IUCRR and Eagle's Nest Incident

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobby

Benderr,
There are some people that most likely only desire to stir the pot and have their drama, however I don't believe that is the case with most, and I know it is not with me. .....

Ken has also stated that the IUCRR could file an FOI request for the incidents that the IUCRR is involved in however that the IUCRR is not willing to make that effort. Seems to me that the organization that is involved in the recovery is in the best position to make the request in order to inform the cave diving and non cave diving public of incidents with public information to further incident analysis and awareness of what causes cave diving incidents.

The other down side and to me this is the biggest is that if the IUCRR is not consistent, credible, and current then it becomes irrelevant. If that happens people will not use it when an incident occurs. For me it is about not only keeping the IUCRR relevant it is also the desire to move it forward and seeing some much needed improvement to keep it current.

Sent

---

Bobby,

It seems to me you stir the pot. As supported by legal, medical and other opinions we haven't released information that could wind us in legal jeopardy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it's wrong. If you personally would like to do what you suggest we should do, based on your interpretation of the laws ... go ahead!

In the face of lawsuits things change try tackling DAN, they stopped publications in 2009 around the same time the IUCRR did.

https://www.diversalertnetwork.org/m...port/index.asp

Please note I have never said the IUCRR would file a FOIA. Why would we have to? The IUCRR has the report we gave to the Sheriff, our job is done! If you want a FOIA YOU file a FOIA. In the time you spend on these posts you could have addressed and mailed a dozen out.

Lastly, the Devils incident, was an attempt at rescue. It was not an IUCRR callout. It is relevant as it points to errors before the victim got in the water and his expiration after getting out of the water. As I said many times when incidents illustrate timely and/or important issues of divers safety we reserve the right to publicize them, therefore posted!

I find it funny that with all the people demanding this information that no one wants to invest their personal time and energy to go get the info, put it up, and maintain it on their own websites for all to see. Yet they are willing to bad mouth others for not doing the work for them, especially a volunteer organization that serves a valuable function to the community.

(not directed at any particular person or post. I have the utmost respect for all recovery/rescue divers and the personal risks they take and sacrifices they make for the sake of others)

Sent from behind the safety of my keyboard using Tapatalk 2

Ken,
Really??? I have a very difficult time following your logic or conclusions. Lets break this down piece by piece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Hill

Bobby,

It seems to me you stir the pot. As supported by legal, medical and other opinions we haven't released information that could wind us in legal jeopardy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it's wrong. If you personally would like to do what you suggest we should do, based on your interpretation of the laws ... go ahead!

---

You have had and still do have the option of taking this off line. I have provided you with my contact information through a PM. The only reason this is still on a public forum is because you have chosen to keep it here. If you were to take a bit of time to read through my posts over the years you would find that "stirring the pot" is something I do try and avoid. You would also find that I have been supportive of the IUCRR. You will also find that I do my best to take the side of logic and reason. I am in no way perfect and allow emotion to influence my opinion and words however I do my best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Hill

Bobby,
In the face of lawsuits things change try tackling DAN, they stopped publications in 2009 around the same time the IUCRR did.

https://www.diversalertnetwork.org/m...port/index.asp

---

You seem to have difficulty understanding that DAN, which is based in the medical field, is in a different situation than the IUCRR. Hence www.diversalertnetwork.org/MEDICAL/report....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Hill

Bobby,
Please note I have never said the IUCRR would file a FOIA. Why would we have to? The IUCRR has the report we gave to the Sheriff, our job is done! If you want a FOIA YOU file a FOIA. In the time you spend on these posts you could have addressed and mailed a dozen out.

---

You seem completely incapable of listening to or trying to understand others opinions or suggestions. I said that the IUCRR is in the best position to file the FOI for an incident that it is involved in because it already has details and the contacts to do so. I also said that having a resource such as the IUCRR website where to speculation and only the facts are posted is very important and helpful. Yes I or anyone else can do it and we could spend the time to build a database and website such as the IUCRR has to provide this service to the community. The organization is already in place to do that and you are suggesting that someone else take on the job of the organization you are the director of.

