At first I thought the yacht owner was the problem but he does have a point about not securing the boat after his arrest, a court needs to decide how much he is libel for.
From the sound of it he DID NOT run the boat ashore. He was arrested, requested to make arrangements, the police refused and left the boat to drift. Absolutely they are responsible.
First, I agree that the yacht should have been securely docked somewhere by the authorities or towed to a safe harbor, same as a car is impounded by the police, for a DWI or DUI arrest. Shameful that nobody is willing to take responsibility for unexecuted actions. The operator of the yacht stated he tried to call to have the yacht towed, but that is only hear say at this point in time.
It seems highly unlikely that the police would've taken him off the boat and just left it adrift. Somehow, I get the idea there's more to the story than we're getting here. If this is, in fact, the complete truth, then the police were grossly negligent. No responsible boater would leave a vessel abandoned and floating free. A simple radio call to the coast Guard would've taken care of it.
because there are loads of news stories from the time it happened, there are also photos of a salvage company hired by the owner removing his property for him and towing the boat further up the beach instead of trying to re-float it - the city was never responsible for the boat until it became obvious it had been abandoned and was a danger to people and the environment. I don't know how so many people in this comment section are defending a guy who had multiple BUI charges before this incident and had served time for stealing and then selling two ferraris within the past 10 years.
Multiple charges under the influence, stealing and selling Ferraris, While appalling I admit...none of that is relevant. However if what you say about the salvage co. is true, then yes he does have some liability. The City would certainly be liable if he was not allowed to make arrangements at the time, and the police had left it adrift with no efforts to secure or tow the vessel. But as you say, if he'd beached it already, then it may be arguable that it was already considered secure. Essentially the tipping point is whether the boat was grounded prior to his arrest, or not. If it was, as you say, then the police are free & clear. If not, then they are at fault. Whatever led them to arrest him, and the poor quality of his charachter, is not relevant to police responsibilities following the arrest.
Am I understanding this correctly? The police took the boat owner into custody and left the boat adrift? If that is true then yes the police/city is responsible, just like when the police arrest a driver on the road they make sure the driver's car is not left in a way that it will become a problem for others to deal with. If they don't tow or impound the car then they make sure it's parked in a secure location. No difference on the water, while a vessel of this size is not something the average person can operate, they (the police) needed to call a towing company like Sea Tow to tow the boat to a secure dock. Then be sure the owner is billed for whatever expenses were incurred for the towing and storage. Allowing the boat to drift free is not only a hazard to other boaters, it is a hazard to the environment. The boat could have damaged reefs and could have leaked hundreds of gallons of diesel fuel in the water. Very careless move by the officers that took the man into custody. One radio or phone call to Sea Tow would have been all that was needed. And believe me Sea Tow would have jumped at the chance to tow it. They would have made thousands of dollars on the towing and storage.
so Brandon, if the boat floated ashore AFTER he was arrested, how did he get arrested for beaching his boat drunk..........yeah its called a brain use it lol
towing a boat beached can destroy the bottom and put tonnes of debris into the ocean so again use your brain XD a drunk fuckwit looking for a payday for doing the wrong thins is all it is lol
Not when he grounded it first! he had to many long Island iced teas and ran a ground. Then the coppers got him. For any one who runs aground, it's the skippers responsibility to remove it,. Did you know the part owner was also there and not arrested. The towing company was contacted and said they could do it but Baker and the other owner refused. The court threw the case out. The right decision. Trying to get out of his responsibility.
Imagine getting arrested for a DUI and the police leave you car in neutral at the top of a hill and it kills somebody. I wonder if someone would be charged with criminal negligence.
"the town worked so hard to do the right thing, to remove the boat..." Ah, no, they didn't. They should have done it when the owner was arrested. That was the right thing. They didn't and now they have to pay for the mess they created.
Robinson Joe You know they let you make calls inside. Dude is going for city because insurance won't pay for this damage due to violation/crime he committed. Like driving drunk and getting in accident won't be covered with insurance.
if the police or coast guard arrest a boat captain then they need to make sure the vessel is properly secured as to not cause damage to the vessel or to surrounding property. the arresting officers should be responsible.
