Former OceanGate director explains why they sent home a contractor who raised safety concerns
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 лис 2024
- Former OceanGate Director of Administration Amber Bay testifies to the U.S. Coast Guard during the Titan submersible hearings.
#southcarolina #charleston #lowcountry #localnews #scnews #titansubmersible #oceangate #coastguard #titanic
____________________
ABC News 4 (WCIV-TV) covers local news, weather, sports and more in the Charleston, South Carolina metro area and surrounding communities.
Website - abcnews4.com
Facebook - / abcnews4
Twitter - / abcnews4
Instagram - / abcnews4
Download our iOS Apps:
News - apps.apple.com...
Weather - apps.apple.com...
Download our Android Apps:
News - play.google.co...
Weather - play.google.co...
Submit news tips: desk@wciv.com
Submit photo/video: abcnews4.com/c...
This woman is lying, it’s so obvious that she’s not telling the truth and at the same time she’s slandering another person‘s good name and performance… And then she follows it up by saying I can’t remember. What a load of BS.
When in doubt get the "I don't recall" lie out.
she was crying and yelling....sounds like the absolutely correct reaction to seeing oceangates operations....give that contractor who cried a promotion. Crying and yelling is not unprofessional if your job is to check safety of an operation thats a death can. Seems CEO had yes men around him and any real adult who raised concerns was orchestrated out by people like this staffer. Yikes the incompetence level here 100%.
Her arranging things on the table, taking glasses off, wringing hands is a sign of inner agitation. Whatever causes that agitation. Maybe it was caused by her not remembering anything while describing every detail, trying to smear a warning voice. Pathetic.
@@flybywire5866 she took her glasses of to release the agitation she felt at using theatre professionals terms like 'notated', you could have said noted but theatre professionals like to hide their own incompetence behind buzz words like adding 'ated' onto words that dont need them etc you get a feel from that woman what a theatre of professional power plays Ocean gate must have been, arranged around feeding that wannabe Stocktons ego. I hate professional theatre, meeting etc should be purely about discussion how the business needs of the company can be resourced/met etc. Theres too much theatre professionals and not enough real professionals who think just of the business aim and not their own egos.
@@poetlaureate7334 I have been working for 43 years now. What I've learned is that companies are just playgrounds for egos. It is about gaining power over people. Power is the ability to force people to do things they don't want to do. It leads to the obliteration of common sense.
It's the job of a contractor to "jump in" and "disturb" when safety protocols are grossly violated.
That's why they got fired. Lucky they weren't made to walk the plank.
Not just a contractor, but anyone really...
No. It isn't. You can write a report and warn the paying clients, but if you are not happy as a contractor, then you need to leave. You aren't offering anything other than ass covering and you're disrupting other people who are tending to the actual mission. It's like saying it's the job of a passenger to jump into the cockpit when they think safety protocols are being violated. Do you think that improves flight safety or makes it worse? If you don't like what your pilot is doing then get off the plane.
@@stonehobson2487 Walking the plank would have given a better them chance of survival than getting locked into that garbage submersible.
It is and I often have (jumped in and disturbed), and always been sent packing quite soon after when Ive done so. Its normal. This kind of lieing is also normal, she was loyal to Stockton and the company and that was her job.
I work in online security and some of the most ordinary and simple precautions that projects should adopt are ignored and to merely raise them honestly is a threat when there's money and time for the project.
She doesn't remember...but she details everything anyway! Total liar.
She appears to have a complete and total memory lapse when asked any questions that could personally be seen to raise issues over her personal role, her personal oversight, her personal possible facilitating of any bad or potentially even dangerous decisions and moves made by the company boss and those she worked for - but she simultaneously shows amazing powers of recall at blaming her colleague and recounting their actions and behaviour instead.
A cynical person might be somewhat incredulous over the testimony she's giving, and how much, exactly, she 'can't remember' or recall.
Liar, trying to cover up her involvement with the incompetence that existed at the company.