The simple reason to file the FOI and use it for anything posted on the IUCRR website is to steer clear of litigation. If it is freely available information and no speculation or opinions are included then what for gods sake does the IUCRR or any of the board members have to worry about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Hill

Bobby,
Lastly, the Devils incident, was an attempt at rescue. It was not an IUCRR callout. It is relevant as it points to errors before the victim got in the water and his expiration after getting out of the water. As I said many times when incidents illustrate timely and/or important issues of divers safety we reserve the right to publicize them, therefore posted!

---

As I said earlier your logic escapes me. The IUCRR stands for International Underwater Cave RESCUE and recovery. Jim and Rose are both IUCRR divers and were involved with the attempted rescue. However if you are correct that this was not involving the IUCRR then you are saying it is fine for the IUCRR to post speculation on incidents it was not involved in and does not have a first hand account of however it can't/won't file a FOI form to safe guard against possible litigation and post incidents that it does have first hand information of?

You also have neglected to address or answer some of the points I have brought up directly to you such as the regional contact information being out of date. Or how can you expect people to use the contact information when it is out of date much less why admonish people for not using the contact information, when they performed a flawless recovery on the biggest holiday of the year, when the information is out of date.

I suggest you look back through your own posts and read them from an outsiders view with an open mind. You will find that you contradict yourself, seem rigid, and incapable of understanding much less accepting that you could be mistaken or wrong. If you are capable of looking at this objectively it should become rather clear that my intent is to help the IUCRR and not stir the pot. I will say it yet again. You have had and do have the opportunity to take this off line. You are the one that has made the clear choice to have this articulated on a public forum.

Jeff,
I understand your post was not directed at me. However I would like to ensure that it is clear that I am not demanding anything. I am suggesting that the IUCRR is the best vehicle for keeping the reports in a place that does not allow speculation and presents the facts of the incidents. A good part of the relevance, IMO, of the IUCRR is "education" as stated on the website. Without current information the education value is negatively impacted and over time will become irrelevant.

Let's be objective here...

You know exactly what an IUCRR report looks like, so, what information from this incident is missing that you feel would change what you can learn from this accident?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobby

I said that the IUCRR is in the best position to file the FOI for an incident that it is involved in because it already has details and the contacts to do so.

---

Everyone has those details. You really just need the address of the agency you are requesting info from, the date of the incident, and perhaps the name of the victim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobby

The simple reason to file the FOI and use it for anything posted on the IUCRR website is to steer clear of litigation. If it is freely available information and no speculation or opinions are included then what for gods sake does the IUCRR or any of the board members have to worry about?

---

The opposite is true. Any fact or circumstance shared could interfere with ongoing criminal or death investigations. Any fact or circumstance listed could be used as the basis of a civil complaint. By publishing the information, the IUCRR could actually make lawsuits easier, or, could encourage a potential plaintiff to file a complaint they may not have filed in absence of a published report. Even if the IUCRR isn't named as a defendant in a civil case, they most certainly will be included in discovery requests (documents, deposition testimony, etc.), and probably required to testify at any trial that may take place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benderr

Everyone has those details. You really just need the address of the agency you are requesting info from, the date of the incident, and perhaps the name of the victim.



The opposite is true. Any fact or circumstance shared could interfere with ongoing criminal or death investigations. Any fact or circumstance listed could be used as the basis of a civil complaint. By publishing the information, the IUCRR could actually make lawsuits easier, or, could encourage a potential plaintiff to file a complaint they may not have filed in absence of a published report. Even if the IUCRR isn't named as a defendant in a civil case, they most certainly will be included in discovery requests (documents, deposition testimony, etc.), and probably required to testify at any trial that may take place.

---

Just out of curiosity, is there a documented case of someone getting sued for making public data that was obtained with a valid FOI request ? I really don't know that answer and wonder if anyone does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benderr

Everyone has those details. You really just need the address of the agency you are requesting info from, the date of the incident, and perhaps the name of the victim.



