U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

34–792 PDF 2007

CRIMES AGAINST AMERICANS ON

CRUISE SHIPS

(110–21)

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

March 27, 2007

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

(

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

JULIA CARSON, Indiana 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

NICK LAMPSON, Texas 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

TED POE, Texas 

DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JOHN R. ‘RANDY’ KUHL, JR., New York 

LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

(II)

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Chairman 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota 

(Ex Officio) 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

TED POE, Texas 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

(Ex Officio) 

(III)

(V)

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... vi 

TESTIMONY 

Bald, Gary, Senior Vice President, Global Chief Security Officer, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. ................................................................................................ 48

Carver, Ken, President, International Cruise Victim Organization .................... 29

Dale, Terry, President, Cruise Lines International Association .......................... 48

Dishman, Laurie ...................................................................................................... 29

Hernandez, Salvador, Deputy Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation ........................................................................................................................ 11

Hickey, John ............................................................................................................. 29

Justice, Rear Admiral Wayne, Assistant Commandant For Response, United 

States Coast Guard .............................................................................................. 11

Kaye, Larry, Senior Partner, Kaye, Rose and Partners ....................................... 48

Klein, Ross A., Professor, Memorial University of Newfoundland ...................... 29

Mandigo, Charles, Director of Fleet Security, Holland America Lines, Inc. ...... 48

PREPARED STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY A MEMBER OF CONGRESS 

Brown, Hon. Corrine, of Florida ............................................................................. 66

Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., of Maryland ............................................................... 70

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Bald, Gary ................................................................................................................ 73

Carver, Kendall ........................................................................................................ 100

Dale, Terry ............................................................................................................... 133

Dishman, Laurie ...................................................................................................... 157

Hernandez, Salvador ............................................................................................... 181

Hickey, John H. ....................................................................................................... 194

Justice, Rear Admiral Wayne ................................................................................. 239

Kaye, Lawrence W. .................................................................................................. 246

Klein, Ross A. ........................................................................................................... 261

Mandigo, Charles A. ................................................................................................ 278

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Hickey, John, 6 Exhibits ......................................................................................... 211

Justice, Rear Admiral Wayne, Assistant Commandant For Response, United 

States Coast Guard, response to question from Rep. Coble ............................. 27

ADDITIONS TO THE RECORD 

American Society of Travel Agents, Cheryl Corey Hudak, CTC, President, 

statement .............................................................................................................. 282

Cruise Shoppes, Shawn Tubman, President & CEO, statement ......................... 284

National Association Cruise Oriented Agencies, Mary S. Brennan, ECC, and 

Donna K. Esposito, President, statement .......................................................... 285

Vacation.com, Steve Tracas, President & CEO, statement .................................. 286

Project: Safe Cruise, Tim Albright, statement ...................................................... 288

vi


34792.001
vii


34792.002
viii


34792.003
ix


34792.004
x


34792.005
xi


34792.006
(1)

CRIMES AGAINST AMERICANS ON CRUISE 

SHIPS 

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME

TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Elijah 

Cummings [chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. This Committee hearing is now called to order. 

Good morning to everyone. 

Before we begin, I ask unanimous consent that Representative 

Matsui, a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, may sit with the Subcommittee today and participate in 

this hearing. And without objection, it is so ordered. 

I also commend Congresswoman Matsui for her leadership on 

this issue. Today’s hearing was scheduled after a request was made 

by Ms. Matsui that we examine in more detail an issue that is of 

great concern to the estimated 12.6 million Americans who will 

take a cruise in 2007; and that is, the extent of crimes committed 

against Americans on cruise ships. 

Any American who travels abroad cannot expect the same level 

of law enforcement’s protection by U.S. officials that they would 

have in the United States. And those who wonder about the whole 

cruise ship issue should understand that it is much different and 

much more unique than if someone were to simply visit Disney 

World. 

However, it is likely that many United States citizens who travel 

on cruises do not realize that when they step onto a cruise ship, 

even if it embarks from a United States port, they are probably 

stepping into a floating piece of Panama, or the Bahamas, or 

whichever foreign country whose flag the ship bears. In fact, aside 

from three ships operating on the coastwise trade in Hawaii, all of 

the estimated 200 ocean-going cruise ships worldwide are flagged 

in countries other than the United States. As such, the same laws 

and rights that protect United States citizens on U.S. soil do not 

apply on cruise ships. 

The FBI may not have jurisdiction over crimes that occur on the 

ship; particularly if the ship never enters a United States port. And 

the investigation of a crime may require the cooperation of many 

different national agencies. Further, the very nature of cruising, 

traveling with a transient population aboard a ship far from land, 

2

may make it difficult to secure a crime scene or ensure the collection and preservation of evidence adequate to be used in a trial in 

the United States. 

Again, this is another distinction between the cruise ship and 

visiting Disney World. And if a crime is not reported until the alleged victim returns to port, or even to their home, the scene of the 

event will likely be completely scrubbed down and all possible witnesses will have dispersed throughout the world. 

Significantly, available data suggests that there are few reported 

crimes on cruise ships. At a hearing in March 2006 convened by 

the Committee on Government Reform, upon which I sit, cruise industry executives testified that 178 passengers on North American 

cruises reported being sexually assaulted between 2003 and 2005. 