I guess this is the new America, where adults, the owner, has no responsibility, I have had several dui's each time I a arrange for my vehicle to be taken care of , why because it was my responsibility, the owner could have arranged for his boat to be towed
Ryan A with "SEVERAL DUI's " I am sure your LOGIC and DECISION MAKING SKILLS are pretty awesome but when people are TAKEN into custody leaving the car on the shoulder of the road is NOT an option
You're lack of intelligence about insurance is frightening, maybe I need to get in the insurance business... I'm sure there are plenty of idiots like you out there.
Usually government picks up the cost for smaller amounts from notebooks to small cars, often they have insurance for higher amounts and indemnity, they negotiate with insurance companies for these type of transactions, at least this is how it works in commonwealth countries.
The boat had already been beached when they arrested him. The damage had already been done. If a drunk driver crashes into a ravine, the city inst responsible for his damages. Since when is it the cities job of operating a ship salvage operation. Getting a boat like this off a beach is a tough job.
That owner is going to make the City of Palm Beach scream like a blond boy in a Turkish prison. Yes. The city is responsible for leaving the arrestee's vehicle in a safe condition.
No the boat floated adrift days later after the arrest. There is plenty of footage of the boat floating across the shore. He wasn't charged with damages or crashing. It was DUI. Drinking under the influence not crashing under the influence.
+Brandon Almas Drinking under the influence is dangerous because it pretty much always leads to crashing under the influence in uncomfortable places. Police had a positive impact on where the suspect was crashing that night.
I would like to see a maritime precedent on this. this will be an interesting case to follow. I can think of cases were owners were sued due to negligent navigation that caused wrecks. but it seems that it is a common occurrence to not be able to take personnel responsibility for ones own actions and blame somebody else.
Hes got a valid point. When you are caught drinking and driver, the police impounds your vehicle, why didnt they impound his boat? They should've impounded it and sold it cheap!
When Police arrest you they are totally responsible for you and your property, from that moment forward. That said, most police officers have little training and even less equipment for such cases, let alone any training in what to do with a beached boat. Bottom line, Police in coastal communities nationwide, have a common sense responsibility to be prepared for boating eventualities, just as the drunk boater is responsible for his own property and should be held equally liable.
Typical law enforcement malfeasance. Bunch of Barney's. Make a mess and leave it for the adults to clean up. Don't believe me? Check out the settlements paid out by municipalities (you) to settle lawsuits.
Actually... The cops were not at fault. The yacht was already ran aground when officers arrived at the scene, a tow company, already on site (called by the owner), was helping the yacht owner remove personal belongings from the boat because it was taking on water and was no longer seaworthy. So... I ask you this... What could the cops have done differently in this situation?
The yacht was no longer seaworthy... which means it was taking on water.. If they would have attempted to just tow it, it would have sunk for sure... they would have needed to place some sort of air tanks or something in order to keep it afloat... I am not actually sure of why the tow company didnt do all the extra stuff, it could have been logistically impossible. But basically the city filed a motion to have the case dismissed on those grounds, that the boat was already grounded, was no longer seaworthy, and the owner had a tow company on the scene... There has been no news since the motion was filed and that was a while ago.
I don't blame the guy for suing. what the cops do just leave the boat drift. they should have taken the time to secure the vessel before they remove the owner. just another case of arrogant cops
The city is nor responsible for the police not being responsible, when the irresponsible owner hires an irresponsible drunken guy as pilot. Whose fault is it? The DRUNK'S.
The police should have seized and impounded the boat. Then they could charge any ridiculous fee they wanted for retrieval costs, towing, and impoundment services and the police would have had the boat for collateral. Now the boat is worthless and everyone loses, the owner, the police, and the taxpayer.
I agree,they should have impounded the boat,at least it couldve been sold at auction. The city should be sued and pay for the destruction of private property,reguardless.
he's got a point that's like arresting a drunk driver and leaving his car in drive on the road the cops and by extension the town would be responsible for any damage caused because they left the vehicle out of control
Owner drinking and drunk runs boat ashore, his f-ing problem. I'm sure he probably didn't even spend the night in jail. With his money he was probably out on bail before he even got to station. He even gets his phone calls and could've had attorney get it taken care of. I'm with the city on this one. Poor rich man wants someone else to pay for his screw up. Boohoo
Wait, so this guy brakes the law and gets arrested while operating his very pricy yacht illegally but doesn't have the means to arrange it's tow. This his responsibly to see his property is 1) legally operated at all times and 2) ensure his property does not become a public hazard or nuisance. This man's recless actions have robbed the community of it's coffers and enjoyment of public land.
