Costa Culpability.

As a thirteenth body was found among the wreck of the Costa Concordia this weekend, the latest from the discredited captain is that the salute to the Isle of Giglio, off the Italian coast, was in fact ordered by the managerial company.

The cruise ship’s altered course caused the worst nautical holiday disaster in recent memory on 13^th January 2012.

Rather than taking the approved course, which is sailed over 50 times a year, the Costa Concordia found itself more than some 4 miles off course and dangerously close to the shallow waters of Giglio. Since the incident, which caused mass panic amongst crew and passengers alike, a string of theories have been offered as to the reasons behind the ship’s misfortune.

Map displaying route and times believed to detail the Costa Concordia's fate, 13th Jan 2012.

Initial ideas centred on faulty equipment, rendering the vessel without accurate mapping systems, or suggested that the captain was attempting to show off to other colleagues on the near-by island.

However, Francesco Schettino has reportedly said he was ordered to carry out the manoeuvre by ship owner Costa Crociere, according to transcripts leaked to Italian newspaper La Repubblica.

Statements to a judge appear to be a cross-breed then of the original theories that plagued papers and onlookers in the wake of the ship listing 10 days ago. Breaking his silence, Schettino accuses the executives of the Costa Crociere group as not only having known of the salute, but actively encouraging the manoeuvre. 

He told the judge that the cruise company insisted it was a good way by which to promote its sailings and continued by adding “Costa was aware of the repeated practice of 'saluting' around the world”.

Besides these contextualising factors, Schettino also described that on the night of the collision he discovered some of the equipment which records navigation data was out of order, which could hamper investigators' efforts to reconstruct his route.

The captain, who is under house arrest whilst the investigations continue, is charged with several offences: namely, manslaughter, causing a shipwreck and abandoning ship.

However, with the time that has passed between the event and these initial remarks, it seems all the more plausible that the Schettino has been advised how to approach his trial, instantly discrediting other major figures within the company.

Despite the torrent of abuse that has circulated around the captain however, the various scandalous reports from both passengers and those working aboard the ship have certainly come to cloud the issue of the captain’s sole culpability.

 Those who claim the captain had been drinking at the bar, for example, when the ship started to list on the rocks have had the event placed on a pedestal of bastardisation, instantly citing it as a testimony to the captain’s abuse of duty. Yet, this was a ship with over 1,000 crew members aboard. Certainly, while this figure is not indicative of the percentage that is senior staff, the captain has rights to a break and could have been enjoying such repose.

Additionally, with perhaps up to twenty other senior officials with access and qualifications to man the ship beside Schettino, it is only in the everyday maintaining of such a vessel that a number of tasks are distributed among the crew. Schettino’s team should have been fairly expected to manage the ship without constant supervision. A captain’s duties go beyond the simple steering of the liner itself.

However, should his stories of faulty navigation equipment prove true, there will indeed be question as to the captain’s conduct and decisions to leave the command posts of the ship on that fateful eve.

Yet, the most trivial aspect of the charges facing the captain is that of abandoning ship. Whilst there is no doubt that Schettino’s exit from the sinking craft was far from dignified, the orders to return and the subsequent backlash appear far out of proportion. No longer are we in a society that should condone the idea of a captain ‘going down with his ship’. In fact, should a captain wait till the last, we would still find Schettino sitting some distance of the Giglio coast, awaiting confirmation he could return to land.

Had the vessel sunk completely after the rocks ripped a hole on the underside, society would have effectively condemned an extra person to a watery grave. Not only should this weigh heavy on conscience, but surely it is better to have a captain that can testify as to the events of the evening in question and provide evidence, than one several hundred feet under the surface of the sea?

Lack of calm logic simply baffles.

Due to the unusual nature of the ship’s listing, having rolled onto its side, normal procedures of evacuation were clearly not possible and, although the mob panic that spread so quickly will haunt many who were on board for some time, this was not a scenario that had been offered foresight.

Of course, the new wave of information from the captain comes to dirty the hands of other more prominent figures. The statements from captain and spokespersons do not match up for one. Schettino says he gave an accurate depiction of the scene to Costa Crociere official Roberto Ferrarini, who approved his actions.

Further, Pier Luigi Foschi, the chief executive of Costa Crociere, said last week: “I can't exclude that ships have been sailed closer to land on the initiative of some captains without informing us. But I have never been aware of this taking place in an unsafe manner.”

Some clever wording on the part of Foschi aside, one can’t help but wonder his thought that “I have never been aware of this taking place in an unsafe manner”, suggesting he is aware of the practice itself. Indeed, the subsequent questions follow: why allow it to continue, even if ‘safe’? Are passengers’ lives a risk worth taking in the battle for consumer image in a recession-struck world? If so, how frequently do such liners alter course, unbeknown to many crew and clientele alike? The irresponsibility is tantamount to a pilot flying in another aircraft’s space; a driver using the wrong carriage on the motorway.

The following video shows the January accident not to be the product of a one off event:

As the evidence appears to mount against the troubled captain that has become the scapegoat of this accident, one US law firm has indicated how it is “all too easy to say this captain acted alone.”

Without doubt, more people were involved in this disaster than has been considered at first glance, though Schettino’s claim of faulty equipment, now that his company contest his remarks, appears all too coincidentally fitting...