During that same period, 24 people were reported missing and 14 

others were reported being robbed. 

However, a key question that must be examined is whether this 

data presents a complete picture of the level of crime on cruise 

ships. Aside from the statistics reported by cruise lines, there is no 

reliable data collected by any independent source. Importantly, 

under United States law, crimes on cruise lines are required to be 

reported only if they occur within the 12 mile limit of the United 

States territorial waters. Though cruise lines have been voluntarily 

reporting incidents and alleged crimes to the FBI for several years 

now, the FBI has not recorded a total number of incidents reported 

to it. Instead, the FBI has maintained records only on those cases 

for which it has opened case files, and these have numbered only 

about 50 to 60 per year. 

Thus, an important question that must be examined by this Subcommittee is whether the voluntary incident reporting system, organized just this week by the cruise industry, the FBI, and the 

Coast Guard, is adequate to capture the data needed to develop a 

reliable picture of the extent of crimes on cruise ships. 

Another important issue requiring examination is what, if anything, can be done to enhance the chance that those individuals 

who are the victims of crimes on cruise ships have a reasonable 

likelihood of receiving justice. In many cases, simply because of the 

nature of cruising, justice is a target floating precariously among 

shifting jurisdictional lines and far from the reaches of the FBI or 

other Federal agencies who may be many hours away. Those who 

cruise must understand that they are entering a floating world 

where United States laws do not directly reach. 

But we in Congress have a responsibility to nearly 13 million of 

our citizens who cruise annually to ensure that, given the unique 

circumstances of cruising, cruise ships are, nonetheless, as safe as 

they can be. And so this is not a hearing to in any way beat up 

on the cruise industry. This is a hearing to bring some enlightenment so that when people save up their hard-earned money and 

make a decision to take a vacation on a cruise ship we can do everything in our power to maximize their opportunities to be safe. 

And with that, I recognize our Ranking Member, Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and good morning 

to you and everyone else. Thank you very much for having this 

very important hearing. And thanks also to Congresswoman Matsui for her suggestion that we do it. 

3

The Subcommittee is meeting this morning to review the laws 

and regulations relating to the reporting, investigation, and prosecution of crimes and accidents that occur aboard cruise vessels. As 

the Chairman has indicated, each year more than 10 million Americans vacation aboard cruise ships, and we need to make sure that 

the existing authorities under the current legal framework are adequate to deter and respond to all crimes that are committed 

against these Americans. If there are changes that are required to 

this framework to better equip passengers, the cruise lines, and 

Federal agencies with the tools necessary to prevent the occurrence 

of future crimes, I have every confidence that this Subcommittee, 

under the able leadership of Chairman Cummings, will move 

quickly to address those shortcomings. 

Almost every cruise vessel that leaves from a United States port 

carries passengers on a voyage to international waters or locations 

outside of the United States. As a result, the investigation of 

crimes and accidents that occur aboard cruise vessels are governed 

by a complicated and tangled assortment of U.S., foreign state, and 

international laws, treaties, and industry practices. I hope as we 

listen to our witnesses today that they will speak to the challenges 

that these competing areas of jurisdiction cause and whether there 

are any specific actions that they would recommend to the United 

States Congress to improve coordination and cooperation among all 

of the entities involved. 

One issue that I would very much appreciate if the witnesses 

would address in their testimony is the apparent discrepancy between the offenses that fall under the jurisdiction of the United 

States law and the alleged crimes that must be reported to the 

Coast Guard and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Speaking 

only for myself, I fail to understand why the law appears to have 

one set of rules for reporting a crime and another set of rules for 

investigating and prosecuting that crime under the laws of the 

United States. 

The cruise industry is an important component of our national 

economy and the economy of many coastal states. It is in the interest of the industry to take such actions as are necessary to deter 

the incidents of serious accidents and crimes on cruise ships to the 

greatest extent possible. 

I want to thank all of the witnesses who are set to appear today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. LaTourette. 

Ms. Brown? 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, 

Chairman Cummings, and Mr. LaTourette for holding today’s hearing concerning the cruise industry. You are two of the fairest Members of Congress and I am glad you will be presiding over this 

hearing. 

As a member of the Florida delegation and the Representative of 

the Port of Jacksonville, I have particular interest in the cruise industry. The cruise industry is the most important economic engine 

in the State of Florida; over 4.8 million passengers embarked from 

Florida in 2005, and the industry contributes more than $5.5 billion in direct spending. In addition, the cruise industry is the secVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
4

ond largest employer in Florida, generating more than 128,000 

jobs. 

The cruise industry is highly regulated by the State, Federal, 

and international laws. They ensure that their passengers are safe 

and have a sound, safe, and secure record. It is apparent from the 

FBI statistics that crime against U.S. passengers on cruise ships 

are rare. Indeed, cruise ships are a very controlled environment 

with entry and exits being well-documented. I do not downplay the 

incidents that have occurred, and while I express my condolences 

to the families of the victims, it is important to put these incidents 

in perspective. 

The rate of crime aboard cruise vessels is far less than the national crime average or the crime rate in a U.S. city of comparable 

size in population. Unfortunately, crime happens wherever people 

gather. But the important thing is that the risk is minimal and 

that procedures are in place to make sure that crimes are investigated throughout and in a uniform manner. The FBI, which is 

testifying here today, can attest that the cruise industry has comprehensive security programs and crime-reporting procedures in 

place on all of their passenger vessels. 