You got that one right 👍
Notice how when she would begin to answer questions her voice was never a "normal" tone..but would start out sounding low, but the more she spoke & toward the end of her responses her voice would be like only above a whisper? That is guilt & she's also minimizing & gaslighting. The way she describes the contractor's behavior it's like she was describing someone that needed to be committed to a mental health facility...I don't believe that *for one minute!* Her 'I don't recall,' & 'I wasn't there,' & 'I don't remember,'...she thinks she's real slick & being evasive but she looks guilty AF. I hope when this committee wraps up & issues their report that they recommend her to be just as culpable as Rush & the rest of that ilk & hopefully find her criminally liable.
@@Corinne-v9c I noticed the quietness too. She was very tearful at the end of her testimony, which seemed heartfelt, but if you were truly wanting to prevent something like this happening again you would be completely factual and open.
She remembers every single detail besides anything having to do with safety concerns. Give me a break!!!🤬
@@why-even-try-brotendo She also remembers very clearly that Nothing Was Her Fault But The OTHER Staff Were All To Blame. She expressed That outlook very clearly, and very often. What an amazingly selective memory she possesses.
This woman personifies the real problem. Rush wasn't a lone monster. There was a whole board of monsters behind him at that company.
Rush hired people that allowed him to act without rules. When people confronted him they got fired.
@@Sean006and then they claimed she acted "erratically" load of bs
enablers and yes men
Paid lackeys.
It’s not just ocean gate but corporate culture in general. Boeing is like this
She was able to communicate in great detail the contractor’s erratic, unprofessional and insubordinate behavior, but she doesn’t seem able to even vaguely describe the contractor’s concerns regarding safety. She was also not able to connect the dots that her concerns over safety the prior day may have resulted in frustration the next day. Rather than try to resolve this you dismissed her. That is the sign of a rubber stamp HR rather than one that recognizes the both employees and leadership need to resolve differences and develop the right respect. I love how at the end she says they were able to resolve the challenges. For someone that didn’t know engineering and operations well, she certainly had a pulse on when they overcame problems. You’re not fooling anyone, and the death of that young man is on your soul too.
I bet there's zero record of the girl "being sick for the last month" too
I wonder if the way the carbon fibre hull was glued to the titanium endrings one of the "challenges" that she "resolved"?
HR exists to protect the executives. That's really their primary function, whether they will admit it or not.
She basically told the woman that it wasn't her job!
@@bobjohnson205 And yet, in any well-run organisation, safety is always regarded as everybody's job, and they are usually told so- often. If someone has a concern about something because they don't understand a technical matter, it's still not just okay but necessary that they raise it- sometimes the observer sees most of the game, and it never hurts having to explain a safety matter. In a good company they will have that as policy.
"a crew member behaved unprofessionally by reacting with a sense of urgency when the company's garbage submersible disappeared in the middle of the North Atlantic"
If it's true that she was crying and yelling (IF), that's not "reacting with a sense of urgency."
@@beeble2003 yes it is?
@@tinyminus No it's not. Crying and yelling is reacting with a sense of disruptive panic.
@@DaveP-uv1ml 100% agree. Snakes the lot of them.
@@DaveP-uv1ml How is an autocratic CEO demanding that somebody be fired a reminder about anything about HR?
When a crew member acts unprofessionally they get fired but when Stockton had a tantrum while stuck to a wreck and threw the controller at David lochridge’s head, that’s when they don’t care about professionalism
And that one chick who testified that Stockton placed the controller on David's feet. Like she didn't know how ridiculous that sounded 🙄
@madreep she doesn't seem to be very reliable. He, on the other hand, was consistent, provided proof to back his position whenever this existed, and what Lockridge said about Rush is consistent with what others have said about him.
so in other words, she knew this was a bad situation that didnt pass the smell test, and she was trying to raise the alarm and save people's lives....but was fired for it
Yep! I would say that she acted/reacted just as she should have! She should have got an award or a raise. Instead she got fired!
They had normalized the repeated failure of their comms systems, without addressing the actual failure reasons
The modus operandi of Stockton Rush and all the yes people around him. Four people paid for it with their lives. I´m not counting Rush in, he made his bed.
@@quesoestbonne Normalization of deviation leads to these disasters.
@@bobjohnson205 see something, say something (you'll get fired for it, but you'll have a clean conscience)
The language of obfuscation is strong with this one. The proof is in the pudding. Isn't it? Your craft was destroyed on the ocean floor, and five people died.
