I was not there when the Littlefield accident occured a few years ago, however, Mr. Littlefield was found NOT guilty of being drunk. It can be your opinion that he was, but you should refrain from stating that he was drunk. Right now is probably not the time for the peanut gallery to be deciding that Erica needs to be held responsible in any legal manner. At this point she is still in critical condition and putting up the fight of her life. Could she have been impared? Speeding? Operating in an unsafe manner? Perhaps. But right now I think it is very disheartening to hear people beating her up when she is in the physical condition she is in. She will have terrible mental and physical scars to deal with from this and right now she needs the community to pray for her speedy recovery and pray for Steph and her family. There are evil people who do horrible things. Erica is a good person who had a horrible thing happen to her, weather she inadvertantly contributed to it or not.

Erica's Condition
 

Honestly, who cares? I've yet to see "Less" string together a coherent thought, and on the random occasions something intelligible escapes his keyboard it is juvenile and non-value-add.

It is either his own post, or a spot-on impression of him. Either way my personal opinion of him is cast and he is not worth the effort to debate with, or consider.

I urge you to simply ignore him, and/or his "imposters".

History re-written...not!
 

Out of sympathy and respect for the individuals and families affected by this collision I will refrain from comment about the original topic under discussion, except for offering my sincerest condolences.

As to your assertion quoted above, it is obvious that you have not read the original court transcript or the opinion of the NH Supreme Court which heard the Littlefield appeal.

I have covered this topic in the past, provided links to the transcripts and posted pertinent passages numerous times. The regular reader is clearly familiar with the evidence I have covered previously.

The jury found ample evidence of Littlefield's impairment by alcohol the night of his crime, and found that intoxication was one of the leading factors that led to his inability to maintain a proper lookout, with death resulting.

On appeal, the Justices of the NH Supreme Court acknowledged that the jury could consider, did consider and rightfully concluded from ample & credible testimony of Littlefield's impairment. That is a matter of fact, not opinion, clearly annotated in both Court decisions.

Littlefield was not found guilty of the higher of the two homicide charges simply because the coward fled the scene and verifiable evidence of the level of his intoxication could not be introduced, for obvious reasons.

Additionally, ample evidence of his intoxication played a significant factor in the awards given during the subsequent civil proceedings.

Mr. Littlefield was intoxicated, a coward and remains a convicted felon for the rest of his life.

Cowardice is the only subject up for debate, but clearly is indicative of my opinion then and now.

Finally, given what little is actually known about the tragedy that just occurred, it is highly inappropriate and extremely irresponsible to be drawing any conclusions or references between the two events.

Skip

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/709126805


Skip,
See paragraph 3 of the above Citizen article. I don't disagree with your comments above about Mr. Littlefield, but it certainly does seem to me that he was aquitted of being drunk. Do I think he probably was? Sure. But I think he was not found guilty of that charge.

My apologies for being harsh...
 

PF, please don't take my previoius post as a personal criticism.

The trial and appeal were very technical, and the transcripts lengthy. One paragraph in the local paper by an underpaid reporter cannot substitute for the actual gist of the charges.

It would take me several pages of legal jargon to explain the technical differences of the two homicide charges Littlefield was charged with, and how (legally) a not guilty finding of the higher charge does not mean he was not intoxicated.

In the end it is neither your's nor my opinion that matters, it was what the jury concluded and what the NH Supreme Court opined in the matter. And a reading of the transcripts clearly shows that they both came to the conclusion that Littlefield was intoxicated. The inability to show to what technical degree is what allowed him to escape a lengthier stay in the State prison system.

Like someone once said...."you could print volumes of what they don't tell you in the papers!"... :(

you people are rediculous! First off who and why are you being a jury in an already settled situation? why are you assuming that the two accidents are the same? Let the families and the professionals(not you rank ametuers) determine what happened and who's at fault.The web master should put a stop to this assault on situations and unknown facts and let families grieve and wait to see what the final outcome is.

How could this have happened?
 