A leisure cruise is one of the most popular vacation options because of the excellent safety record and the high quality of service 

provided on board. I look forward to working with the Committee 

to continue to ensure that safety and the well-being of passengers 

on cruise ships is maintained. 

In closing, let me just say in my prior life I owned three travel 

agencies and a cruise is one of the most comprehensive vacations 

a person can take. Sixty percent of the people who took a cruise 

were second time passengers, whether it was honeymoons, clubs, 

church groups. So it is a very important industry for our 14 ports 

in Florida. 

I am looking forward to this hearing and to working with the 

Committee. Thank you both, Chairman and Ranking Member. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Ms. Brown. 

Our Ranking Member of the full Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure, Mr. Mica. 

Mr. MICA. Thank you, Chairman Cummings. 

First of all, I want to associate my remarks with the comments 

of my colleague from Florida, Ms. Brown. She very eloquently stated the importance of the cruise industry to our economy in Florida. 

I believe, like Ms. Brown, that for millions of Americans cruising 

has proven to provide a safe and economical way for many individuals to travel to see locations and parts of the world that would not 

otherwise be available to them. As Ms. Brown said, in our State, 

the cruise ship industry is part of a multi-million dollar tourism industry that provides hundreds of thousands of jobs. It is a great 

boost to some of our local, and State, and national economies. 

However, I think both Ms. Brown and I share concern, and we 

believe that it is important that Congress, the cruise industry, and 

all levels of law enforcement do everything possible to make certain 

that cruise passengers are as safe and secure as possible. Ms. 

Brown and I also represent the Daytona Beach area. We just finished Bike Week and we have actually done a great deal of improvement in enforcement in Bike Week. We have about a half-aVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
5

million people visit the Daytona Beach area during Bike Week. 

This year I think we lost seven individuals as a result of motorcycle accidents. Last year I believe we lost 27 individuals coming 

for tourism to enjoy themselves and participate in a great weekend 

activity. But with any tourism activity, there is risk and it is important that we put in place measures to ensure people’s safety and 

security. 

Mr. Cummings, the Chair, also stated, very appropriately, the 

difficulty we have with the cruise industry in that they may come 

in and pick up passengers at a Florida city, or Baltimore, Jacksonville, New York, wherever it may be, but in just a few hours they 

are in international waters, they are travelling to international 

ports. We have a very complex situation as far as laws and liability. But U.S. law enforcement agencies I think should be responsible for investigating crimes against American citizens—interview 

victims, and examine crime and accident scenes—and we want to 

make sure there is a mechanism for doing this. 

I appreciate the Transportation Committee and this Subcommittee reviewing this matter. However, I am also on the Committee on Government Reform, you will hear from Mr. Shays in a 

few minutes, and I participated in hearings in the 109th Congress 

with him and other Members. During those hearings we received 

testimony from Federal agencies, the cruise line industry, legal 

scholars, members of victims’ families examining some of the issues 

that we will hear again today. 

We have made some progress. I commend the cruise industry, 

the FBI, the Coast Guard for working on a protocol to improve the 

reporting of crimes and accidents involving Americans on cruise 

ships. Implementation of this protocol I am hopeful will address 

the concerns of the cruise ship industry critics and also hopefully 

address some of the delays that have lead to the failure to prosecute crimes and to find accident victims in a timely manner. 

Again, this is a very important issue to us in Florida. I might say 

in closing, I look at the different tourism activities—we have Disney World, Sea World, I mentioned the different activities like Bike 

Week that we host—and there is no tourism business in Florida, 

or in the United States, or anywhere in the world that provides a 

better check on its employees, a more thorough identification of 

their guests, every guest has a photo I.D. card, and also records of 

guests entering and exiting the property or the ship, there is no 

one that compares in having personally checked and examined 

some of the system. Yes, there is room for improvement and I hope 

from this hearing today we will hear what progress has been made 

and what other measures can be taken. 

Then, in closing, Ms. Brown mentioned the safety of cruise ship 

activities and of an individual on a cruise ship versus major metropolitan areas. I have some of the actual statistics. One of the safest 

places in the world to be is on a cruise ship, and the statistics will 

prove it. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would ask that these statistics 

be made part of the record. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Without objection, so ordered. 

We will now go to Mr. Bishop and then we will come back to you, 

Ms. Matsui. Mr. Bishop? 

6

Mr. BISHOP. I have no opening statement at this time, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Very well. Ms. Matsui. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank 

you very much for calling this very important hearing. I appreciate 

your willingness to bring this issue before the Committee and to 

conduct a thorough and fair hearing of crime on cruise ships. 

I asked Chairman Cummings to hold this hearing because a 

young woman from my district came to me for assistance after she 

had been a victim of violent crime on a cruise ship. That young 

woman, Laurie Dishman, is here with us today. 

Laurie shared a shocking story with me in a letter one year ago. 

As a passenger on board the Vision of the Seas, a ship operated by 

Royal Caribbean, Laurie was raped by a crew member. The story 

of her ordeal on the ship was shocking enough. Unfortunately, I 

soon learned that was only the beginning. 