She's lying, the director. She needs to be put under oath and held accountable for her lies.
She is under oath here. All witnesses are sworn in.
@@swimgirl24 Just like Rush, rules and requirements mean nothing to her.
💯%
She is under oath here, and of course she‘s trying to evade responsibility here.
Seeing this clip made me realise that criminal charges are required.
She acted non professionally said by the man that threw a controller of the sub to the pilot (that managed to get them unstuck).
of course Renata who was on board at the time, testified he didn't throw that controller. The engineer said he did. someone wasn't telling the truth, and we need a third person to testify as to what happened.
@@blitzmom2674 Well considering that the controller had to be fixed before Lockridge could use it to pilot the submersible loose I'd say SOMEBODY threw the controller.
@@rsrt6910 I think that since there are now two very different accounts of the behavior (and it is significant, if Rush entangled the submersible and then had a tantrum) that the hearing board really needs to call on the other passengers on that dive. We know Renata was one, and we know Rush and his engineer were there, so who were the other two? I'm so curious to hear their account. And then if it turns out Rush did throw the controller, what will happen to Renata who denied that he did, under oath? Would someone really lie in these circumstances, and why?
@@blitzmom2674 You can't take a vote of those present, though, when they all have their own agendas- I think there would be a temptation for some to rose-tint Rush's past antics as it might help them believe it was okay that they did nothing to try to stop him. They may even have reconstructed events in their own minds as they'd like them to have been. I saw Lockridge's evidence, and hers, and I'd believe him of the two, because everything he said was consistent within itself, and consistent with other reports of Rush's character and even the videos of him. His account was detailed and precise, hers seemed vague. Consistent detail is a good indicator, so long as it is not parroted, and he wasn't parroting. He was able to say the same things using different words, for example.
@@alisonwilson9749 I believe Lockridge too and I got the impression Renata as an oceangate fangirl, but still, it would be interesting to hear a third account.
“I don’t remember.” Famous last words of a gaslighter.
Do you remember what was said to you however many years ago?
@@beeble2003 Why are you in all the comments arguing with people to defend this man and his company?
@@Supermanohman it's probably an A.I. bot meant to just get a reactions from sane individuals.
@@Supermanohman I'm not defending anybody: I'm just pointing out that people have unreasonable expectations of witnesses. OceanGate looks like a total cluster*** but not being able to remember something doesn't mean that somebody is gaslighting.
@@DINSTAAR-FPV Because only an AI bot could possibly disagree with you, right?
She doesn't remember the contractor bringing up any safety issues, but she referred her to upper management about those concerns, lol.
If a concern is serious enough wouldn't you assure that they make it to the proper person by walking them to that person's office, or scheduling a meeting that includes them, to ensure that the person doesn't just get discouraged and go home?
@@AaaaNinja She just told her that none of that was her job! What a useless b***h!
Liars have a hard time remembering what they say.
Giving her the benefit of the doubt, I'm assuming what she means is that she didn't go into details with her. It sounds to me like this woman was the director of HR or something. I'm an engineer, I can tell you for a fact that HR doesn't have any clue what was going on from an engineering perspective outside of being involved with onboarding and terminating people.
@@tankerd1847 Well, then in that case she did her job extremely well! She should be very proud of what she did. Somehow I don't think she feels that way! 🤔
I’m sure the contractor was making people upset with potent warnings like “you are gonna kill someone” but firing whistleblowers won’t stop your experimental craft from fatally malfunctioning.
I would so sue this woman for her personal comments (insults) towards that contractor. She was proven correct in the end and this piece of fluff wants to cover her behind from litigation so she try’s to throw the former employee under the bus almost alleging that she had some kind of medical/emotional issues. What BS. I’d have a process server delivering lawsuit papers on her in 24 hours…
Denial denial denial. Not just a river in Africa. 🤔
I worked for a firm once where on another site a worker got crushed to death by a dropped load.
Managment blamed him even after site studies clearly showed that the load was both incorrectly secured and the area beneath it was not properly sectioned off.
