Originally posted by CadoAngelus
And while all of your post seems to have enlightened me somewhat in the happenings of the "BP Oil Spill", surely the rig was still crewed by Transocean staff. So anything that happened the day of the start of the spill would be linked to whatever Transocean staff did...
can you support this? from what I have seen, it appears that staff took orders from both BP and transocean officials, and that while Transocean themselves had in the past violated saftey protocol, eyewitnesses say it was BP in this particular instance making decisions, even against transocean's advise.
Even if they are technically "Transocean" staff, this would be the same as the rig itself. If the problem can be shown to have been caused by the staff or from negligence in the staffing process, then yes, Transocean would face the culpability. However, it appears that the staff themselves were warning BP about their cut corners policies, including on the day of the accident. Because BP was paying money for the use of the rig, they also assume responsibility for its usage.
Think of it like renting a car. Even if they give you a driver, it is still your responsibility if you break things, so long as it wasn't a problem specifically with the car itself or the driver they provided for you.
Originally posted by CadoAngelus
I'd say BP and Transocean were both as culpable as one another.
no court will agree with you
Originally posted by CadoAngelus
Slightly off on a tangent here: As soons as Transocean officials and high ranking staff realised about the burst pipe they used a maritime law to cover there arses. The law allowed them to class the rig as a sailing ship, which made it so they'd only need to pay 18million compared to what would happen if they were taken to a tribunal and sentenced accordingly.
of course they did, who wants to loose money?