Laurie wrote to tell me she was having difficulty getting a response to her request for information about the incident from the 

cruise line. As I began looking into the matter, a number of red 

flags were raised regarding the handling of Laurie’s particular 

case, from the FBI decision not to have a polygraph test of the crew 

member, to the cruise line withholding Laurie’s own medical information. 

These incidents beg the question: What is the process when a 

crime is committed on a cruise ship, and what recourse do passengers have? 

The more I have inquired, the more I have been alarmed that 

there is no shortage of cases of rape, sexual assault of minors, alcohol-related fighting and abuse, and persons overboard. Ever more 

troubling, most of these incidents have not been fully resolved or 

prosecuted. The onion it seems has only more layers to peel back. 

Laurie’s case was declined for prosecution under circumstances 

that strongly suggest Federal authorities did not fully investigate 

her case and that cruise industry representatives have coached the 

crew member in his testimony. I have since learned that there have 

been no convictions of rape cases on cruise lines in four decades, 

a statistic that takes on a new meaning through the lens of 

Laurie’s experience. 

Cruise industry executives testified last year before the House 

Government Reform Committee that 66 cases of sexual assault 

were reported by Royal Caribbean between 2003 and 2005. However, as a result of a civil suit, Royal Caribbean was forced to turn 

over internal documents that showed that the numbers were actually much higher, specifically, the number was 273. I have also 

come to learn that crimes that were not reported involved minors. 

It seems impossible that Royal Caribbean would not consider these 

crimes worthy of reporting. This time around I want to know 

whether the industry has accurately depicted the number of sex 

crimes on ships, and how it chooses to define the crimes. 

The cruise industry states that they are the safest form of transportation. Some representatives have also said some cruises are 

safer than being on shore. I find such claims to be dubious, at best, 

but they also ignore a critical problem—at least on land we have 

7

a police force and law governing people’s actions, and most of all, 

consequences for these actions based on laws. 

Americans who go on cruise ships for a family vacation have no 

idea they may be stepping into a situation in which U.S. law has 

little power and where they may be victims of a crime without recourse. Cruises operate in a legal vacuum, where lack of accountability empowers predators and obstructs their victims’ pursuit of 

justice. That is an unacceptable situation, made worse by the 

cruise lines’ own efforts to block scrutiny of and accountability for 

their own handling and security of their passengers. 

My hope for this hearing is that the cruise lines finally take 

these crimes seriously and enact necessary reforms. I am sure that 

after hearing from Laurie you will come to the same conclusion I 

have: that we must make sure something like this never happens 

again. I appreciate Laurie’s determination and I am very proud to 

be here with her in this effort. I am confident that from this hearing we will have a better understanding of what actions we must 

take to ensure the safety and security of the over 10 million Americans who will travel on cruise ships this year. I thank you very 

much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Ms. Matsui. 

Mr. Coble. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will not use the five 

minutes. I want to thank you and the distinguished gentleman 

from Ohio for having called this hearing. 

Not unlike Mr. Mica, the Ranking Member of the full Committee, 

I do believe that the cruise industry generally and on balance contributes very favorably to our overall economy and I think, for the 

most part, conduct themselves responsibly. Now I have never sailed 

as a passenger aboard a cruise ship so I have no on board evidence 

that will be enlightening today, nor have I talked to anyone who 

has been a victim. But I do believe that when passengers report 

aboard they have every right to assume that they will enjoy a safe 

cruise. We have victims, I am told, who will appear subsequently. 

I look forward to this hearing, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you 

all again for having called it. I yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Coble. The Chairman 

of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Oberstar. 

Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will submit my 

statement for the record. This is a hearing that is long overdue, 

one about which we have been receiving deeply disturbing reports. 

Ms. Matsui has already expressed, and you have stated in your 

opening remarks, issues that have to be addressed. 

There are 10 million passengers a year on cruise lines in the 

United States. It is a huge business, a massive multi-billion dollar 

business. These ships are the size of small cities; they do not have 

a police force, they have security guards, they do not have crime 

victim counselors, they have customer service representatives. 

It is a very different situation on board a ship than on land. 

When you step on a ship you do not realize maybe you are stepping 

into another country—Liberia, Panama, another flag of convenience 

country in which the vessel is registered. In other instances we 

have crews aboard ship who have been told, well, if you have a 

problem, you go file your lawsuit in the country of origin where you 

8

came from or where the ship is flagged. Not much justice in some 

of those places. So the U.S. courts are the point of reference and 

point of justice. 

People want to know that everything has been done by the cruise 

line that should be done to prevent a crime from happening, they 

want to be treated fairly, compassionately, comparably to what 

happens in the domestic airlines. We had very serious problems in 

aviation and the airlines, with the Department of Transportation, 

developed a code of conduct and a Passenger Bill of Rights. And 

now we find that they in several instances have not lived up to 

their own Passenger Bill of Rights. 

So there are a whole host of issues we have to deal with. Not to 

dwell on, but the fact that local police have to investigate these 

crimes and there may be different police forces in different ports. 