The opposite is true. Any fact or circumstance shared could interfere with ongoing criminal or death investigations. Any fact or circumstance listed could be used as the basis of a civil complaint. By publishing the information, the IUCRR could actually make lawsuits easier, or, could encourage a potential plaintiff to file a complaint they may not have filed in absence of a published report. Even if the IUCRR isn't named as a defendant in a civil case, they most certainly will be included in discovery requests (documents, deposition testimony, etc.), and probably required to testify at any trial that may take place.

---

I have had a couple of back and fourths with Ken over this. I think the issue is the IUCRR does not want to release their report they provide to LEO for Legal reasons.I understand this. What is at issue is Once the report and the Case are public record IE Closed, The medical examiner's report and the IUCRR report would be available for release under most public records circumstances, AL LA New Town, CT The parents tired to block the release but a judge sided with the News Media. If the report is obtained under all legal public records process and post to a blog as a new item I do not see how or why there would be any legal liability on any party. Now this comes down to the fact, to which I agree Ken Hill and the IUCRR have no reason or responsibility to provide a news Blog on Cave related accidents. I suggested this would be something the Agencies might wish to pursue for their instructors, Ken also suggested this might be an opportunity for someone with a passion for news to submit these as stories to UWS as a type of I learned about Cave Diving.... Article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benderr

The opposite is true. Any fact or circumstance shared could interfere with ongoing criminal or death investigations. Any fact or circumstance listed could be used as the basis of a civil complaint. By publishing the information, the IUCRR could actually make lawsuits easier, or, could encourage a potential plaintiff to file a complaint they may not have filed in absence of a published report. Even if the IUCRR isn't named as a defendant in a civil case, they most certainly will be included in discovery requests (documents, deposition testimony, etc.), and probably required to testify at any trial that may take place.

---

This is what amazes me about the IUCRR in the first place. I agree somewhat with what you are saying here, but I got to ask. If you are not working directly for the Law Enforcement agency requesting the search and recovery, then how are you immune at all to any liability? There are OSHA laws in place for this very reason, which make you immune to civil liability, but only when working for a fire or law enforcement agency. Are all of you in the IUCRR volunteers for law enforcement agencies and if I asked that agency, would they confirm this?

Further, Instead of the IUCRR authoring reports on their own, they should have the law enforcement agency do it, so it is work product and can be protected until the investigation is over. Then any FOIA request could only be done through the law enforcement agency and the IUCRR could stay out of the whole mess in the first place. I agree that IUCRR is opening themselves up to litigation, but only because there are better ways to go about protecting themselves.

Lastly, I do not believe Bobby is trying to stir the pot, I believe he is passionate about this issue and it trying to do the best he can. I have checked out the IUCRR website several times and the information is SO outdated. How can your list of coordinators for Florida be two guys that have no interest in doing recoveries or help coordinating those recoveries. I know them both, so I am confident in saying that.

As an outsider, there seems to be a lot of fingerpointing and bravado going on, instead of each other trying to help the other get better, or trying to make the organization stronger. As someone who operates a large PSD team, I wish we could all learn from one another and share our successes and failures, so we can make our teams better (i.e. keep our divers safer). We do not do recoveries for our egos, we do recoveries for the families of the victims. Frankly, if it wasn't for the families, I would not be in this game in the first place. I would still like to sit and talk with one of you guys (Bobby or Ken), because I have some questions regarding techniques/planning issues.

Matt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Hill

Thank you for the story, it illustrates it perfectly!

For the ghouls that may be listening here's a story that you can lock yourself in the bathroom with! It highlights bureaucracy. I pulled a dismembered body out of a river that was wearing only a "brown" sock. I made the remark that "he" was dead and was immediately chastised. I was told only the Medical Examiner could declare the body dead and the fact that it was wearing a "mans" sock could in no way determine gender. I was wrong and careful ever since!

---

What were you wrong about? Was it not a man or was he/she not dead?