THEY BLAMED THE DEAD DUDE SO THEY COULD FORCE THE FAMILY TO FIGHT THEM IN COURT, WICH THEY COULDN'T DO BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY
those monsters took their husband/father and then any chance at life insurance so they family suffered even more. Fucking monsters
Why is the first thought to “sue?”
@@Agnus_Mason there wasn't workers' comp insurance?
@Scribe127 Because people can't testify in a broadcast hearing whatever they feel like without feeling professional consequences.
"She was acting unprofessional" Meanwhile, Stockton comes across as a total maverick, especially with other people's safety.
He literally got 4 innocent people killed because he was too concerned with breaking the rules to save time and money. Their business venture was not making money and he was ready to do anything for his company to get out of the red.
lol this witness seems TOTALLY not guilty of anything.
it's odd that those concerned about safety gave testimony on their own. Those defending oceangate roll up with lawyers in tow.
@@gdwnet who judges these kinds of enquies?
@@gdwnet I don't know how much culpability these "dedicated" mission specialists will have to face in the end. At least we should get to hear them explain all this to one of the family's lawyers in a court of law. That should be a little more revealing and much less pleasant for her. She's as guilty as Rush for propagating these lies and killing a child.
@@damilkk I'm not sure, the inquiry itself isn't a court case but it does carry legal weight and as they are public everything is recorded and on the record so I guess the families could sue?
Totally agree.
Not guilty of having a conscience.
Not guilty of possessing an IQ greater than 80.
Not guilty of giving a shit.
Not guilty of accountability.
Not guilty caring about anyone besides herself.
Not guilty of any sort of engineering background.
Not guilty of... well, I could do this all day and you see where I'm going with this.
I don’t know nothin, and if I did, it wasn’t my area of responsibility. To the best of my recollection, which could be wrong.
Literally her whole testimony.
"She acted erratically" coming from Stockton Rush is pretty ironic. He sounds like an ego driven danger to everyone around him - and no lady, they were not successful in working out those challenges. That's why you are sitting there making an obvious ass of yourself now.
Saying someone 'acted erratically' is a get-out clause. Very difficult for them to prove they didn't.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the contractor was aware of safety issues, and was SO concerned that she became emotional and unprofessional to wave a red flag.
Instead, she's labelled "irrational."
Ironically, in the end, the contractor was entirely rational and Ms. Bay's deadpan delivery of her operational ignorance is quiet and calmly unhinged.
I firmly believe rational behavior can't exist in chaotic circumstances. Rush created this environment that drove people nuts and I believe her behavior was a reflection of the frustration of being in that environment.
@@Supermanohman Exactly! The point when cognitive dissonance finally gives way to reality is very uncomfortable and probably looks irrational.
Agree.
To act unconcerned, unapologetic and concerned only with the way safety issues were communicated rather than with the actual concerns when five people died as a result of ignoring safety concern seems highly irrational to me.
She needs therapy.
suggesting the contractor is lying, suggesting the contractor was sick, suggesting she is incompetent, character assassination attempt much?
And she is asked to say something about herself and what she knew her answer is "I am sorry, I do not recall".
Laughable.
Good observations.
re: "Laughable." - She seems to be more like Criminal.
Remembers in great detail what the contractor supposedly did wrong. Can’t remember the details of the contractors safety concerns……..sometimes I forgor
She has blood on her hands. Her acceptance of the dangerous status quo and inaction led to those deaths.
I think the description by a previous witness was ‘paste’😳 DNA of all five identified.
I believe the contractor. This woman is lying to protect herself and others.
I love how she’s acting like the contractor was unreasonable and weird for being concerned about the communication loss issues. Too bad that contractor wasn’t around on the last day to disrupt operations.
The entire internet heard your testimony and doesn’t believe a word you said. I just thought you may want to let that sink into your head.
I think there's a bit of a lack of context here that is leading to sensationalized comments like yours. This sounds like the director of human resources. I don't think this woman was involved in any kind of engineering or quality effort and likely didn't actually have any details of safety incidences reported to her, nor was she in a position to do anything about them. If she's at fault for anything it's wrongfully terminating people on the CEO's orders.