So I just frame a little part of the issue, Mr. Chairman, your hearing will cover the broad scope of issues here. We need to hear those 

and hear them fairly and then determine what action needs to be 

taken appropriately. I want to thank Mr. Shays for coming here 

this morning as well, and Mr. LaTourette for his diligence and participation in the hearing. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Poe. 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your holding 

this hearing. In my prior life I was a judge in Texas for 22 years 

and saw about 25,000 people charged with everything from stealing 

to killing, but I also saw a good several thousand victims work 

their way to the courthouse as well. I am the founder of the Victim’s Rights Caucus, a bipartisan caucus, to promote victim’s concerns in Congress. And while it is true that the cruise industry 

probably has generally a safe record regarding crime on board, generally a safe record is not good enough. One victim is one victim 

too many. And I notice there are plenty of victims here, some will 

not be able to testify today but I want to thank you for being here. 

I am especially concerned about sexual assault that occurs on 

cruise lines in international waters. The victims that I have talked 

to have told me generally when they report this to somebody, because they do not know even who to talk to first, the response they 

get is: sorry, there is nothing we can do. That is not acceptable. We 

have to take care of American citizens in international waters. 

Wherever crime occurs onboard a ship, if there is an American citizen involved as a victim, this Nation needs to be very concerned 

and the answer shall never be: sorry, there is nothing we can do. 

So I look forward to figuring out a solution with the cruise industry, the FBI, and Congress to come up with a protocol, a plan so 

that when a victim is victimized onboard ship somebody cares 

about them, and it better be the American Government. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back my remaining time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank you, Mr. Poe, for your statement. I think you pretty much struck the balance we are trying to 

strike in this hearing, trying to make sure that we are fair across 

the board and to try to come up with solutions. 

To that end, we are very pleased to have Congressman Christopher Shays from Connecticut’s fourth district. In the 109th Congress, Mr. Shays convened two hearings on crimes on cruise ships 

9

in the Committee on Government Reform, in which as a member 

of the committee I also participated. Those hearings laid much of 

the groundwork for the issues to be covered today, including examining the shortcomings in the reporting of crimes on cruise ships 

to Federal officials. 

Before you start, Mr. Shays, I have read all the testimony over 

the last few days that is going to be presented today, and there is 

one issue I think, going back to what Congressman Poe just said, 

trying to find a solution to the problem, the FBI and the Coast 

Guard, and I understand the cruise ship industry has not signed 

on yet, but have some agreement for reporting. I want you in your 

comments to comment on that solution. Because that is what has 

been presented as a solution, certainly by all of these agencies, in 

trying to come to some kind of fair resolution. So I would appreciate it if you would make that a part of your comments. 

Mr. Shays. 

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. 

Cummings, I know you well, I know you, Mr. LaTourette, well, and 

you are both extraordinarily fair but you are also dogged in wanting to know the truth. And I thank the Chairman of the full Committee and all the Members. Thank goodness this is now before 

your Committee and not just before our Committee which could investigate and recommend. You can really work toward some solutions. 

I want to just say we were first triggered to have our hearing in 

March of 2006 when I was reading about a constituent, George 

Smith IV, who was on a honeymoon and he was viewed as missing 

and his new wife was crying out for someone to pay attention. At 

first, the cruise line acted like he was just overboard. And then it 

was fairly clear as they began to look at this there was much more 

to the story—blood on the side of the ship and so on. 

But what really outraged me was how she was treated. So we 

wanted to look into this because we realized that you have about 

seven different nations involved in the process. You have the passenger, the port of departure, the port of call, whether it is in a 

certain territory of a port of call, the ship ownership, where the 

ship is flagged, are you in open waters where then the ship is in 

charge, and then you have the staff and the staff can be from who 

knows where, and then you learn that this is like a floating city 

and they say they compare statistics to cities but they do not divide 

by 52 weeks a year to get the number to be more accurate. And 

then you say, well, if you are like a city, let me talk to your police 

officers. Well, they do not have them. Then you say let me talk to 

someone skilled in investigation. They do not have them. 

What I suspected would happen did happen, that if we had this 

hearing we would start to hear other stories. You are going to hear 

from a witness that I get outraged every time I think about it. Ken 

Carver, he did not know where his daughter was. She was not in 

communication with him. So he had to get a private investigator, 

and he spent I think about $70,000, to find out where his daughter 

was. 

He learned that a few weeks earlier, maybe a few months earlier, 

his daughter was onboard ship. Now you are going to learn that 

when she was onboard ship she was viewed as missing by the stewVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
10

ard because she did not seem to come back to her cabin. Now I realize that sometimes people may not go to their cabin, they may 

go to some other cabin. But you want to begin to be aware. 

So he had no bed to make up all week, and he told his superiors. 

And then when the ship came to port, they just grabbed all her 

stuff because she did not come to pick up her belongings. I think 

that could be a warning. And they took her stuff to something like 

a lost and found and then just disposed of it. Never notified anyone 

in the family. How outrageous is that? She may have been killed. 

She may have committed suicide. Who knows? 

I would say to you, and I agree with Ms. Brown and with Mr. 

Mica, cruise lines give you the best vacation. I do not doubt that. 

And I do not doubt they are the best deal in town. I have friends 

who love them. But there is an outrage going on and it relates now 

to the fact that you are going to hear from Laurie and she is going 

to tell you that in her court case, first she is going to tell you how 

she was treated, which is outrageous, she was basically ignored, 

put off, so she had to take action, there are statistics that are presented in court and affidavit that disagree with what people gave 

us when they were sworn in in our Committee. 