Only in America can a drunk guy pilot his boat onto the beach, and it becomes the cops problem to clean it up. This is where insurance is supposed to hire a tow boat to recover the stranded vessel. How about the boat captain shows some personal responsibility for his screw up?
I would be suing too. I totally understand not drinking and operating a vessel but how do the police just leave the yacht?? They should pay for all damages.
you cant tell me, they didnt give him ANY chance to make a phone call in the month or so this boat was left there. if anything the city should counter sue for the removal
It's amazing that the majority of the people commenting here are blaming the police and not the stupid drunk boat owner. Could it have been handled differently? Maybe however had the boat owner not driven it aground in a drunken stupor none of this would have taken place.
The tow boat service should have been called at the time of the arrest. The police department should have had the vessel removed immediately and held the owner liable for the tow or salvage. The police did not secure the yacht and are now liable. I'm sure the residents are mad as hell.
Suppose I are drunk driving and hit a tree at the top of the slope and incidentally the brakes become faulty even if we were not aware of it. And I ask to make arrangements for it to be taken care of but was refused. Then in the night, the car got loose and down the hill it went smashing into a house and killed someone. Who do you guys think is responsible? Me? Because I was drunk driving the day before? That said, I am not a drinker.
I had friend go through a similar problem he got arrested they left the keys to his car on his seat and left the car car got stolen and stripped guess what he had gun charges they dropped the gun charges for he wouldn't sue them. Why because it was their responsibility
The owner of a yacht cannot afford to hire a company to upright his vessel? Does he have no attorney? Millionaires tend to be yacht owners. Counter Sue the owner.
The city would be found at fault for this. Since he was arrested they would've been in charge of impounding or towing the vehicle to a secure location until he would be able to get it released. If you were arrested for DUI along the highway and the car was left there where lets say vandals ruin the car and steal the wheels. The city would be liable for not having secured the vehicle. So unfortunately this looks like it's the city's fault as annoying as it is.
Did he drive the boat ashore while drunk, or did police arrest him while the boat was afloat and let it drift to the beach? Even if they anchored it off the beach, any idiot would know it will be on the beach soon.
If I'm on the jury for the civil trial... BUI guy gets a bill for the removal of his scrapped yacht. DUI/BUI they need to crush the vehicle. Its hard to repeat offend if your vehicle is reduced to tiny fragments.
One lady saying that the town worked so hard to get everything done, what's the reason that they getting sued is because they didn't do what they had to do to get things done properly. They was supposed to tow that boat out of there the day the guy was arrested the same how they tow your car when they get a DUI on the street. They're going to wind up paying on that for not following proper procedure
No, marine salvage laws are different. Coppers gave him and co owner opportunity to organise tow. Co owner was there too. The owners refused the tow company. That is from court docs. Co owner was not arrested and had opportunity to take on the salvage, which he did not.
I hope he gets his money. The judicial system caused the problem by refusing to allow the owner enough access. When you take charge of someone's property it is no concern of the community responsible how the aggrieved party feels about things.
I know this is a 2yr old story, but it would be interesting to hear the outcome of this incident. PD did not leave the boat adrift or anchored since the anchor was still in place. There must be more to this story.
Yep he lost case. Co owner was on boat too. They contacted towing company, boat was aground. Towing company gave time frame. Owners said no. From court docs police assisted in letting them organise it.
As soon as I saw the Lady named Jody Foster start talking about the Tow Company etc, I started to see how Thomas Baker was a Shoe in for Hannibal Lecture 😅
1. shouldn't drink and boat 2. shouldn't leave yachts abandoned at sea when you arrest its captain. Remember, at this point he is presumed innocent. 3. Simply placing a few calls for the guy would have avoided all this. But someone got high and mighty. 4. Society relies on cooperation, not just legality.
But for the fact that the owner had been drinking, none of this would have happened. In other words, the owner doesn't have "clean hands" in this case, so he should not have the right to sue. He needs to cut his losses, no matter the value. When drinking, you deserve whatever happens to you.
