Harvey Family Banned By Carnival Corp
By Mike Groves
The recent story regarding the Harvey family concerns me, not just because of the way they were allegedly accused of malicious or criminal damage on board Carnival's cruise ship, which I found a little strange in itself, but more so in the manner in which they were then 'detained' on board the vessel thereafter.
Let me clarify a few things as I have experienced in my own mind - On each and every embarkation, or disembarkation day [cruise jargon for waving goodbye to our happy travelers and saying welcome to our new ones] in various ports of call around the Globe, vessels undergo a major and somewhat chaotic turnaround with virtually 95% of the officers & crew being involved in one capacity or another.
This [Embarkation/Disembarkation event] occurs more often than not, every fortnight; not a vast amount of time in itself between each new cruise, however what is certainly clear is that at this time all cabins [guests suites] are given a thorough going over, with beds stripped to the core and curtains, carpets, upholstery and bathrooms/ensuites being hovered and scrubbed within an inch of their life!
Indeed the fantastic - and how could we ever manage without their Gladiator like stamina and Goddess like smiles - Stewardesses on board all cruise ships work especially hard on these momentous occasions to ensure everything is perfect for all new guests embarking the ship. [In addition to this gargantuan 'rub a dub dub' on embarkation days, stewardesses also clean and prepare guest suites twice daily.]
DISEMBARKATION NORMALLY COMMENCES FROM AROUND 0700 HOURS WITH ALL GUESTS HAVING BEEN OFF-LOADED BY 1000 AT THE LATEST, ALTHOUGH THIS CAN RUN OVER A LITTLE AT TIMES! EMBARKATION NORMALLY STARTS AROUND 2-3pm.
All suites having been cleaned thoroughly are also inspected. Often the housekeeper will personally inspect all suites with her/his assistant housekeepers [one or two stripe officers] and where they will record and evidence any damage discovered at that point in time. It would appear that this has not occurred in this particular case?
It is at this time and prior to the Harvey's boarding the vessel that damage would have obviously been noted; well you would imagine that such 'obvious damage to Carnival representatives' would have been seen previously but again, it appears not. So the question beckons - at what point did Carnival decide it had the powers of law enforcement officers to detain a person for such a minor ALLEGED OFFENCE and whilst already alongside in a US port? In short none, certainly not in my opinion!
IF A PERSON on board a vessel is IN THE ACT of being threatening, abusive or otherwise endangering the vessel and/or is an obvious danger to themselves or others, then shipbourne security staff may both defend themselves and/or protect others if need be by the use of reasonable force. However, it is then for the Captain - THE MASTER OF THE VESSEL - to decide if that person shall be held in their own guest suite; there are no brigs [jails/cells] on cruise ships or the Captain may direct that they are held and supervised in a more secure location on board the vessel if particularly violent.
That person may also be restrained but should be checked every 15 minutes to ensure they are not suffocating if lying down in handcuffs and in accordance with recognized custodial practices - observations; medical examinations, refreshments' etc as you would find in most law enforcement police stations.
The biggest member of the Harvey's family, according to reports, consisted of a Travel Executive who was neither drunk, abusive or threatening in any regard. In addition he was also in company with his wife and young children yet all of them were allegedly confined on board the vessel, denied permission to leave of their own free will, so I am to understand. If the ships officers were so convinced a crime had been committed then police officers [law enforcement officers] should have been brought on board.
Under UK law a civilian may only arrest someone who is IN THE ACT of committing an arrestable offence or who they have JUST SEEN commit an arrestable offence. Police Officers; under Section 24 of PACE [Police and Criminal Evidence Act] solely reserve the powers to detain someone if they THINK an arrestable offence has been committed and they THINK that person has committed an arrestable offence.
This is what should have happened and from my personal opinion and experience. The name, address and passport number of each passenger is recorded when they book the cruise on line and if not then, certainly when they board on the first day. Passports are also scanned with credit cards details also being recorded during the booking in session. Albeit Carnival HAD EVERY RIGHT TO ENQUIRE about the damage; cruise bruise does not dispute this at all, they were perfectly entitled to do so however this clearly should have been handled a lot better.
I'm not sure what powers exist in the UNITED States legal legislation concerning civilians powers to detain an offender, but I believe these ships officers, if in UK waters, would have been sailing a little close to the wind if they had done this here, more so when alongside a UK port already and with police officers so readily available.
Quite simply this was just a scenario that appears to have grown into the parameters of bizarre on board the vessel as well as being somewhat aggressive and an abuse of power; it was a complete overkill in my personal opinion and from my experiences within law enforcement.
Although the Captain later signed the BANNING NOTICE which I equally find very strange - why on earth was the Master of the ship bothered by his own officers with such a minor incident - and how did it escalate to this level, a ban? The ban should not have been put in place, this is reserved for the likes of those that commit serious crimes and clearly this incident was so small everyone missed it until the final day, only the Harvey's camera coming forward as their star witness and proof of their word that it was there when they embarked?
I wonder what quick clarifications or investigations took place before the Harvey's were 'detained'? Was the family's own stewardess asked if she noted this damage prior to their arrival? Maybe she had opted to not report such a minor scratch as appears to be the case from the pictures shown? Did she feel it was just normal wear and tear as indeed the Harvey's may have felt when they took over the suit? It really sounds to me that 'some managers' just went into this with guns blazing and eyes blinkered.
The company knew the Harvey's home address and quite simply should have just informed them that they would investigate this further and contact them at their address in due course. The company could have then have easily initiated legal proceedings by sending papers to the Harvey's home address.
Holding the family on the ship and effectively demanding payment or an admission was both intimidating, publicly humiliating and a down right insulting way to conduct business. Furthermore, the Harvey's could very easily have lost connecting flights by their' incarceration' or incurred other costs.
Carnival have since offered a full apology and lifted the ban WHICH IN ITSELF SAYS RATHER A LOT DOESN'T IT? I'm certainly not having a dig at the cruise line here, in actual fact it is great to see that Carnival have led the way and offered this 'unreserved' apology and lifted the ban, I do however hope that it will not stop there, and any identified further training or guidance for those involved in this incident will also be considered.
In conclusion this incident is a little embarrassing and unnecessary. It has all simply come about through complete ignorance of the law, a lack of common sense and a knee jerk reaction from employees on board and NOT the cruise line itself in my personal opinion. I just hope the Harvey's experience have not put them off the joy of cruises altogether, whether with Carnival or others.
Harvey Family Banned By Carnival Corp
By Mike Groves QGM
Cruise Bruise Security And Safety Advisor
September 20, 2009