So now getting to your point, Mr. Chairman. I do not trust the 

statistics the cruise line industry is giving us. I trust what they 

might give to the courts, but even then I wonder. So the first thing 

that we should be doing, clearly, is gathering statistics on murders, 

rapes, those that are missing, sexual assaults, maybe even serious 

accidents, and what about thefts. You are going to learn that if 

someone steals a $5,000 watch the cruise industry does not give a 

damn. They do not care. Now, if it is worth $10,000 or more, they might pay attention. 

They have this threshold. But I think passengers need to know the 

statistics. How many times has there been a murder onboard the 

ships? When was the last one? How many people have gone missing onboard the ships? How many thefts onboard the ships? How 

many rapes onboard the ships? That is just providing them information, and then provide it to the government as well. 

And let me just conclude by saying to you that statistics are the 

most important thing. Secondly, they must be transparent. You are 

doing the right thing. You all get it. I do not need to say anything 

more. But you have some precious people who are, in fact, victims. 

They need to be heard and their complaints need to be dealt with, 

and you are the perfect Committee to deal with this. And Ms. Matsui, thank you for bringing this forward and encouraging it. You 

are going to do some good things. And in the end, the cruise industry itself will benefit. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Any questions of Mr. Shays from members of the 

panel? 

[No response.] 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Shays. We really appreciate your leadership and your being here. 

We will now move on to our first panel. Mr. Salvador Hernandez, 

Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

and Rear Admiral Wayne Justice, Assistant Commandant for Response with the United States Coast Guard. We have your full 

statements and we are going to limit your oral remarks to five minVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
11

utes. We have quite a few witnesses today. We thank you for being 

here. 

Mr. Hernandez. 

TESTIMONY OF SALVADOR HERNANDEZ, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; REAR 

ADMIRAL WAYNE JUSTICE, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT FOR 

RESPONSE, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning 

Chairman Cummings, Ranking Member LaTourette, and members 

of the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today 

and address the FBI’s role in investigating crimes against American citizens traveling aboard cruise ships. I am happy to address 

some of the concerns raised by the Subcommittee members, and 

specifically Congressman Matsui’s concerns. But I would like to 

begin with my prepared comments. 

Mr. Chairman, the FBI is committed to addressing piracy and serious criminal acts of violence and is dedicated to working with our 

partners at every level to investigate and prosecute crimes on the 

high seas. We will do everything in our power to uphold our mission of protecting our fellow citizens from crime and terrorism. 

First, I would like to briefly discuss by what means the FBI obtains its jurisdiction over crimes committed on cruise ships. The 

authority of the FBI to investigate criminal offenses and enforce 

laws of the United States on cruise ships on the high seas, or territorial waters of the United States, depends on several factors. The 

location of the vessel, the nationality of the perpetrator of the victim, the ownership of the vessel, the points of embarkation and debarkation, and the country in which the vessel is flagged all play 

a role in determining whether there is Federal authority to enforce 

the laws of the United States. 

The principal law under which the United States exercises it 

Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction is set forth in Title 

18, Section 7 of the United States Code. This statute provides, in 

relevant part, that the United States has jurisdiction over crimes 

committed on a ship if: 

One, the ship, regardless of flag, is a U.S.-owned vessel, either 

whole or in part, regardless of the nationality of the victim or the 

perpetrator, when such vessel is within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of 

any particular state; 

Two, the offense by or against a U.S. national was committed 

outside the jurisdiction of any nation; 

Three, the crime occurred in the U.S. territorial sea, which is 12 

miles outside the coast, regardless of the nationality of the vessel, 

the victim, or the perpetrator; or 

Four, the victim or perpetrator is a U.S. national on any vessel 

during a voyage that departed from or will arrive in a U.S. port. 

There has been interest in the FBI’s ability to investigate outside 

the U.S. or its territorial waters. When an incident occurs outside 

the territorial waters of the United States, numerous other factors 

come into play in determining the FBI’s role and ability to investigate. In addition to the laws of the United States, the laws of 

other nations and international law will determine our legal auVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
12

thority to respond to and/or investigate the crime. As these incidents may involve the citizens or interests of other countries, The 

FBI’s investigative efforts may implicate the sovereignty or interests of other involved nations. Resolution of these questions requires consultation and coordination with the U.S. Government. 

The FBI has posted a number of senior level agents in 60 legal 

attache offices, or Legates, and 13 sub-offices around the world. 

Through established liaison with principal law enforcement officers 

in designated foreign countries, the FBI’s Legates are able to pursue investigative activities where permissible. The Legate’s authority to conduct investigations overseas or to coordinate 

extraterritorial teams’ investigations abroad varies greatly and 

must be determined by each Legate on a country-by-country, caseby-case basis. The Legates coordinate closely with the Department 

of Justice’s Office of International Affairs, which provides assistance in international criminal matters to U.S. and foreign investigators, prosecutors, and judicial authorities, primarily in the 

international extradition of fugitives and evidence gathering, and 

with the Department of State. 

