Guess what's in Santo Domingo?

aarhus

Long live King Frederik X
Jun 10, 2008
4,412
1,987
113
Me too for others' errors. Mine - not so much.
Not forgetting that English is not everyone's language of choice.

I turn a blind eye to grammatical & spelling errors
I definitely make mistakes. English is not my native language although I consider myself close to being bilingual. I have started writing online/blogging and have started using a software called Prowritingaid for editing and it’s fun to use.
 

Sailor51

Happy to still be here
Oct 30, 2018
633
306
63
Okay folks, didn't intend to insult. But since I occaisionally publish on Amazon I constantly spell check. And yes, even here.
 

Jan

Bronze
Jan 3, 2002
1,812
485
83
64
Santo Domingo Este
www.colonialzone-dr.com
The first few days it was in port in SD I saw heads bobbing on the decks. People walking around. I did not walk near for a few days but the last 2 days, viewing from afar, I see noone. I wonder if it has been abandoned or maybe only the crew is on board. I have not been up close. I only see it on morning walks from the Villa Duarte side of the river.
 

Ecoman1949

Born to Ride.
Oct 17, 2015
2,809
1,311
113
Yes, technically you can arrest a vessel. That is what it is, and has been, for the past couple of hundred years.

The arrest warrant is issued, by a court, then depending on the jurisdiction, a lawyer or bailiff must climb aboard, and arrest the vessel to prevent it leaving the territorial waters of the country where it is under arrest. In some jurisdictions, a company can pay a bond to cover the claim against its vessel to have it released while the court case proceeds. Legally, it is probably the most fascinating area of maritime law, and that's not even getting to sister-ship arrests.

But I'm really not sure how your comment about Miranda rights has anything to do with the arrest of a vessel.

Foreign vessels can be held in port under court orders until creditors are paid for long overdue food and fuel services. Vessels can be seized for legal reasons inside territorial waters for human trafficking, drug smuggling, etc. We have held vessels from sailing until the spill they caused has been cleaned up and a Surety Bond has been posted prior to allowing them to depart.

AlaPlaya is right. Foreign vessels can be seized/held for many reasons. Many foreign vessels have Ship’s Agents in ports to handle these affairs. Legally any agency that seizes a vessel has an obligation to maintain it in good order. That doesn’t always happen. I’ve seen them sit idle and unattended for years, and quickly deteriorate.

The SeaFarer’s Union has legally held vessels to get the vessel owners to pay the crews long overdue wages. This doesn’t always end well. Many times, the vessel owners leave the crew on their own and the Seamen’s Mission has to provide food and fuel to enable the crew to survive during winter. Salvors also have a legal right (liens) to hold vessels in port until all their bills are paid.

The Flying Fox is an expensive toy, located well outside US territorial waters, registered under a flag of convenience. Even with a US-DR agreement in place, I think it would be hard for a US Agency to seize the vessel under the guise of the spoils of war. The Caymans have a reputation as an offshore money haven and secrecy. I’m not sure if they have a reciprocity agreement with the US. I doubt if they would cooperate with US authorities.

Seizures of foreign vessels, even in territorial waters, can come back to bite enforcement agencies in the ass. We seized a Spanish trawler years ago, allegedly for illegally fishing a restricted species in a restricted area. We lost the case and had to pay for all costs including loss of fishing time and loss of the processed fish on board the vessel. It cost our government millions of dollars and serious loss of face as the Japanese say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlaPlaya

bob saunders

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
32,580
6,005
113
dr1.com
Foreign vessels can be held in port under court orders until creditors are paid for long overdue food and fuel services. Vessels can be seized for legal reasons inside territorial waters for human trafficking, drug smuggling, etc. We have held vessels from sailing until the spill they caused has been cleaned up and a Surety Bond has been posted prior to allowing them to depart.

AlaPlaya is right. Foreign vessels can be seized/held for many reasons. Many foreign vessels have Ship’s Agents in ports to handle these affairs. Legally any agency that seizes a vessel has an obligation to maintain it in good order. That doesn’t always happen. I’ve seen them sit idle and unattended for years, and quickly deteriorate.

The SeaFarer’s Union has legally held vessels to get the vessel owners to pay the crews long overdue wages. This doesn’t always end well. Many times, the vessel owners leave the crew on their own and the Seamen’s Mission has to provide food and fuel to enable the crew to survive during winter. Salvors also have a legal right (liens) to hold vessels in port until all their bills are paid.

The Flying Fox is an expensive toy, located well outside US territorial waters, registered under a flag of convenience. Even with a US-DR agreement in place, I think it would be hard for a US Agency to seize the vessel under the guise of the spoils of war. The Caymans have a reputation as an offshore money haven and secrecy. I’m not sure if they have a reciprocity agreement with the US. I doubt if they would cooperate with US authorities.

Seizures of foreign vessels, even in territorial waters, can come back to bite enforcement agencies in the ass. We seized a Spanish trawler years ago, allegedly for illegally fishing a restricted species in a restricted area. We lost the case and had to pay for all costs including loss of fishing time and loss of the processed fish on board the vessel. It cost our government millions of dollars and serious loss of face as the Japanese say.
Especially because the USA is not at declared war against Russia.
 

Sol09

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2017
293
267
63
The Dominican government is pretty cooperative in letting the US carry out missions here. Even without proper jurisdiction, I don't see the Dominican authorities forbidding the US to do what they want to do here.
 

Ecoman1949

Born to Ride.
Oct 17, 2015
2,809
1,311
113
Holding it is one thing. Seizing it and taking ownership of it is a whole different matter Without just cause, this might be interpreted as an act of piracy under international Maritime law. The true owners of these vessels have unlimited financial and legal resources. They will get their yachts back, otherwise the precedent for search and seizure in countries allied to invaded countries could open the door to worldwide piracy.

The temporary seizure of these mega yachts is just one aspect of the NATO political media exercise to bring Putin to the negotiating table and end his invasion of the Ukraine. It’s not about his billionaire cronies or their yachts. They just happen to be in the line of fire.
 

CristoRey

Welcome To Wonderland
Apr 1, 2014
11,787
8,055
113
The Dominican government is pretty cooperative in letting the US carry out missions here. Even without proper jurisdiction, I don't see the Dominican authorities forbidding the US to do what they want to do here.
Been that way before we installed their last dictator.