Businessman charged with manslaughter for 2021 boating accident
Local businessman Andrew Morrell was arrested and charged yesterday for manslaughter regarding the last October’s boating accident that resulted in the death of Frandie Martin Jr.
A press release by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution indicates that after a police investigation into the October 16, 2021, accident, it was determined that there is sufficient evidence, and it was in the public’s interest to charge Morrell with manslaughter.
The charge, according to the press release, was laid “contrary to the Criminal Code 1997 (as amended), Causing Serious Injury to a Person while on Board a Vessel, contrary to the Merchant Shipping Act, 2001 (as amended); and for Failing to Render Assistance after a Collision, contrary to the Merchant Shipping Act, 2001 (as amended)”.
The release further added that the accused was granted bail under strict conditions and is scheduled to be brought before the Magistrate’s Court on May 31. 2022.
“We are aware of the public interest in this matter, and remind the public that such investigations take time, and must be executed properly to ensure that there is due process for the victims as well as the accused,” the press release said.
Martin Jr, a popular musician and volleyball player in the territory was killed and three others were injured in the boating accident near Tortola’s south coast between Prospect Reef and Slaney.
Copyright 2024 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.
He is going to hire a QC to represent him . and the DPP will start trembling like a leaf . NOW ,SHE IS PREPARING HER APPEAL BUT NOT THE CASE.
What would be in the public interest would be for the DPP to resign or be fired asap!
There is a certain chap from CGB still walking around thanks to the protectionist DPP.
“1. If another vessel is approaching you from the port — or left — side of your boat, you have the right of way and should maintain your speed and direction.” Did Andy have the right of way? Why want the captain of the other boat charged? Did they even get his blood sample?
Alright, set your watch and monitor how the proceedings of this going to go.
If you need a little help, go review the Zimmerman vs Martin (treyvon) case where they charged him erroneously on counts they know wouldn’t stand up in court and at trial scrutiny.
Not only was this man …
This one going to be interesting to watch, but hard to stomach. I hope I’m proven wrong.
What happen to the man that was ran over and killed by Monkey Point Guana Island?
He wasn’t popular and was added to a long list. Sorry to say, but its always who know you…..this statement alone says a lot ” it was in the public’s interest to charge Morrell with manslaughter”
The press going to hype up the case in print; and when it go to trial BAM. the truth will come out. no evidence, work the DPP and the police did not do – no case submission. dismissed.
it’s about time
I totaly agree with you UKM have not heard nothing about this accident you from the british virgin island u do something wrong or bad you just get a slap on the back and all is okay
That is far from the truth. Its the other way around. Those not from the BVI get a slap on the back and walk away!
Three just walk free from a murder trial. This one was an accident.
Tell me which ones were from the BVI again?
On another note,samples should have been collected from both captains, if possible.
Ahh this guy — Did the Morrel family reach out to the Frandys family? If not, Why not? He didnt went out with the boat with that sinister intention ,however by allegedly operating a motor vessel inconsistent with maritime laws and guidelines alone would be enough to pursue a civil case as well. Do Frandys wife and kids needs to be compensated?
Oh really? It was a port side collision into the boat he was operating – i.e. under quite obviously the other skipper’s fault. Why is Andy Morrell being charged at all? What about the other skipper?
According to “Rule 15 Crossing Situation” of the Convention on the international Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972:
• Must be two power-driven vessels, crossing (not head-on or overtaking), and involve risk of collision
• The vessel which has on her starboard side another vessel crossing must give-way
• As the give-way vessel, avoid crossing the bow when maneuvering to avoid collision
The fact that Andy Morrell has been charged does not make him guilty. That said, the claim that it is “in the public interest” to charge him is disturbing. Why was it not in the public interest to charge anyone for the fatal accident at Monkey Point, in broad daylight, with witnesses, in a designated mooring field?
What about the tourist run over outside Fischers Cove? That disappeared quietly, hmmm….
There is a lot more evidence to come in this criminal collision case that will determine the innocence or guilt of the defendant and additional criminal liability for the owner, managers and operator of the larger yacht.
Besides the criminal charges against the defendant and possibly others there is also the civil suits for the damages sustained by the the various parties involved in this collision.
Lastly there is also the safety investigations that must be conducted by VISR and BVI Port Authority to prevent these late afternoon collisions of fast planing motor yachts in diminishing visibility as daylight wanes.
This is crazy corrupt. The other skipper was to blame according to the law and not a single charge laid against him?? Corruption alive and strong in the BVI as if we needed reminded of that. Shameful.. How this is happening? We have to ask who the other skipper knows. Why he is being protected. Shameful.
This writer understands that the route of the charges against Morrel is that he did not remain on the scene to render assistance, but, that will be brought to light I am sure. If that is indeed the case, it’s unlikely to succeed. Firstly, under Maritime Rules Morrel did indeed have the right of way, the collision was the other parties fault. Secondly, Morrel was unlikely to have been in a position to render assistance due to the injuries aboard his own boat. By all accounts three people were injured leaving Morrel to operate the vessel, and, the only other person not injured having to assist the injured parties, no spare hands. The only action under Morrel’s control was to get his vessel’s injured to shore for medical evacuation, which, he did. It is a sad fact that in many disasters you often can’t save everyone, so, you save the one’s you can.
There is no such thing as “right of way” when it comes to avoiding a collision.
Rule 8.(i) A vessel which, by any of these Rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe
passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take
early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not
relieved of this obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision
and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by
the Rules of this part.
(iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with
the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve
risk of collision.
And that applies to both vessels.
Hence the maritime safety rules. Someone has to be responsible, in this case it is the other vessel unless it can be shown that Morrels vessel went out of its way to collide. Which is a manoeuvre I have only seen performed by those red and white Rom**co boats.
According to “Rule 15 Crossing Situation” of the Convention on the international Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972:
• Must be two power-driven vessels, crossing (not head-on or overtaking), and involve risk of collision
• The vessel which has on her starboard side another vessel crossing must give-way
• As the give-way vessel, avoid crossing the bow when maneuvering to avoid collision
According to “Rule 15 Crossing Situation” of the Convention on the international Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972:
• Must be two power-driven vessels, crossing (not head-on or overtaking), and involve risk of collision
• The vessel which has on her starboard side another vessel crossing must give-way
• As the give-way vessel, avoid crossing the bow when maneuvering to avoid collision
Was the boat hit trafficking people (girls), illegally? Will that will come out too?
The DPP has not yet released the evidence of the compass course steered by each vessel in this collision. Until that information is made public any comments about liability in this fatal collision are purely speculative.
There is no such thing as “right of way” when it comes to avoiding a collision.
Rule 8.(i) A vessel which, by any of these Rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe
passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take
early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not
relieved of this obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision
and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by
the Rules of this part.
(iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with
the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve
risk of collision.
Whoever keeps reposting this BOTH Vessels were supposed to avoid the collision.. A keep clear of B and B keep clear of A.
…
What’s the difference between him an the cop that ran over the biker an there calling it just an accident Instead of manslaughter as well?? He’s a nobody to the public. On the other hand the business man has power also! Good luck!
But avoid collision at all times. So if he isn’t doing what he should you should still avoid collision.