He beaches a 40+ft yacht. How do you expect the police to move it, with a rope? This is a bit different than a dui with a car. No one would probably touch it u less they were getting paid! Which is why the city had to do it. The guy is th one that should pay the city the expenses incurred for moving it.
dodgeguyz, there are tow boats, just like they are tow trucks. However, this wealthy guy would probably sue the city by claiming that nobody asked him if he wanted his boat towed. Legally, the city has to pay.
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
How do u arrest someone and leave there property behind,it's not gonna play out good for those officer's.
At first I thought the yacht owner was the problem but he does have a point about not securing the boat after his arrest, a court needs to decide how much he is libel for.
From the sound of it he DID NOT run the boat ashore. He was arrested, requested to make arrangements, the police refused and left the boat to drift. Absolutely they are responsible.
The lawyer is absolutely right dang it
yup
First, I agree that the yacht should have been securely docked somewhere by the authorities or towed to a safe harbor, same as a car is impounded by the police, for a DWI or DUI arrest. Shameful that nobody is willing to take responsibility for unexecuted actions. The operator of the yacht stated he tried to call to have the yacht towed, but that is only hear say at this point in time.
MY GOD,,,,,,, can you imagine the pain of having to see a boat by the water.... just so out of place.
My 2 cents worth, if the guy wasn't drunk in charge of the boat none of this would have happen.
It seems highly unlikely that the police would've taken him off the boat and just left it adrift. Somehow, I get the idea there's more to the story than we're getting here. If this is, in fact, the complete truth, then the police were grossly negligent. No responsible boater would leave a vessel abandoned and floating free. A simple radio call to the coast Guard would've taken care of it.
NJ Eddie no they left it adrift that's why this is a story and the tax payers are going to foot the bill
No, he was arrested after he had already run the yacht aground, there was no drifting
Cssfiend - How do you know? And if so that doesn't change anything.
because there are loads of news stories from the time it happened, there are also photos of a salvage company hired by the owner removing his property for him and towing the boat further up the beach instead of trying to re-float it - the city was never responsible for the boat until it became obvious it had been abandoned and was a danger to people and the environment. I don't know how so many people in this comment section are defending a guy who had multiple BUI charges before this incident and had served time for stealing and then selling two ferraris within the past 10 years.
Multiple charges under the influence, stealing and selling Ferraris, While appalling I admit...none of that is relevant. However if what you say about the salvage co. is true, then yes he does have some liability. The City would certainly be liable if he was not allowed to make arrangements at the time, and the police had left it adrift with no efforts to secure or tow the vessel. But as you say, if he'd beached it already, then it may be arguable that it was already considered secure. Essentially the tipping point is whether the boat was grounded prior to his arrest, or not. If it was, as you say, then the police are free & clear. If not, then they are at fault. Whatever led them to arrest him, and the poor quality of his charachter, is not relevant to police responsibilities following the arrest.
Am I understanding this correctly? The police took the boat owner into custody and left the boat adrift? If that is true then yes the police/city is responsible, just like when the police arrest a driver on the road they make sure the driver's car is not left in a way that it will become a problem for others to deal with. If they don't tow or impound the car then they make sure it's parked in a secure location. No difference on the water, while a vessel of this size is not something the average person can operate, they (the police) needed to call a towing company like Sea Tow to tow the boat to a secure dock. Then be sure the owner is billed for whatever expenses were incurred for the towing and storage. Allowing the boat to drift free is not only a hazard to other boaters, it is a hazard to the environment. The boat could have damaged reefs and could have leaked hundreds of gallons of diesel fuel in the water.
Very careless move by the officers that took the man into custody. One radio or phone call to Sea Tow would have been all that was needed. And believe me Sea Tow would have jumped at the chance to tow it. They would have made thousands of dollars on the towing and storage.
no, the boat had run aground before the police showed up and arrested the owner, it was already in a state where towing it had become unfeasible
how could they have left it adrift when it ran aground. people dont use their brains anymore XD
No the boat floated ashore days later after the arrest. Why do you think there is clear footage of the boat floating across the shore. *palmsmack*
so Brandon, if the boat floated ashore AFTER he was arrested, how did he get arrested for beaching his boat drunk..........yeah its called a brain use it lol
towing a boat beached can destroy the bottom and put tonnes of debris into the ocean so again use your brain XD a drunk fuckwit looking for a payday for doing the wrong thins is all it is lol
The police should be paying for this out of the funding from their own department for letting this happened.