I'm an aerospace engineer who works in commercial aviation. I work in a highly regulated transportation field. If something went terribly wrong on the engineering/operations side due to negligent management, I guarantee you the HR manager wouldn't have anything meaningful to add unless she was involved with terminating people wrongfully. Just some food for thought, I'm obviously not defending this company.
@@tankerd1847 As the director of HR, she should be making sure that people are not dismissed because they hurt the boss' fee fees. The contractor was hired to do a job. She did that job. The boss didn't like it. This woman enabled Stockton. That's why she was in the position she was in.
@@tankerd1847 I appreciate your thoughts. I too am an aerospace engineer, and I have worked in corporations for over 30+ years. What I observed in this woman’s testimony was her protecting her job by placating the CEO rather than representing the organization’s interest towards compliance and risk mitigation. That is every employee’s responsibility just like security is every employee’s responsibility. In does not matter that the contractor came to her with an engineering safety concerns. Yes, she did indicate to the contractor that she was not responsible for product safety; however, as an officer or director in the company (HR usually is) , she should have escalated the issue to the proper channels and not shrug off the contractor. Worse, when there was a conflict between two employees (one could argue a storm brewing because of her inaction), the contractor and CEO, she did not act as a good HR representative and try to resolve the differences. Instead she sided with the CEO, the easy play. I am not saying her situation was not difficult, that she deserved it. But when you are HR you must hold yourself to standards. That is why HR experts are certified.
@@tankerd1847 But I assume in your company, if an employee came forward to HR with a safety concern, that would be documented and formally passed on to the proper quarter, wouldn't it? With a paper trail? partly because it is a good thing to raise concerns, partly to cover HR's backside? It seems it wasn't in this case.
@@tankerd1847 Except that she WAS involved in engineering work... You should view her entire testimony, where she stared that (and "entirely knowing" how to torque the bolts: up to "two clicks" of the wrench, sir). She became part of the DECK CREW, and when asked if she had any formal training, she said "no, just on the job".
She didn't want to jeopardize her nice job, and all at the cost of safety. Greed can kill
she was sent home because Stockton Rush had narcissistic personality disorder. That's it. That's all it's ever going to be about. Not because someone didn't follow proper channels, have an explorer mindset or didn't work well with others. Because the CEO was a narcissist. Period. PERIOD. This is a case study in NPD.
The dude thought he was innovating something that would be a boon to offshore oil exploration, as if rovs don't exist.
It's also a great case study on how unmeritocratic accumulation of wealth really hurts societies, because there's plenty of Stockton Rush's all over american industry hplsing us all bsck
..except for one thing. The Narcissist actually fell for his own BS to the extent that it killed him. Normally they only kill other people.
Well then that’s the final word. We should all believe what you say and just move along. You seem to have an “exaggerated sense of your importance and are clearly desiring attention.”
To label it narcissism is insane. There are plenty of other possibilities it can be. How do u know its narcissism? You dont even know the guy, other than what he put on internet. Ever hear of projection?? I would say he was a child, very immature behaviour patterns. Other than that, i dont know him enough..
@@Scribe127imagine simping for Stockton Rush
She has a very selective memory. You can tell by the way she is talking that she is not confident in her answers. When she is faced with answering with a direct lie, she says “I can’t remember”.
Blame the dead guy, but you did his dirty work
I wouldn’t have myself on video if I said what she said for the world to see and hear.
My bullshitonometer just exploded
Are you wearing depends?
@@buzz5969Do people who know you refer to you as an a$$hole
Wow, she didn't even rehearse her lies and nonsense. "Um...um...um..." lol.
Here we have again, the vagueness of a manager's lies...
Her testimony sinks faster than Titan
4 innocents and a kamikaze officer in the deep! RIP especially for the young man.
My experience with military investigators is that if they are asking you a question, they already know the truth, so don't try to dance around self preservation.
“That wasn’t my responsibility.” Yeah, right.
Typical evasive HR weasel, throwing the employee under a bus. Ironically accusing and firing them for actions that Rush was also guilty of. Although in the end, thw employee was fired, Rush was killed. So karma.....