I would like to provide a brief summary of trends of crimes on 

the high seas that the FBI has responded to and investigated over 

the last five years. The following trends are based on these statistics. 

From fiscal year 2002 through February of 2007, the FBI opened 

258 cases of crime on the high seas, or approximately 50 cases 

opened annually. Of these 258 cases, 184, or 71 percent, occurred 

on cruise ships. The remaining cases involved private vessels, commercial ships, and oil platforms. Of the 184 cases that occurred 

aboard a cruise ship, 84, or 46 percent, involved employees as suspects. 

Sexual assault and physical assaults on cruise ships were the 

leading crime reported to and investigated by the FBI on the high 

seas over the last five years, 55 percent and 22 percent respectively. 

Most of the sexual assaults on cruise ships took place in private 

cabins and over half were alcohol-related incidents. Employees 

were identified as suspects in 37 percent of the cases, and 65 percent of those employees were not U.S. citizens. Employee on employee assaults made up approximately 2 percent of the total cases 

opened. Fifty-nine percent of the sexual assault cases from fiscal 

year 2002 to February of this year were not prosecuted, and the 

typical reasons for prosecutive declinations were lack of evidence, 

indications that the act was consensual, and/or contradictory victim 

or witness statements. 

Physical assaults were the second most frequent crime upon the 

high seas with 53 cases opened. 

Missing persons on cruise ships comprised only 12, or 5 percent 

of the cases opened during this period. Missing persons were sporadic in nature, and did not appear to have any significant pattern. 

There were slightly more cases opened on cruise ships and private 

vessels than fishing vessels and other commercial crafts. It is difficult to draw any conclusions from these cases due to the inability 

to locate bodies in all cases. Using eyewitness testimony, investigators were able to surmise that alcohol was involved in at least 42 

13

percent of these cases. Investigations were typically closed with indications of suicide or accident; however, in about 25 percent foul 

play was suspected. Missing person cases yielded no prosecutions 

over this period of time, and none of the victims were minors. 

In terms of our reporting, in accordance with Federal regulations 

contained in Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations, passenger 

vessels covered by regulation must report to the FBI each breach 

of security, unlawful act, or threat of an unlawful act against passenger vessels or any person aboard when such acts or threats 

occur in a place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. 

Over the past several months, the FBI has been engaged in discussions with the cruise lines through CLIA, the Cruise Lines 

International Association, and the U.S. Coast Guard regarding the 

establishment of procedures relating to the reporting of serious violations of U.S. law committed aboard member cruise lines outside 

the mandatory reporting requirements that are already in place 

under 33 C.F.R. 

Under these proposed procedures, and I will mention that these 

procedures have been adopted by the cruise line industry by a letter that was submitted just yesterday that tells us that they have 

enthusiastically adopted these measures, CLIA members will telephonically contact the nearest FBI field office or Legate office as 

soon as possible to report any of the following incidents involving 

serious violations of U.S. law: homicide, suspicious death, missing 

U.S. national, kidnapping, assault with bodily injury, sexual assaults, firing or tampering with vessels, and theft greater than 

$10,000. 

If CLIA members are unable to contact the FBI Legate, they will 

contact the FBI field office located closest to their security office. 

After telephonic contact, CLIA members will follow up with a 

standardized report. CLIA members will submit reports to the 

Coast Guard either by facsimile or e-mail, and they will also submit those reports to the FBI headquarters for tracking purposes, 

and to the field office that is affected. 

Incidents not falling into one of the above categories, and therefore not requiring immediate attention by the FBI, may be e-mailed 

or faxed to the FBI field office; for example, a theft greater than 

$1,000 but less than $10,000. 

If criminal activity aboard a CLIA member vessel does not meet 

the above reporting criteria, CLIA members may report the incident to the proper state or local law enforcement authority and, if 

applicable, to foreign law enforcement. The decision to continue 

and/or conduct additional investigation of crimes within the jurisdiction of a state or local law enforcement agency will be at the sole 

discretion of the respective state or local agency. 

Currently, the FBI tracks only the number of cases opened. However, we have established a system that will compile reports of all 

incidents submitted by the cruise lines. 

I have other information regarding training but I will save those 

since I am over my time. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Admiral Justice, before you start, I hope that you 

will convey to the members of the Coast Guard our congratulations 

from Subcommittee and full Committee on them making the largest seizure of drugs in the history of the Coast Guard, and also 

14

thank them for their assistance over the weekend when folks fell 

overboard. Since you all are the subject of our Subcommittee, we 

want to make sure we recognize all the good things that the men 

and women of the Coast Guard do every day. Please. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Thank you, sir. I really appreciate that. It was 

a real good seizure. 

Good morning Chairman Cummings, Ranking Member 

LaTourette, and Subcommittee members. As we see today, crimes 

on cruise ships are receiving increasing attention from Congress, 

the media, victims’ rights groups, law enforcement, and the cruise 

industry. 

Given the global, multinational operational and legal structure of 

cruise ship operations, responsibilities for reporting, responding to, 

investigating, prosecuting, and adjudicating these crimes on cruise 

ships are distributed among a variety of nations, organizations, 

and individuals around the world. In considering response options 

of the United States to crime on cruise ships, the Coast Guard is 

mindful of the essential operational an legal environment in which 

many cruises occur, as has been stated many times this morning. 