First let me say that you people who keep bring up the 150' headway speed thing are really ignorant. Do you honestly think that if someone knew they were heading for an island they would not have taken action to avoid hitting it?
Even though someone sells a particular model of boat doesn’t automatically mean they know everything about every boat in that model line.
Now lets say the operator was on a brand new boat, one that they had just purchased and were out on for the first time, one they were not totally familiar with and therefore were not using GPS but rather relying on there life long knowledge of the lake to guide them.
Now for all you boaters, where do you keep your right hand when operating your boat?
Not sure but I believe 90% would say that it was resting on the controls.
What direction propels the boat forward?
If I was operating a boat and it came to a stop unexpectedly there might be a good chance I would push the throttles full forward thus adding to the boats forward momentum.
Granted this is only hypothetical but a scenario that very well could have played out this past weekend.
So please have a little respect for those who were involved and let the facts come out before you show so much disrespect for the families by assuming the people involved had to have done something wrong.
We take our lives in our hands each and every day. To say that someone should not have been boating in those conditions is ridiculous. Who are you to say what optimum conditions to boat in are? As for the GPS, anyone who is a real boater knows that GPS is only a backup system. If you cannot navigate a body of water without a GPS then you do not belong out on it.

I don't know how many of you have been caught in a thunderstorm at night, but I can tell you from experience, the lake can be very, very dark and you cannot see an inch in front of you. You can't even see the buoys. It is very scary. We are seasoned boaters and were out there many years ago in that situation. We got lost and took three and a half hours to find our way home. We just couldn't tell where we were.

Yeah, I buy it and I believe him. The guy is out in left field sometimes and he does like to stir up the pot, but for the most part I think he is a good guy. I think if he had actually done it, he would be man enough to own up to it. It would be pretty easy to post under someone else's name in another venue, in fact I think if I look back I could find some admissions of people posting clandestinely in an off shore forum, collecting information.

I think the person who did it is lower than low and should be hiding like the little wuss they are............

backup system -- exactly!
 

That's exactly right. There is a lesson here for all boaters, and that is really the intent of the so-called "criticism" and hypothesizing. All boaters need to understand that when they are navigating at night on Lake Winnipesaukee, they are already in a SERIOUS condition that demands total attention of the captain. If you don't know exactly where you are, you should be at headway speed. Headway speed does not cause the damage shown, but I'm not speculating it was over 25 mph either. As far as navigation is concerned, you need to employ backup systems. The depth sounder, chart, eyes, spotlights, ears, and GPS all complement each other. In aviation, you don't rely on one instrument, but correlate all other indicators where possible. If you are heading across a certain area of the broads and expect 80' depth and the bottom is rising rapidly, cut the throttle until you figure out what's going on.

Let's all learn something from this mishap.

R.i.p.
 

My sincere condolences to all involved. Accidents happen whether in a kayak or power boat. Life is fragile
To all those who brought up the speed issue or any other factors in a speculative manor, " IM DISGUSTED"

Knock it OFF !!
 

Let me start by saying that I love this site. For years I have used it to keep up with resturaunt reviews, what's new on the lake, and for timely news that can not be found from any other source at a place (Winni) that I can't get up to enough times during the season. With that said:

I am Disgusted & Appalled, saddened actually, when reading through this thread. So Much Garbage about indivial expert "Opinions" as to wether or not speed was a factor/wether the boat had electronics/inside the 150' rule/wether FLL posted in the UL or not ........ on and on and on. KNOCK IT OFF !! a young adult died and two others were (and remain) seriously injured. Have a little respect Forum members ..... it coulda been your daughter out there!!

I hope that future posts will stick to advising and informing us of new "facts" as they surface and not speculation or opinions. For example: I for one, until reading the Monitor article could not figure out in my feeble head why Erica (whom I do not know personally) was headed Southeast as first reported in the news (here in Mass). After reading the article -- a great post and the type I have come to expect of this crowd -- I now know she was headed back from her dad's house towards a cabin on Sleeper Isl. To which makes all the sense in the world NOW (to me) why she was even near Diamond at 2:30am heading in a "Southeast" direction.

As a father of 3 girls in Erica's age group my heartfelt Sympathy go out to each of the families. May they find a way to bear through this tragic time.

Good points Orion. Does anyone know what the contour of the bottom looks liike there? Does it go from 50' to 0' is short order or gradually come up to the shore?

Phantom, I don't understand why we can not dicuss what happend and ALL learn a little something from it while still being respectful to the people involved? All of the issues brought up in this thread are important. All the critics and theorys will sit in peoplels memory to help avoid MANY different situations in the future.

I wouldn't go there.

BoatEd.com is discussing this incident, and they are being very critical of operating in fog. One reason I hope the discussion moves on with the "nuts and bolts" of the incident to another thread...NOT this one.

4Fun -- I have absolutely no issue with discussion ...... your absoultely correct .... we all can learn from it. I simply shake my head when it is purely "speculation and conjecture" or worse, off topic (example the short discussion of the definition of an accident).

Because it is just too soon.

Update
 

Here's an update from the Laconia Citizen.