She knows how serious her failings are and how responsible she is; a huge event such as the Titan Imploding would crystalise all memories/events'the "I don't recall" etc etc is pure BS along with the "I dont have any engineering knowledge..." etc to evade guilt-pretty useless director if she ignored all safety warnings given by people in the know. Along with Nissan-trying to worm out of it all. Hope she gets sued along with all others in OceanGate who did nothing.
i have had an incompetent boss like this
A lot of “I don’t remembers”
People often don't remember the details of conversations they had years ago...
@@beeble2003 STOP ARGUING WITH ALL THE COMMENTERS! Are you invested with Oceangate or something?
@@beeble2003defending a death cult? Strange flex but okay
@@colin-nekritz I'm not defending anybody. I'm just pointind out a simple fact. Any time somebody says "I don't remember" in a court or similar setting, people pounce and accuse them of lying. In reality, people don't remember stuff.
And I really have no idea what you mean by calling my comment a "flex". What part of what I said makes you think I'm trying to come across as powerful? That's just nonsense.
@@beeble2003 People are more likely to solidify long term memory in stressful situations, like workplace conflict. If she didn't remember what she had for lunch last Tuesday, that would make sense. It seems unlikely that she wouldn't remember details of her interactions with the contractor.
The contractor didn't raise safety concerns. She always refers safety concerns to the engineering team. She referred the contractor to the engineering team. If the contractor didn't raise safety concerns, why did she refer her to the engineering team? Poor questioning.
In this instance it was a bit like trying to nail jelly to a wall.
“Not my responsibility.” Wow!
Dry sale five memory. She remembers what Stockton told her exactly and part of what the contractor told her but not what she said to the contractor. That’s not how memory works.
I cannot stand her fake "nice" voice
So fake.
She's annoyed that she's there.
If all her concerns were notated she should produce the notes.
A superficial and poor job of questioning that BS Geyser.
Deny deny deny. That was pitiful.
Lawyers must be lining up to sue the Rush estate and anyone who was in management
That's actually very interesting in this case.
Even under ideal situations this is inherently and fundamentally massively dangerous. It carries known risks. They sign waivers and understand the dangers.
Yes, the argument is he took shortcuts and ignored other experts.
So, in this case, at what point are the people who agreed to go under, responsible? How much is Rush's company responsible?
The fact that Rush himself turned into toothpaste is such a fascinating element to all of this.
Such a strange confluence of elements.
This reminds me of that car racer, a few years ago, who got out of his crashed car and in anger walked across the track and got killed.
He totally brought it on himself and everyone let it lie. What's to say? The guy was a moron.
Interesting, frustrating and ultimately horrifying story.
@@Bubbles99718 I seriously doubt that the legal waivers would stand up to a legal challenge.
1. The sub was made from a new, novel material.
2. Stockton refused to have an outside agency test and certify the sub.
3. The was delamination (I.e failure) of the built-up carbon fiber-resin before the final dive.
3. Managers and officers of the company voiced their safety and engineering concerns to Stockton well before the final dive.
Legal waivers are generally more effective for simple negligence or ordinary risk. Waivers are less effective or even invalid in cases of gross negligence, intentional misconduct, or other statutory rights. misconduct. I think a decent lawyer could make an excellent argument that this was a case of gross negligence and intentional misconduct.
These people should be in a court of law, not in front of this kid glove treatng commitee
Fact finding first, lawsuits and prosecutions next.
@@BuzzyStreet The law supposed to fact find, not just commitees a year later!
@machinetoolcommerce9375 You don't charge people with crimes, then try to find evidence they actually committed crimes while in court.
You find the evidence, then charge them.
“It wasn’t my responsibility” Look, safety was your first and only responsibility.
This is one person who was and is still part of the problem that enabled the unsafe environment to exist. She enabled Stockton and is still defending his ways.
Her deflection is astounding.
Why are none of these second, third or fourth in command being held responsible?
That's typical. Consider that even the great majority of atrocity-committing SS officers never faced punitive consequences for their crimes.
Maybe they are working up to those. It's often done that way. Get the underlings to testify before the big guns, so they aren't sure what to say to back their bosses up.
SHE remembers. I don't recall is another way of lying about the truth.
This woman has been well coached by her attorney.