Not when he grounded it first! he had to many long Island iced teas and ran a ground. Then the coppers got him. For any one who runs aground, it's the skippers responsibility to remove it,. Did you know the part owner was also there and not arrested. The towing company was contacted and said they could do it but Baker and the other owner refused. The court threw the case out. The right decision.
Trying to get out of his responsibility.
Shameless ... so American
Only the ones in red baseball caps.
Imagine getting arrested for a DUI and the police leave you car in neutral at the top of a hill and it kills somebody. I wonder if someone would be charged with criminal negligence.
Yes, they would be charged.
"the town worked so hard to do the right thing, to remove the boat..." Ah, no, they didn't. They should have done it when the owner was arrested. That was the right thing. They didn't and now they have to pay for the mess they created.
your name should be idiot guy
Edgy Guy
z
You mean the Taxpayers will pay for it.
Hell at the very least dropped the anchor
Robinson Joe You know they let you make calls inside. Dude is going for city because insurance won't pay for this damage due to violation/crime he committed. Like driving drunk and getting in accident won't be covered with insurance.
if the police or coast guard arrest a boat captain then they need to make sure the vessel is properly secured as to not cause damage to the vessel or to surrounding property. the arresting officers should be responsible.
Yes they are libel for all damages and loss including any and all alcohol on board that vessel.
I guess this is the new America, where adults, the owner, has no responsibility, I have had several dui's each time I a arrange for my vehicle to be taken care of , why because it was my responsibility, the owner could have arranged for his boat to be towed
and the buzz that got killed while being arrested.
Ryan A with "SEVERAL DUI's " I am sure your LOGIC and DECISION MAKING SKILLS are pretty awesome but when people are TAKEN into custody leaving the car on the shoulder of the road is NOT an option
murph murph lol yes how dare they waste alcohol, role out the guillotine I say lol.
liable not libel
when the boat ran aground, it was upright and not capsized.
Boo hoo, the ppl had to deal with an eye sore. Yawn.
Shinigami Lee That's Florida for sure a bunch of old lady's bitchin about everything and a few bad apples not taking care of there stuff.
Eclipse Zombies their stuff, not there stuff.
Why is it his fault?
Plenty of blame to go around, but the decision to boat while impaired triggered this whole mess.
Wait til after a hurricane. Thousands of big boats will be stacked up. Nice photo oppertunity.
Police will have to pay for this one big time LOL
Insurance
Insurance has nothing to do with this.
You're lack of intelligence about insurance is frightening, maybe I need to get in the insurance business... I'm sure there are plenty of idiots like you out there.
"Insurance has nothing to do with this."
Kilocharlie33 may be referring to the city/municipal insurance. Either way - the tax payers.
Usually government picks up the cost for smaller amounts from notebooks to small cars, often they have insurance for higher amounts and indemnity, they negotiate with insurance companies for these type of transactions, at least this is how it works in commonwealth countries.
The boat had already been beached when they arrested him. The damage had already been done. If a drunk driver crashes into a ravine, the city inst responsible for his damages. Since when is it the cities job of operating a ship salvage operation. Getting a boat like this off a beach is a tough job.
Whatever happened to personal responsibility ?
That owner is going to make the City of Palm Beach scream like a blond boy in a Turkish prison. Yes. The city is responsible for leaving the arrestee's vehicle in a safe condition.
Nope. Once he wreck the boat it became salvage under maritime law which is diffrent
VietVet 1970 it wasn't in safe condition he crashed it in a beach
Grounded and Crashed are two separate words.
No the boat floated adrift days later after the arrest. There is plenty of footage of the boat floating across the shore. He wasn't charged with damages or crashing. It was DUI. Drinking under the influence not crashing under the influence.
+Brandon Almas Drinking under the influence is dangerous because it pretty much always leads to crashing under the influence in uncomfortable places. Police had a positive impact on where the suspect was crashing that night.
That is a nasty beach. The Florida panhandle is 100x nicer.