Boat driver's condition unchanged

I couldn't disagree more. This discussion is not about the people involved in the accident. It is about the accident itself. I don't think anyone has said anything but prayers for anyone involved.

I firmly beleive ALL the speculation guessing will have an impact on everyone involved in this discussion. While we have no idea what the factors were that caused the accident we have discussed many that will stick in the minds of us and help us make better decisions in the future.

Patchy fog, watching the contour on a depth finder, using GPS, just plain being more aware are all things that we will pay more attention to when faced with a situation on the lake. We are a species that LEARNS from mistakes. This is a good discussion.

Then why not wait for the investigations to prove yourself less than brilliant? Seriously. Who knows or cares how fast the boat was going? I'm sure you do, but whether they were going 25mph or 45mph, the force of impact would still be significant. "These Tragedies", please spare us all your lack of facts and understanding, not to mention the lack of numerous Tragedies there.

If this sad accident had involved an 18' bowrider going 22 mph, and the head of a pro speed limit group was injured, you'd probably shut your mouth. Biased ignorance knows no bounds apparently, and at least 2-3 of you people have shown your complete lack of respect, not to mention complete lack of compassion or class. Your statement to the contrary does not cover up your own personal, compelling need to justify your position. IMO, it reflects poorly on you.

Boating used to be a fraternity, regardless of boat or type of boat. Any boating accident is to be taken seriously, and I've read many stories of such accidents around the country. As such, I offer my condolences to families and friends of people I've never met, never knew. Because as boaters, they are all part of my extended family.

Reform This Turtle.

To FLL
 

Just got caught up with the forum, and it looks like I was in error stating that FLL made that post to the Union Leader. My regrets for my apparent error.

And if this sad accident had involved an 18' bowrider going 22 mph, and the head of a pro speed limit group was injured,this forum would have lit up like a Christmas tree. So when is a good time to hear something you dont want to hear? I refer you to Winnipesaukee's excellent post this AM on the speed limit thread. He discusses when it's appropriate to discuss the war in Iraq after another soldier has died...immediatly. The driver in this accident was a spokesperson for an anti speed limit organization, in other words she was political. Politicizing this accident? It's like someone being accused of politicizing the Iraq war. As alluded to in other forums, clearly this subject additionally touches a nerve for the GFBL no speed limit crowd because after this accident, any remaining shred of credibility for this group vaporized (see links below).
Mr. Beaudoin is quoted as saying that he didn't know why they were going so fast. Are you going to tell him to shut his mouth too?
For another perspective on how people view some of these recent events, check out the thread under boatered.com; even more revealing are the comments/letters section in today's Union Leader following the article about the accident. I think you may be surprised at some of the comments that appear in forums that are not so predominantly weighted by the GFBL/no limits crowd.
Given the tone of your angry diatribe, you will of course minimize the fact that people on the speed limit side have and continue to offer condolences (including myself) to the victim(s). And a fitting tribute to Ms. Beaudoin would be to decrease the chances that this happens again.
So VtSteve...please check out these links
Reform This VtSteve...see how silly this looks

Turtle Boy... and others!

Your way off base here. Until the experts weigh in on the accident, there is no proof that the Formula was exceeding the nighttime limit of 25MPH as proposed by HB-847.

If the accident reconstruction team determines that she was in fact traveling less than the proposed 25 MPH limit, then essentially a speed limit would have done nothing to have prevented this tragedy.

At this point in time, this accident is just that... an accident! The causes of this tragedy will no doubt play out in a VERY public fashion.

Woodsy

Exactly. Like others, I would "expect" the damage to even more severe if the boat was going fast, but what the heck do I know?

Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Blizzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night? Some feel that 25 MPH was too high a compromise for night time and that 20 MPH(Squam) or less (some other states) would be more appropriate to consider after HB 847 sunsets.
Anyway, thankyou (seriously) for your calm, measured, polite reply..TB

Thank YOU for your detailed conclusions on the events that transpired. No need to wait for the official investigation now. Case closed. All Hail HB847.

Turtle, everything posted here and elsewhere is conjecture, pure and simple. This was a larger boat, apparently off course, and hitting a large object above the waterline. It resulted in loss of life and severe injuries.

We can all speculate about what happened. My initial thoughts are of no valid concern, but they are of genuine horror. This type of accident can happen to anybody, anywhere. We'll probably find out the facts as they become available. For now, I prefer to think it is a terrible tragedy that happened to friends and fellow boaters. I prefer to assume nothing other than a simple accident occurred, because that's just the way I am.

