DEBUNKING 'ROYAL CARIBBEAN MYTHS'
Hello everyone, and thanks again for all your interest and support. I think it is necessary at this point to go back over some important information in George Smith's disappearance. On January 27, 2006, Royal Caribbean released their "Top 10 Myths Regarding Royal Caribbean's Handling Of The Disappearance Of George Smith." Much of this, in short, is professional spin; it would take me several posts (if not much longer) to even begin debunking it, but I will start, in no particular order.
Here goes. They begin...
"Myth 1. Royal Caribbean engaged in a deliberate cover-up, which impeded the investigation. The company washed down the canopy in the morning, before the authorities even arrived and then painted over the blood."
Well, I, for one, know of AT LEAST one guest on the ship who says she saw Royal Caribbean employees washing off that canopy as early as 7:30am, local time. Another says he saw them painting over the stain. One is a former homicide detective. And I am sure there are more of you out there.
Royal Caribbean writes:"Myth 2. Royal Caribbean destroyed evidence and compromised the crime scene before the forensic investigation was complete." Well, Royal Caribbean alerted the local Turkish authorities to the fact that George was missing after 9:30am local time. The Turkish authorities did not even board the ship until (at earliest) 11:30am, some two hours later. By their own admission, Royal Caribbean staffers had entered the Smith cabin in that time. (Later, in 'myth 10,' they write "The two photos were a "before" photo, taken at approximately 9 a.m. on July 5,..." Is that not an admission of compromising the crime scene? Royal Caribbean was in that room, taking photos, at the very least.
Let's skip to number 5. Royal Caribbean writes: "Myth 5. The company ignored numerous reports of fighting and/or confrontation noise and violence in the room." Passengers on EITHER SIDE of the Smith cabin reported noises of confrontation in the cabin, and both reported it in those early morning hours. Clete Hyman did, as did the couple on the other side; what's overlooked is that the couple on the other side CONFRONTED the Royal Caribbean 'security guards' (two of them) and told them, as they stood before the Smith cabin, that they better go inside that cabin, that all holy hell is breaking loose in there. That's fact. What more evidence do you need? The (7) bullet points they list are a wonderful example of denial and excellent spin.
Just for laughs, jump down to myth 9. They write:
"Myth 9. Cruise ships are unsafe." And they offer a litany of statements about why cruise ships are safe. Not so. If you have any doubt, just check out cruisebruise.com
Now, go to myth 11. They write: "Myth 11. Guests observed Royal Caribbean personnel cleaning the Smiths' stateroom in the days after Mr. Smith's disappearance... This is not only false, but also irrelevant."
False and irrelevant? Let's unpack that. There are at least two passengers who maintain (to this day) that they saw Royal Caribbean staffers in the Smith cabin, cleaning it, 'scrubbing it down' in the days following George's disappearance. These two people were staying a few doors down from George on deck 9; they knew his room, they had seen him on the cruise, and they saw what they saw. Royal Caribbean had the audacity to tell them no, they were mistaken. But these two people remain steadfast about what they saw. They,BTW, have no dog in the fight. They are just two everyday Americans who care about justice.
As for the 'irrelevant' assertion: well, let's be clear. If the Turkish authorities were on board by 11:30am and off the ship by 2:30pm, and just for the sake of argument we agree with Royal Caribbean that they cleaned the blood off the canopy at 6:15pm that evening, well, was that enough time to complete a forensic examination? Most forensic experts agree (and I have spoken to several) that three hours is hardly enough time to collect evidence. It takes much longer. And, Royal Caribbean says the FBI investigated the room on the 7th of July. Let me ask you this: wouldn't the FBI want to investigate a crime scene before it has been cleaned? If, as these two Americans say, George's room was cleaned in the two days following his disappearance, wouldn't that compromise the FBI's investigation of that room, that crime scene? Seems quite relevant to me. And as for the two Americans, they were shocked, and remain so.
I'll leave you with one final thought. Why was the carpet in George's room later removed? I'd have to say that's irrelevant.
Here goes. They begin...
"Myth 1. Royal Caribbean engaged in a deliberate cover-up, which impeded the investigation. The company washed down the canopy in the morning, before the authorities even arrived and then painted over the blood."
Well, I, for one, know of AT LEAST one guest on the ship who says she saw Royal Caribbean employees washing off that canopy as early as 7:30am, local time. Another says he saw them painting over the stain. One is a former homicide detective. And I am sure there are more of you out there.
Royal Caribbean writes:"Myth 2. Royal Caribbean destroyed evidence and compromised the crime scene before the forensic investigation was complete." Well, Royal Caribbean alerted the local Turkish authorities to the fact that George was missing after 9:30am local time. The Turkish authorities did not even board the ship until (at earliest) 11:30am, some two hours later. By their own admission, Royal Caribbean staffers had entered the Smith cabin in that time. (Later, in 'myth 10,' they write "The two photos were a "before" photo, taken at approximately 9 a.m. on July 5,..." Is that not an admission of compromising the crime scene? Royal Caribbean was in that room, taking photos, at the very least.
