the captain who testified declined representation, even after being advised more than once of their right to have counsel.
The commission is now working through the evidence from passengers, owners, crew members and others as it tries to establish what led to the collision and what changes may be needed to prevent a similar tragedy.
Public hearings are expected to continue today.
Any third-party or user posts, comments, replies, and third-party entries published on the St. Lucia Times website (https://stluciatimes.com) in no way convey the thoughts, sentiments or intents of St. Lucia Times, the author of any said article or post, the website, or the business. St. Lucia Times is not responsible or liable for, and does not endorse, any comments or replies posted by users and third parties, and especially the content therein and whether it is accurate. St. Lucia Times reserves the right to remove, screen, edit, or reinstate content posted by third parties on this website or any other online platform owned by St. Lucia Times (this includes the said user posts, comments, replies, and third-party entries) at our sole discretion for any reason or no reason, and without notice to you, or any user. For example, we may remove a comment or reply if we believe it violates any part of the St. Lucia Criminal Code, particularly section 313 which pertains to the offence of Libel. Except as required by law, we have no obligation to retain or provide you with copies of any content you as a user may post, or any other post or reply made by any third-party on this website or any other online platform owned by St. Lucia Times. All third-parties and users agree that this is a public forum, and we do not guarantee any confidentiality with respect to any content you as a user may post, or any other post or reply made by any third-party on this website. Any posts made and information disclosed by you is at your own risk.