Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part IV

[Mojo]

Imagine you are a border guard. You will have been told in advance who to look for and who to stop.

 

[Vixen]

Where does that say they can identify officers in the dark in the middle of a storm?

How are you trained to do that?

It is very simple. First you rescue people and then you identify them by asking their name and date of birth.

 

[Vixen]

Are they allowed to kill someone (if, say, they join a gang and are required to go out on a hit job)?

Are you picturing something like a cross between James Bond and Lisbeth Salander? Does it sound exciting and dangerous to you?

Not at all. I know this for a fact.

It is common knowledge, actually.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Hoffmeister's report.

Where does it say the 'Atlantic lock' was added as an accessory lock to make people feel safer when sailing?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

It is very simple. First you rescue people and then you identify them by asking their name and date of birth.

Ok, so let's say they undertake this mission and they pull someone out of the water. They ask for name and DOB and the guy responds "John Smith, 4th June 1977" which is not who they are looking for. What do they do then?

 

[Vixen]

So not a 'posh lifeboat' just a lifeboat?

How would you identify who was in the lifeboat in the dark in a storm when there are other lifeboats floating around?

What if you found the wrong people, would you throw them back?

You rescue them and ask their name. As there is a high probability they will all be together (just as Linde, Sillaste, Treu and Kadak were all together) it is not the difficult job you imagine it to be.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You see whether it passes the port at 45 degrees.

But does it pass to he left or right? that would tell you if it was a gentleman's lifeboat.

 

[JayUtah]

Not at all. I know this for a fact.

You are not a reliable source.

It is common knowledge, actually.

Therefore there should be a plethora of documentation attesting to its veracity.

 

[Andy_Ross]

As it seems clear the Swedish Defence Forces were involved, any thwarting of their aims will be seen as a hostile enemy action, so yes, the persons concerned will be 'Wanted'.

That doesn't make sense, or answer the question.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

As it seems clear the Swedish Defence Forces were involved, any thwarting of their aims will be seen as a hostile enemy action, so yes, the persons concerned will be 'Wanted'.

Thwarting what the hell now? Do you mean if the crew had sabotaged their own ship, they would be prosecuted?

Well, duh.

That gets us to wanted for questioning. Not to disappeared.

And a few moments ago you had the Russians threatening the Swedes they would sink the Estonians' ship, so how come you're suddenly blaming the crew?

 

[Vixen]

Do you believe Hoffmeister got the right answer? Do you believe JAIC got the wrong answer?

He has the credentials to be considered an expert in his field.

The JAIC's findings are purely hypothetical anyway, as their appointed engineer, threw the lock back into the sea, so it did not get examined.

 

[Andy_Ross]

It is very simple. First you rescue people and then you identify them by asking their name and date of birth.

Then those that aren't officers you throw back in the water?

What if they lie?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Not at all. I know this for a fact.

It is common knowledge, actually.

Is it?

So, are they allowed to break the law or not?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It is very simple. First you rescue people and then you identify them by asking their name and date of birth.

That's normal. First you rescue the people.

Do you know what's not normal? First you unleash the frog ninjas to pluck just the officers out of the waves and disappear them. That's swivel-eyed lunacy.

 

[Vixen]

But you are claiming there was a special secret mission just to find the officers.

Why would this need to happen if you were just going to rescue them anyway?

If you were Stockholm's Police Chief, you would be aching to interview the ship's officers.

Stop feigning naivete.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You rescue them and ask their name. As there is a high probability they will all be together (just as Linde, Sillaste, Treu and Kadak were all together) it is not the difficult job you imagine it to be.

But what if you find someone else? do you abandon them back in to the waves?

Why are they likely to be all together?

 

[Vixen]

A helicopter rescue man is not a border guard.

They are members of the armed forces who are guarding their country.

The ones from Berga are navy guys.

 

[JayUtah]

In English, he's just Dr Hoffmeister. As you've now been told twice.

His publications are all about machine tools and manufacturing processes. He is not an expert in structural analysis using finite-element methods. This might explain why the models he used in the proffered report were so rudimentary. However I would trust him to identify microfracturing, and to prepare the surfaces accordingly for that inspection. Those are machining-related questions. Incidentally he was once associated with the Fraunhofer Institute. I'm one of their suppliers for FEM technology and methods, but only since long after Hoffmeister was there.

 

[Mojo]

It is very simple. First you rescue people and then you identify them by asking their name and date of birth.

And then you somehow get all the officers, and nobody else, onto the same helicopter.

 

[Vixen]

Euphemisms don't change lunacy into sense.

Wanting to question the officers does not explain your imagined plot to disappear them. Your imagined plot to disappear them does not explain how the hell they thought anyone, "elite frogmen" or not, could hope to achieve it.

It's bad movie nonsense.

Their names did appear on early survivors lists.