I would like to see a maritime precedent on this. this will be an interesting case to follow. I can think of cases were owners were sued due to negligent navigation that caused wrecks. but it seems that it is a common occurrence to not be able to take personnel responsibility for ones own actions and blame somebody else.
If dimwit grounded the boat then marine salvage law applies. It’s NOT like a car left on the roadside.
Thankyou,I never heard of marine salvage law.
It doesn't matter what you drive, DON'T DRIVE DRUNK. This situation was completely avoidable.
Hes got a valid point. When you are caught drinking and driver, the police impounds your vehicle, why didnt they impound his boat? They should've impounded it and sold it cheap!
When Police arrest you they are totally responsible for you and your property, from that moment forward. That said, most police officers have little training and even less equipment for such cases, let alone any training in what to do with a beached boat. Bottom line, Police in coastal communities nationwide, have a common sense responsibility to be prepared for boating eventualities, just as the drunk boater is responsible for his own property and should be held equally liable.
Not the taxpayers bill for sure! Insurance or drunks personal problem! Not the taxpayers!
It wouldn't surprise me if his insurance company told him to shove off.
Typical law enforcement malfeasance. Bunch of Barney's. Make a mess and leave it for the adults to clean up. Don't believe me? Check out the settlements paid out by municipalities (you) to settle lawsuits.
Cops totally in the wrong here...
Dominic Truelove. BS. Drunk owner totally responsible. He should have left it tied up in dock. No sympathy for irresponsible drunk.
Kent Bullard did you even watch the video. They wouldn't let him make arrangements to move the yacht before it happened. Cops totally at fault.
Actually... The cops were not at fault. The yacht was already ran aground when officers arrived at the scene, a tow company, already on site (called by the owner), was helping the yacht owner remove personal belongings from the boat because it was taking on water and was no longer seaworthy.
So... I ask you this... What could the cops have done differently in this situation?
I dont understand,, if the tow was there why was the boat not towed ??
The yacht was no longer seaworthy... which means it was taking on water.. If they would have attempted to just tow it, it would have sunk for sure... they would have needed to place some sort of air tanks or something in order to keep it afloat... I am not actually sure of why the tow company didnt do all the extra stuff, it could have been logistically impossible. But basically the city filed a motion to have the case dismissed on those grounds, that the boat was already grounded, was no longer seaworthy, and the owner had a tow company on the scene... There has been no news since the motion was filed and that was a while ago.
People blaming cops, ridiculous. Let me ask you a simple question, how did the boat get there in the first place?
If he tested positive for intoxicants it's his responsibility not the City's.
Anyone know the outcome of this story?
a perfect example of why lawyers are soooooo hated!!
I don't blame the guy for suing. what the cops do just leave the boat drift. they should have taken the time to secure the vessel before they remove the owner. just another case of arrogant cops
The city is nor responsible for the police not being responsible, when the irresponsible owner hires an irresponsible drunken guy as pilot.
Whose fault is it? The DRUNK'S.
The OWNER was drunk.
The police should have seized and impounded the boat. Then they could charge any ridiculous fee they wanted for retrieval costs, towing, and impoundment services and the police would have had the boat for collateral. Now the boat is worthless and everyone loses, the owner, the police, and the taxpayer.
Also, a registered yacht is technically classified as a home or dwelling right?
I agree,they should have impounded the boat,at least it couldve been sold at auction. The city should be sued and pay for the destruction of private property,reguardless.
That lady acting like her community is just ruined because of a boat on a public beach
he's got a point that's like arresting a drunk driver and leaving his car in drive on the road the cops and by extension the town would be responsible for any damage caused because they left the vehicle out of control
Article is not clear, did they arrest the guy then the boat ran aground, or he ran aground first?
wow - you get a BUI and a solid case to win cash - a win-win for the boat owner
Owner drinking and drunk runs boat ashore, his f-ing problem. I'm sure he probably didn't even spend the night in jail. With his money he was probably out on bail before he even got to station. He even gets his phone calls and could've had attorney get it taken care of. I'm with the city on this one. Poor rich man wants someone else to pay for his screw up. Boohoo
I'm not sure he screwed up or screwed down. He could have known about this law, planned it all, and used his drunkeness as an excuse.