Let's skip to number 5. Royal Caribbean writes: "Myth 5. The company ignored numerous reports of fighting and/or confrontation noise and violence in the room." Passengers on EITHER SIDE of the Smith cabin reported noises of confrontation in the cabin, and both reported it in those early morning hours. Clete Hyman did, as did the couple on the other side; what's overlooked is that the couple on the other side CONFRONTED the Royal Caribbean 'security guards' (two of them) and told them, as they stood before the Smith cabin, that they better go inside that cabin, that all holy hell is breaking loose in there. That's fact. What more evidence do you need? The (7) bullet points they list are a wonderful example of denial and excellent spin.
Just for laughs, jump down to myth 9. They write:
"Myth 9. Cruise ships are unsafe." And they offer a litany of statements about why cruise ships are safe. Not so. If you have any doubt, just check out cruisebruise.com
Now, go to myth 11. They write: "Myth 11. Guests observed Royal Caribbean personnel cleaning the Smiths' stateroom in the days after Mr. Smith's disappearance... This is not only false, but also irrelevant."
False and irrelevant? Let's unpack that. There are at least two passengers who maintain (to this day) that they saw Royal Caribbean staffers in the Smith cabin, cleaning it, 'scrubbing it down' in the days following George's disappearance. These two people were staying a few doors down from George on deck 9; they knew his room, they had seen him on the cruise, and they saw what they saw. Royal Caribbean had the audacity to tell them no, they were mistaken. But these two people remain steadfast about what they saw. They,BTW, have no dog in the fight. They are just two everyday Americans who care about justice.
As for the 'irrelevant' assertion: well, let's be clear. If the Turkish authorities were on board by 11:30am and off the ship by 2:30pm, and just for the sake of argument we agree with Royal Caribbean that they cleaned the blood off the canopy at 6:15pm that evening, well, was that enough time to complete a forensic examination? Most forensic experts agree (and I have spoken to several) that three hours is hardly enough time to collect evidence. It takes much longer. And, Royal Caribbean says the FBI investigated the room on the 7th of July. Let me ask you this: wouldn't the FBI want to investigate a crime scene before it has been cleaned? If, as these two Americans say, George's room was cleaned in the two days following his disappearance, wouldn't that compromise the FBI's investigation of that room, that crime scene? Seems quite relevant to me. And as for the two Americans, they were shocked, and remain so.
I'll leave you with one final thought. Why was the carpet in George's room later removed? I'd have to say that's irrelevant.
posted by RED at 10:46 PM
10 Comments:
there is really no new info here. Just what the tabloid shows have already discussed. I think this case is dead- in -the -H2O.
Thanks, appreciate your opinion.
Red
I am not on the side of RCC, but I can see why they figured it was a suicide, accident or whatever at the time. Suicides and accidents are more common than murders. They didn't know george and they had 2500 people on board the ship.I think when you are in Rome ,you do as the Romans do. That is apparently their way of carrying out an investigation. they must have their own protocol for investigating.
Things are very different in 3rd world counties and if we don't realize that, we should stay home.
We are not going to see the same options we have in America.
what is really relevant is that there is not enough evidence to arrest someone. How can one say this was a murder if the FBI can't prove it? I think it is ridiculous to just assume. If there was sevidence of a crime, there would have been an arrest and what I have heard is not evidence-just pieces of information that don't make a lot of sense. I don't know why the carpet was removed. From all other information I have heard, I figure someone threw up on it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Diva,
Thanks for your comment and I disagree. To say it is ridiculous is ridiculous. Just look at how many people have been arrested for a murder at sea. That number, unfortunately, is close to zero. And the fact the FBI has not arrested someone on this case - yet - doesn't mean anything. They've committed thousands of dollars and manhours for what, because they think it was an accident? There is plenty of information not known to the public which points to a murder. The FBI has convened a grand jury not to humor themselves, I would argue. Think what you wish, but if you look at ALL the facts in this case, my guess is you'd think likewise. There are so many lies in this case, though, you have to ask, why lie? Especially if it was merely an accident. People don't lie for the fun of it.
Yes, it probably is ridiculous to think that there was not a crime committed from what we know but how much of it is true? The wife never answered a question directly on any interview I saw so far. I suppose she could have been given a drug but why appear at all if you don't know anything and were the person supposed to be with the man murdered. the whole thing is weird and not only on RCC's part. At least they gave an account of the evening as they saw it. The rest don't seem to know anything.
It was RCC who told the wife where she was, for Pete's sake! And that her husband was missing hours later.
And that she was passed out.Passengers told her she kicked her new husband.The "boys" told her they took her husband back to the room drunk.
Josh told her she was flirting with the casino manager.
Why does everyone else know what she is doing that night. Where was her brain? Why does she not defend herself on these issues other than to say "It was nothing scandelous".?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Why hasn't anyone focused on Clete Hyman. Because he's a cop?
Most who hear there was someone complaining and banging about noise at least checks out that part of the story...
Clete Hyman admits to being interested enough to open his door to look at the "3" men leaving.
Might he been more curious or irate enough to take it further and knock on George's door?
Clete himself says he hears noises, but not violent noises. Yet neighbors on the other side say it IS violent, like the room is being trashed.
To me...the simply story of a drunk girl and guy and their friends plus a casino has drawn attentions away from the simplest tale in the book...
The pissy neighbor on a cruise.
This is how it looked to me, anyway. I watched the Dateline special and could not believe how glossed over and forgotten Clete was...taking his story at face-value. To me, something didn't quite equate and that is the direction I'd go.
Post a Comment
<< Home