Ms Wilby is a very brave & courage young woman. To be in your first job & to raise her concerns about the safety of the vessel to ask questions about the data & engineering facts, would have taken an enormous amount of courage. And then to be ridiculed & bullied by her superiors & then let go by them is indicative of the cavalier attitude of that company. I hope Ms Wilby has not lost confidence she has a bright future ahead of her. Most people in her position would have just looked away. I hope that she reads this post because she has true integrity & honesty. I salute her.
Back pedalling like no tomorrow.
fidget with napkin, coughing, euh euh, I don't remember, fidget with glasses, hear say, I dont't remember. Classic!!
That lady is full of crap. She is the only person who believes her (own) words.
Utter BS.
I have no knowledge of engineering operations but I can assure you our sops to re-establish coms were both successful and sufficient. Absolute clown 🤡
You sent her home, because the truth hurts, poor design, poor production, untested materials in deep dive submarine industry..... guilty of gross negligence.
These people make up people acting unprofessionally as an excuse to fire people, when all they do is act unprofessional people in charge always hypocritical
For whatever reason I cannot stand this womana voice.
Probably has something to do with all the diarrhea exploding out of her mouth.
Objection your honor, the witness is lying to cover her own ass
I can smell the bs from here.
So a "crew member" was acting "unprofessionaly".... what does she call Stocktons behavior? Stockton was reckless with both his own and other peoples lives! That is much worse than somebody getting mad at a bad system when trying to keep track of a submersible.
She “disparaged” the crew, who sent the Titan and civilians to a watery grave. She wasn’t a “team player”… which means someone who blindly follows orders. This woman is certainly a OceanGate Team-player… and, she’s partially responsible for the deaths of the civilian joy rides, I mean “ mission specialists”.
My God! Not the first time she's lied in her life.
She is not fooling anyone.
She slipped up when making her closing statement which is not part of this clip. She referred those that died as "Explorers". I can very easily see that she used the term "Explorers mindest" that Wilby says she used in their conversation.
This is what they call ‘leakage’ when analysing speech. A drop may not mean much, but so many of them can make an ocean.
Ironic how they fired someone who was acting unprofessionally! Smh!!
Oceangate is like a metaphor for America in so many ways.... someone should write a book about it.
The company spent more on lawyers to cross all the ts , than they did on anything else. The victims were not paying passengers, they were science investors, in international waters, that signed away their rights. Let's see if it holds up better than the vessel. I doubt passengers truly understood the risks, and proving they were lied to, holds the key. Firing someone a day before the contract is up is a slimy move, whistblower or not. Did they even pay this contractor?
The loud cracking sounds that happened on every dive were the sounds of the wound carbon fibers delaminating caused by water intrusion and pressure. The wireless communication system used was faulty and never worked properly. On the Titan's last dive, it failed as usual, and the surface support vessel lost contact with the Titan for half an hour before the Fatal implosion occurred. All because Rush was cost cutting.
I remember I said all the right things but can’t remember any of the other details, sorry
Lol, when you know someone is full of it
That was the testimony of someone trying to cover their own ass!
History is littered with Stockton Rushes, bored rich men who don’t have to work for money and have never had the humbling that comes with patience, convinced on some rumour that there is an Eldorado out there and they are the man to find. From the Franklin expedition to here the story is the same, they march off full of confidence into a place few dare to tread without good reason and vanish forever, usually taking some undeserving sods with them.
This lady suddenly suffers of amnesia. All in charge should be thrown in jail.
She is lying and I don't think she fooled anyone. As people point out she remembers with great clarity everything that happened on that except the reasons. It also seems standard practice that as soon as someone brings safety they get fired. I think that Stockton had an ego the size of the titanic and a very thin skin and if anyone even remotely critical was fired. That is why he hired inexperienced young people as they didn't know better.
She needs to go under oath
I can't stand that she talks like a programmed bot 🤖
Who we really need out here is Wendy Rush 😡
Another Stockton shill.
Fast food employees putting together a bathtub toy.
"Erratically and unprofessionally". Sounds more like Stockton 🤡
Deflect and Deny
I want to ask why this woman is acting like the contractor was overreacting, but I know she's trying to avoid consequences. That contractor was emotional, because she could see the disaster coming and was not being taken seriously. The fact is, the contractor who was dismissed was right. Amber Ray enabled Stockton and shares a measure of responsibility for the failure.