I hope a judge tosses the case out of court. The owner collected from the insurance company, I'm sure.
Wait, so this guy brakes the law and gets arrested while operating his very pricy yacht illegally but doesn't have the means to arrange it's tow. This his responsibly to see his property is 1) legally operated at all times and 2) ensure his property does not become a public hazard or nuisance. This man's recless actions have robbed the community of it's coffers and enjoyment of public land.
not only should the. it. of pay up but he should be charged for the clean up of the boat and the damage to the beach.
Nobody is going to mention the name of his lawyer?
Well if they didn't let him arrange to have it removed then they should pay for it, period.
A nursing home got in the way of my car when I was "not drunk" driving. The nursing home needs to pay for the damages!!!
The cops are in the wrong and they should have to pay.
Only in America can a drunk guy pilot his boat onto the beach, and it becomes the cops problem to clean it up. This is where insurance is supposed to hire a tow boat to recover the stranded vessel. How about the boat captain shows some personal responsibility for his screw up?
He wait for that to happen. They should have left it. To remind people not to drink and boat.
Kasey Seay yeah but it's obvious to move it to a safe place instead of leaving it in the water
Stephen Jin it was a joke dude.
I would be suing too. I totally understand not drinking and operating a vessel but how do the police just leave the yacht?? They should pay for all damages.
This is the consequences of drinking and driving how long did it take him to get out of jail
Ah yeah. the city should have taken responsibility once they took him in and simply bill him for the cost before the boat was severely damaged.
FHP does not leave cars in neutral on the side of the highway, FWC or whatever law enforcement was in charge at the time is at fault for neglect
you cant tell me, they didnt give him ANY chance to make a phone call in the month or so this boat was left there. if anything the city should counter sue for the removal
Hope he gets enough money to upgrade to a bigger boat
Makes sense, the police are responsible for impounding the vehicle when someone is arrested for being drunk. Be it a boat, car or skateboard.
Did he have insurance or would insurance be negated by his DWI?
I think the whole thing was set up to dispose of a yacht the owner couldn't afford and couldn't sell. Now, he wants to sue for an inflated value.
It's amazing that the majority of the people commenting here are blaming the police and not the stupid drunk boat owner. Could it have been handled differently? Maybe however had the boat owner not driven it aground in a drunken stupor none of this would have taken place.
Doesn't matter. Law is law. There is no self-gratification or Mad Max justice when it comes to how the law is written.
Ray Johnson it's the world we live in now I guess were people have no responsibility for there actions
Ryan A - Wrong. Law and order has been this way since 1776.
Ray Johnson if you're arrested fpr drunk driving they can't just leave your car sitting in the street. That boat should have been secured.
+pfifo fast Uh except you’re wrong
His personal problem. It's called consequences.
Yup, if they arrest him, they city IS RESPONSIBLE. No different than if they arrest you for DWI in your car.
If you REALLY want to fix the problem, hold the arresting officers responsible. Not the city.
ABSOLUTELY! It was the cops that screwed up and didn't follow the law. They should pay and loose their jobs. We have way too many irresponsible cops.
Who owns a vessel this valuable and not have Sea Tow policy? Arrest the man, allow him to use the towing company to dispatch the yacht. Everone is Ok.
You can't argue with someone who's right and the attorney is right. (unfortunately).
The tow boat service should have been called at the time of the arrest. The police department should have had the vessel removed immediately and held the owner liable for the tow or salvage. The police did not secure the yacht and are now liable. I'm sure the residents are mad as hell.
Suppose I are drunk driving and hit a tree at the top of the slope and incidentally the brakes become faulty even if we were not aware of it. And I ask to make arrangements for it to be taken care of but was refused. Then in the night, the car got loose and down the hill it went smashing into a house and killed someone. Who do you guys think is responsible? Me? Because I was drunk driving the day before? That said, I am not a drinker.
I had friend go through a similar problem he got arrested they left the keys to his car on his seat and left the car car got stolen and stripped guess what he had gun charges they dropped the gun charges for he wouldn't sue them. Why because it was their responsibility
hope all the taxpayers of palm city have to pay for this
The owner of a yacht cannot afford to hire a company to upright his vessel? Does he have no attorney? Millionaires tend to be yacht owners. Counter Sue the owner.
