PDA

View Full Version : (05/21/10) "Deepwater Horizon survivors allege they were kept in seclusion after rig explosion, coerced into signing legal waivers" (by Brett Michael Dykes, Yahoo! News)


Spang
05-24-2010, 02:41 PM
According to two surviving crew members of the Deepwater Horizon, oil workers from the rig were held in seclusion on the open water for up to two days after the April 20 explosion, while attorneys attempted to convince them to sign legal documents stating that they were unharmed by the incident. The men claim that they were forbidden from having any contact with concerned loved ones during that time, and were told they would not be able to go home until they signed the documents they were presented with.

Stephen Davis, a seven-year veteran of drilling-rig work from San Antonio, told The Guardian's Suzanne Goldenberg today that he was held on a boat for 36 to 40 hours after diving into the Gulf from the burning rig and swimming to safety. Once on a crew boat, Davis said, he and the others were denied access to satellite phones or radio to get in touch with their families, many of whom were frantic to find out whether or not they were OK.

Davis' attorney told Goldenberg that while on the boat, his client and the others were told to sign the statements presented to them by attorneys for Transocean — the firm that owned the Deepwater Horizon — or they wouldn't be allowed to go home. After being awake for 50 harrowing hours, Davis caved and signed the papers. He said most of the others did as well.

Davis' story seems to be backed up by a similar account given to NPR by another Deepwater Horizon crewmember earlier in the month. Christopher Choy, a roustabout on the rig, said that the lawyers gathered the survivors in the galley of a boat and said, "'You need to sign these. Nobody's getting off here until we get one from everybody.' ... At the bottom, it said something about, like, you know, this can be used as evidence in court and all that. I told them, 'I'm not signing it.' "

Choy said that once he was finally allowed to get off the boat, he was shuttled to a hotel, where he met up with his wife. At the hotel, representatives from Transocean confronted him again and badgered him to sign the statement. Exhausted, traumatized and desperate to go home, Choy said that he finally relented and signed.

Choy's lawyer, Steve Gordon, is incensed over what transpired in the hours after the explosion. He, along with other attorneys for Deepwater Horizon workers, is trying to get the documents voided by the courts.

"It's absurd. It's unacceptable, and it's irresponsible," Gordon told NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126667241).

The Source (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100521/sc_ynews/ynews_sc2191)

Suzan
05-24-2010, 02:59 PM
Choy's lawyer, Steve Gordon, is incensed over what transpired in the hours after the explosion. He, along with other attorneys for Deepwater Horizon workers, is trying to get the documents voided by the courts.

I hope once they get the documents voided, they sue the living crap out those people. That sounds like unlawful restraint, maybe kidnapping. Certainly coercion. Unbelievable.

sojourner
05-24-2010, 03:04 PM
I hope once they get the documents voided, they sue the living crap out those people. That sounds like unlawful restraint, maybe kidnapping. Certainly coercion. Unbelievable.
And yet you seem to believe it.

Suzan
05-24-2010, 03:08 PM
And yet you seem to believe it.
And your point?

sojourner
05-24-2010, 03:13 PM
And your point?

Most people that find things unbelievable don't believe them. I just found it interested that you do.

Suzan
05-24-2010, 03:19 PM
Most people that find things unbelievable don't believe them. I just found it interested that you do.
Has anyone ever suggested that you're too literal?

sojourner
05-24-2010, 03:33 PM
Has anyone ever suggested that you're too literal?


When something seems too good to be true it usually is.
corollary:When something seems too unbelievable to be true it usually isn't.

first reports are usually wrong

I am just suggesting that you not believe everything you read, especially if it is the first report. Your post suggested to me the the events that were reported were unbelievable and yet you seemed to believe them. How should I have taken you post? That they really were believable because an evil oil company was involved?

Suzan
05-24-2010, 03:48 PM
Ah, now I understand. Your real motive was to suggest that I'm biased against BP because I think they're evil, not to question a word choice that is in common usage. Wouldn't it have been easier for both of us if you'd just done that. :rolleyes:

sojourner
05-24-2010, 04:03 PM
Ah, now I understand. Your real motive was to suggest that I'm biased against BP because I think they're evil, not to question a word choice that is in common usage. Wouldn't it have been easier for both of us if you'd just done that. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by sojourner
Most people that find things unbelievable don't believe them. I just found it interested that you do. I have no idea why you chose to believe the report. I was just speculating on why. I could be wrong it is bound to happen sooner or later.

I find it hard to believe because, aside from asking them to sign a statement that they were not injured, the reported actions taken would not be in the best interests of BP.

foxyladi
05-24-2010, 05:45 PM
held for two days.:confused:

Suzan
05-24-2010, 11:46 PM
I have no idea why you chose to believe the report. I was just speculating on why. I could be wrong it is bound to happen sooner or later.

I find it hard to believe because, aside from asking them to sign a statement that they were not injured, the reported actions taken would not be in the best interests of BP.
You think it's not in the best interests of BP to protect themselves against lawsuits? Why then does any business have customers sign waivers? And there's always some form of coercion involved, imo. When doctors do it they're saying sign away your right to sue me or I won't treat you from whatever it is you appear to be dying of in my office. BP just took it a little further, probably because of mushrooming panic about all the lawsuits that will come out of what is now being called the biggest environment disaster in U.S history.

Do I believe that it happened? Why not? Stranger things have.

sojourner
05-25-2010, 12:30 AM
You think it's not in the best interests of BP to protect themselves against lawsuits? Why then does any business have customers sign waivers? And there's always some form of coercion involved, imo. When doctors do it they're saying sign away your right to sue me or I won't treat you from whatever it is you appear to be dying of in my office. BP just took it a little further, probably because of mushrooming panic about all the lawsuits that will come out of what is now being called the biggest environment disaster in U.S history.

I guess we will have to disagree. I think that most of the actions that were reported would invite lawsuits not protect against them. That is why I question the report. IMO,the reported actions are unbelievable and against the companies interests.

sojourner
05-25-2010, 12:35 AM
When doctors do it they're saying sign away your right to sue me or I won't treat you from whatever it is you appear to be dying of in my office. If you have a doctor that does that, run. I have never had that happen and I have had some major surgeries. All I have had to sign was a statement that I understood the procedure and knew the risks involved.

Suzan
05-25-2010, 02:41 PM
If you have a doctor that does that, run. I have never had that happen and I have had some major surgeries. All I have had to sign was a statement that I understood the procedure and knew the risks involved.
I thought you lived in California. Here in socal they all have waivers here that don't allow you to sue. Most of them require you to go into mediation if something goes wrong.

Edit: Okay, not all. I haven't been to all the doctors in socal, but I've personally experienced this several times.

sojourner
05-25-2010, 02:51 PM
I thought you lived in California. Here in socal they all have waivers here that don't allow you to sue. Most of them require you to go into mediation if something goes wrong.

Edit: Okay, not all. I haven't been to all the doctors in socal, but I've personally experienced this several times.

Sounds like you belong to an HMO? I can see mediation on disputes over coverage but not over malpractice.

foxyladi
05-25-2010, 07:31 PM
checking my policies.so much fine print.(where did i put that magnifying glass)?

Suzan
05-26-2010, 02:40 AM
Sounds like you belong to an HMO? I can see mediation on disputes over coverage but not over malpractice.
No, this was before we switched to an HMO. I've never signed one at the HMO. It was the PPO doctors and at least one outside the system. I'm really surprised you've never been asked to sign one of those forms.