I don't know whether your knee-jerk reaction about the "other" thread is simply because you care so gosh darn much about people, or maybe there's something else going on here. All I know is that Sunday was Father's day, and there some pretty miserable, heartbroken parents out there.

I'm not a GFBL boater, and I'm probably a bit more anal about being cautious than average. Most of us care deeply about friends and family, and take our role and responsibilities as Skipper pretty seriously. I've read the thread over at BoaterEd. Much more civil, but no more informative.

The laws currently provide that everyone is responsible for piloting their boats in a manner that is safe in the given conditions. I know many like solid numbers, laws, tables and data. Too fast for given conditions is a common citing in many accidents. It can be as slow as 1 mph as far as I'm concerned. I'm not scared about night boating, but I am scared about boaters without lights, kayaks on moonless nights, fog, I'm just cautious. But many seem to need a special law.

It appears from the data so far that it was at least very dark, likely raining, "possibly" foggy. I'd be going slow on a night like that. I'd probably not go out on the lake if I didn't have to. If those very conditions existed at the time of the accident, then the you know what would have been superseded by the old laws anyway. And I think you know that.

And I do see your point and am grateful that the tone here has ratcheted down a notch (mine too). My concern is that on a dark foggy rainy night, to do the damage I saw on that boat, 25 MPH would not fit the "reasonable and prudent" criteria. We'll just have to wait and see.
And I'm sorry if it seemed I was belittling your earlier post. What strikes a nerve with me is that on this forum the speed limit people have often been portrayed as being pure evil. I know (all) of you don't believe this. I''m very protective of my small family and do not want to wake up at 2:30 AM with a 37' formula boat in my grandson's bed on top of him, or for him to be hit in the open water as happened to that man in '02 in Meredith.
Anyway,thanks...TB

Against my better judgment, here goes...

No speed limit, no matter how high or low it's set, is going to be a magic prevent-all for accidents. Short of banning human presence on the water's surface, there is nothing that will prevent an operator from accidentally missing a marker, hitting a shoal, or running into an island. It might help minimize the damage if one does those things at a lower speed, but we can't legislate away the fact that accidents can and will happen.

That being said, all we know right now is enough to fuel conjecture and speculation. We can only guess at speed. We don't know for certain who was at the helm (although we think we have an idea based on press reports). We've heard conflicting reports about the weather -- was it foggy, rainy, had it cleared, was there some moonlight? Those reports came from different observations around the lake at differing times on the night in question. I've looked across that part of the lake from the shore on a mostly clear night and viewed only inky darkness over the water where I knew a Diamond and a Rattlesnake Island should be, but darned if I could see them. Multiply that 10-fold trying to figure it out while under way. We just don't know.

Now, also against my better judgment, I'm going to hazard a semi-educated guess at speed and do so based solely on the weight, position and damage of the boat shown in the photo above and some common references. I'll admit my marine structural engineering experience comes from designing nuclear-powered underwater weapons platforms with advanced materials and not the composite-layup pleasure boats being discussed here, but the fundamental engineering principles don't change. (Great.... more speculation.... ;))

Last year a boat ran aground on Eagle Island and ended up ON EAGLE ISLAND, well into the trees. That wasn't the case in this accident. And in looking at the photos, the damage is limited to the first 20% or so of the length. What looks catastrophic at first seems to be fairly well contained. It appears the top portion of the bow remains intact although disconnected, possibly sheared horizontally where it came in contact to what appears to be a roughly 90-degree edge of the rock in the Channel 9 video. That seems reasonable on the surface. In addition, the rest of the hull appears to have split and peeled back along the keel line. Those are what the two flaps of hull hanging down look like to me. This also seems like a reasonable mode of crack propagation and failure for perpendicular contact of the rigid axis of the hull to a stationary surface. In the photo, the lift harness is compressing the deck and hull and some delamination of the deck/hull interface seems to be present. I don't know if this is a result of loading/unloading of the boat by crane after the designed structural integrity of the vessel had been compromised, or if that was a result of the collision itself, but for the sake of speculation, I'll guess the latter.

What I'd really like to know is how heavy the anchor is and how far away the summer camp is that allegedly got nicked by the anchor. Putting those two pieces together would give us an approximate idea of the momentum present and required to get the anchor from the boat to the building, thus yielding an approximate speed of the boat at the point of anchor departure. But even then, that calculation quickly gets complicated by whether or not the anchor was mounted, how much drag there was on the winding mechanism, blah, blah, blah, but it would be nice to know.