He was arrested and not afforded the opportunity you moron!
The city would be found at fault for this. Since he was arrested they would've been in charge of impounding or towing the vehicle to a secure location until he would be able to get it released. If you were arrested for DUI along the highway and the car was left there where lets say vandals ruin the car and steal the wheels. The city would be liable for not having secured the vehicle. So unfortunately this looks like it's the city's fault as annoying as it is.
Why is this even news?
Did he drive the boat ashore while drunk, or did police arrest him while the boat was afloat and let it drift to the beach? Even if they anchored it off the beach, any idiot would know it will be on the beach soon.
Wouldn't the coast guard more suitable in moving a yatch?
If I'm on the jury for the civil trial... BUI guy gets a bill for the removal of his scrapped yacht.
DUI/BUI they need to crush the vehicle. Its hard to repeat offend if your vehicle is reduced to tiny fragments.
Hes right , if they arrested him without giving him an opportunity to move his boat then they are 100% responsible
It says he ran it aground in the VIDEO, i swear it's like you guys only hear the two sentences you want to hear, then black out the rest.
One lady saying that the town worked so hard to get everything done, what's the reason that they getting sued is because they didn't do what they had to do to get things done properly. They was supposed to tow that boat out of there the day the guy was arrested the same how they tow your car when they get a DUI on the street. They're going to wind up paying on that for not following proper procedure
No, marine salvage laws are different. Coppers gave him and co owner opportunity to organise tow. Co owner was there too. The owners refused the tow company. That is from court docs. Co owner was not arrested and had opportunity to take on the salvage, which he did not.
If you get arrested while driving a car when you're drunk, the cops make sure the car is towed. Why is a boat any different?
I hope he gets his money. The judicial system caused the problem by refusing to allow the owner enough access. When you take charge of someone's property it is no concern of the community responsible how the aggrieved party feels about things.
In this instance......my personal opinion is that the authorities had a duty of care.
I would file for the plaintiff on this one.
I imagine theres a whole lot of finger pointing going on in that city's police department.
I hope he gets every penny he asks for
I know this is a 2yr old story, but it would be interesting to hear the outcome of this incident. PD did not leave the boat adrift or anchored since the anchor was still in place. There must be more to this story.
Yep he lost case. Co owner was on boat too. They contacted towing company, boat was aground. Towing company gave time frame. Owners said no. From court docs police assisted in letting them organise it.
As soon as I saw the Lady named Jody Foster start talking about the Tow Company etc, I started to see how Thomas Baker was a Shoe in for Hannibal Lecture 😅
So can I just get drunk and have my town take over MY responsibilities. Sounds about right in todays world.
1. shouldn't drink and boat
2. shouldn't leave yachts abandoned at sea when you arrest its captain. Remember, at this point he is presumed innocent.
3. Simply placing a few calls for the guy would have avoided all this. But someone got high and mighty.
4. Society relies on cooperation, not just legality.
simple,charge him for littering for same amount ,and community service
I understand that Palm Beach is suing the owner for the cost of removing the wrick .
So what happened in the end?
He lost
But for the fact that the owner had been drinking, none of this would have happened. In other words, the owner doesn't have "clean hands" in this case, so he should not have the right to sue. He needs to cut his losses, no matter the value. When drinking, you deserve whatever happens to you.
That picture of the owner looks suspiciously like a "mug shot" doesn't it?
Oh, please! He gets drunk and caused this situation. He should be sued by the town for eyesore & debris following his stupidity.
He beaches a 40+ft yacht. How do you expect the police to move it, with a rope? This is a bit different than a dui with a car. No one would probably touch it u less they were getting paid! Which is why the city had to do it. The guy is th one that should pay the city the expenses incurred for moving it.
dodgeguyz, there are tow boats, just like they are tow trucks. However, this wealthy guy would probably sue the city by claiming that nobody asked him if he wanted his boat towed. Legally, the city has to pay.
who said crime don't pay - get paid to DUI
Yep , continued police arrogance cause this !! And should pay
stumpy haskew I don't think it had anything to do with arrogance, everything to do with incompetence.
dude...they dont care...the taxpayer will fit the bill, why dont ppl get that..they will just raise a tax to compensate