“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”
Except where the lie intersects the physics of the natural world... and mother nature is an unforgiving bitch.
how many times can this thing lie
That thing is practically a fractal liar.
This woman is lying
I love that these settings literally let you see how people cope with stress live, she was good, but not good enough to sweet talk incompetence/negligence into 'bad luck'
What is this the HR lady?
Stockton Rush was an innovator and would inevitably clash with engineers. Engineering is an extremely conservative profession. It must be. People's lives are at risk. Design is based on knowing the strength of a material, the forces that act upon it, its response through its operating range and a safety factor to account for the unexpected. Assembling diverse components without full knowledge of their properties and hoping for success is not the way it is done within the profession. Studious detailed application of knowledge. Not wishful thinking.
Using batshit crazy cheap-ass components and operating with no regard for either reality or sanity is NOT innovation.
If he felt competent with his contraption, why did he refuse to have it be tested like it should have been? And why did everyone let him get away with that? What's wrong with people?
@@TheCornhusker Following all of the rules would mean that the project would never launch, as a result of costs and delays. Stockton Rush knew that the actual strength was often several times the certified strength, which would suffice for the customers of its products and at the same time shield the manufacturer from liability should an unexpected combination of factors result in failure. The viewing window did not break even though it was taken far beyond its certified depth. The carbon fibre hull did not buckle in the middle which was a major concern. For the most part the materials did hold up. Failure was precipitated in separation of the titanium ring from the carbon fibre hull. That was not anticipated due to lack of knowledge of how epoxy, which is extremely strong, becomes brittle and is easily shattered when near freezing. International waters do not come under regulations so nothing stopped Stockton. People are people that do not wish to become involved.
@@mrmelmba "The carbon fibre hull did not buckle in the middle which was a major concern. For the most part the materials did hold up. Failure was precipitated in separation of the titanium ring from the carbon fibre hull. That was not anticipated due to lack of knowledge of how epoxy, which is extremely strong, becomes brittle and is easily shattered when near freezing. " First off, we don't know whether the feeble and compromised hull collapsed first, or the glue gave way first. Have you seen the photos of the sections of the hull they sliced into? Full of holes which should not have been there. And those with knowledge on making up and glueing carbon fibre who I have heard talking seem to think that the way it was made and glued was not in accordance with current practice (and that's putting it mildly). Glueing two materials together with different rates of expansion is known to be a problem. The glue substance itself did not need to fail for the end to come off. I'd also be shocked if engineers didn't know how glues react to low temperatures- can you give a source for your assertion about that?
@@alisonwilson9749 I agree with your opinion. The source is personal experience. When attempting to remove ceramic tiles that were glued to fibre board it took nearly 20 minutes and a cylinder of propane in order to remove one tile. When temperatures dropped to near freezing tiles dropped off with the slightest shock and I removed a few hundred in within a few minutes. Stockton Rush was reckless, but I understand his position. It would have taken years if he had adhered to all of the requirements.
I am going to use an example from an entirely different situation, housing. Each council, in order to get reelected wishes to demonstrate that they accomplished something during their term of office. So, they implement additional regulations for your "safety" and "protection." It was not that houses were collapsing with people getting injured and killed. Now, the time and expense to maneuver through these myriad regulations has resulted to thousands of homeless in each city with a couple of hundred deaths each month. Only a person with deep financial pockets and who can afford to wait years can succeed in building a house. Stockton Rush knew what he was faced with. In order to make a minor change that cost a few hundred dollars, it ended up costing a former landlord ten thousand dollars before all of the studies and regulations were met. Someone was not allowed to add a bathroom to the first floor at a cost of about $2000 but was permitted to add a lift to the second floor that cost $200,000. Applying that concept to the Titan virtually meant that the mission would never leave the drawing board.
Of course her name is Amber...
Critical sad how many directors are in inflicted with the ole directors amnesia…, a crippling disease…, still.. it never seems to affect their careers…
This woman is a terrible liar.
she knows more, it’s obvious.