Anyway, that the boat reportedly came to rest in the water and not ON the island, that the hull structural failure is limited to the front of the boat and that it appears to be relatively well contained separation and delamination, and that we can't currently account for the cause of the hull/deck separation (although I'd be comfortable assuming initially that this is where much of the collision energy may have been dissipated, also accounting for the reported loud noise), I'm guessing (emphasis on guessing) that people will be surprised at the speed with which this collision took place. I'm way way way out here on this limb speculating based on many assumptions and one photo, but I don't think the speed at impact is going to be nearly as high as people think it was. But time will bear that out.

We now return to our regularly-scheduled agenda-driven finger pointing... ;)

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy
Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Hazzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night?

There are no conclusions here, only the statement that if a boater as experienced as Ms. Blizzard can miss this channel, what are we to expect of less experienced boaters.
Your rather nasty, bitter, and sarcastic response is something I've referred to in the past on this forum, that some posters diminish any semblance of civilized and intellectual discourse. Other (former) posters on this forum have contacted me saying this is what made them stop posting here...this near rabid attack against anything at all pro speed limit. What you have left is a forum where nearly everybody has the same opinion. Refer to the posts at boatered.com and after today's article on the accident in the Union Leader if you want to see some other opinions. Don't you think you could do better than this Ryan?

TB,

The difference here is you are trying to promote an agenda and Erica is the one paying the price. When Mr Hartman was tragically killed, no one on this forum tried to do anything but write sympathies to the families. When the trial tried to bring up the "there was no light on his boat at the time" theory, no one here used that and promoted it as even a remote possibility. A lot of us don't see the same sympathy coming from the pro-speed limit crowd. We see them using this tragic accident to promote their cause and I personally find it very distasteful.

Go ahead, attack!!!

Just a note to the speed limit folks whom are gleefully waiting for charges against Erica for exceeding the speed limit and BWI.......Erica rarely drinks and if she does it is a social glass of wine.I'm guessing that there are some who visualize a drunken,crazed, go fast boater ripping through the broads at 2 o'clock in the morning.But, what you will find,I believe,is a girl and her friends who went out to play a fathers day trick on her dad and simply missed a marker in the fog.
Please don't act indignant.....some of your posts speak for themselves.

I think you are not looking hard enough!

The "leaders" of the pro-speed limit side has been either silent or extremely sympathetic. I did a quick check and find that the four members you are talking about have 30, 36, 32 and 5 posts. I don't think they represent our movement.

My heart goes out to the families involved. This is not the time for idle speculation.

BR:

Oh, you can say that Erica is paying the price all right, and sympathies did abound back then, but your memory of the outrage during Mr Hartman's tragic death tells us "You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know".

This forum ranted for days even before we learned who the perpetrator was and where his boat was hidden away. The white stern light was indeed used as a good defense by some still posting here.

Years later, the legal team of Sisti & Twomey was criticized by one of the same posters as being inadequate for Pamela Smart's successful murder of her husband, "so what could Littlefield have expected when he hired the same New Hampshire legal team?"

The outrageous support continues.

Now now. What is not very helpful is that the PSL crowd refuses to acknowledge anything other than a simple speed limit law.

In each and every case presented, time after time, probably this one as well, existing laws were broken, or, it was just an accident due to human misjudgment.

They simply cannot deal with not having a neat little legislation package to feel good about. I know these accidents frustrate many, especially the ones that have been discussed many times. The 28 mph accident was infamous for misunderstanding the problem. In areas of increased enforcement all around the country, accidents go down over the long run, and best of all, repeat offenders get thrown out.

It's not a perfect world, and stuff happens.

Referring to her as Erica Hazzard is just plain rude and uncalled for, especially given the circumstances. For whatever the reasoning may be, she probably has more boating experience than you or most on this forum. She grew up in the industry. Put your head back in your shell or go troll elsewhere.

But wait a minute. I respectfully want to point out my post from 4:33 PM today. My "agenda" is that I would not want this 37 foot Formula boat to be landing in my grandson's bedroom at 2:30 AM. Clearly the GFBL/ no speed limits people have an agenda too. "Promote my cause"?...Sure...my cause is that I don't want a boat similar to the one involved in the fatal accident this past weekend to kill one of my family members. I would find that to be very distasteful. And as my previous posts infer, what the speed limit proponents also find distasteful is the premise made by people like you that this "agenda" of concern for their family is so inherently evil and self-serving.

Then stay FAR away from the lake. Anything less greatly increases your risk of being involved in a random accident.

All the legislation in the world won't make the lake "safe". Legislating to get as close as reasonably possible goes against most of the founding principles of this country and only serves to dumb down society.

Next you'll be recommending that we all take a gramme Soma...