As a practical matter and consistent with well-settled principles 

of international and U.S. domestic law and practice, this operational construct allocates most criminal jurisdiction with respect 

to extraterritorial cruise ship crime to flag states or coastal states, 

not the state of the passenger’s nationality. This same framework 

allocates investigative and enforcement jurisdiction to flag or other 

coastal states, not U.S. law enforcement agencies, with respect to 

criminal activities that occur beyond the foreign flag cruise ship operating beyond the 12 mile U.S. territorial sea. 

United States law enforcement agencies do have a role, albeit 

limited, to play in preventing, investigating, and responding to 

crime aboard foreign cruise ships operating beyond U.S. territorial 

seas, most often when such vessels call on a U.S. port. In this limited circumstance, both international and U.S. domestic law permit 

the exercise of U.S. criminal jurisdiction for certain serious offenses 

committed aboard foreign flag cruise ships operating seaward of 

U.S. territorial waters. When these cases arise, the Coast Guard 

employs the President’s Maritime Operational Threat Response, 

MOTOR, plan to coordinate the real time Federal response as well 

as to request and provide response and investigative assistance to 

similarly situated foreign governments. 

The legal environment aboard foreign flag cruise ships does not 

mean that cruise ships are or should become havens for lawlessness. The legal environment does mean that prompt reporting of 

serious crimes by cruise passengers and the cruise industry coupled 

with investigative cooperation among coastal and flag states is essential to preserving cruise ship security and safety. 

Further, prospective cruise ship passengers need to assess the 

level of security and safety on cruise ships on which they embark 

just like they would evaluate their safety and security risks when 

visiting a foreign country. Working closely with the FBI and CLIA, 

the Coast Guard has participated in the development of voluntary 

procedures relating to the reporting of serious violations of U.S. 

laws committed aboard cruise ships and the FBI’s response to such 

violations. 

15

The FBI will, on an annual basis, compile information provided 

by the cruise lines and prepare a comprehensive report. This report 

will be provided to CLIA, and to our knowledge represents the first 

disciplined effort to gather serious crime statistics with respect to 

cruise ships frequented by U.S. nationals. This data will permit 

some analysis of trends and comparison with other maritime and 

tourism venues. 

Those of us who have made a profession of maritime security 

continue to undertake significant initiatives to better protect U.S. 

citizens and U.S. interests throughout the maritime domain. It is 

clear that some serious acts affecting U.S. nationals aboard foreign 

flagged cruise ships have brought great sadness to victims and the 

families of victims. The Coast Guard mourns the losses and we are 

committed to improving the overall safety and security environment within the maritime domain. 

We recognize the collective jurisdictional and resource limitations 

of the United States, but we see viable strategies to improve the 

safety and security of U.S. nationals aboard cruise ships by 

leveraging partnerships with industry and international partners, 

as well as improving transparency for consumers. We believe the 

proposed voluntary cruise ship crime reporting procedures are an 

excellent step in the right direction to improve awareness of and 

response to serious criminal activities on cruise ships. 

Thank you, sir, for the opportunity to testify before you today. I 

am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank both of you for your testimony. 

I want to pick up where you left off, Admiral. One of the things 

that we are trying to do today is to make sure that we have a 

measured response to a problem. I think Ms. Brown talked about 

fairness and others have talked about fairness and having balance. 

You just talked about the agreement that was entered into, both 

of you mentioned it. I want to go back to your testimony, Admiral, 

I was reading it at 4:00 this morning and it was very interesting, 

but on page 5 of your testimony you talk about the agreement. You 

say ‘‘these data will permit some analysis of trends and comparison 

with other maritime and tourism venues.’’ You go on to say ‘‘The 

Coast Guard encourages CLIA,’’ this is the interesting point, ‘‘to 

disclose the report information to potential cruise ship passengers 

so that they can make informed judgements about their comparative safety and security, and so that CLIA members can take appropriate measures to reduce the potential for unlawful activity 

aboard their vessels.’’

Now this is where I am going with this. You just said that you 

believe that the agreement is excellent. And then I look at this 

statement and it seems like you believe that we need to go a little 

further. Again, going back to trying to have a measured response, 

do you stand by the written statement here? And could you comment on that, please. 

Admiral JUSTICE. I thought my verbal and written statements 

should parallel. But we have come to the conclusion——

Mr. CUMMINGS. In other words, did you work with the FBI, and 

I am going to have you comment too, Mr. Hernandez, did you work 

with the FBI and the industry on this agreement? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Absolutely, sir. 

16

Mr. CUMMINGS. I think that whenever there can be a voluntary 

agreement, the Congress applauds it as long as it resolves the 

issues. I guess what I am getting at is I am wondering if you feel 

that this resolves the issues, and if not, why have we stopped short 

of completely resolving it, if that is how you feel. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Sir, given the legal situation that we are in, I 

do feel, and the FBI and the Coast Guard submitted this proposal 

to the CLIA, that their positive response, their quick response 

shows an absolute commitment on their part to work this process. 

I do feel that this will provide a positive significant step for all concerned here. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Hernandez, what will this agreement put us 

in a position to do that is not happening right now? We have a 

young lady, Ms. Matsui’s constituent, who is going to be testifying 

in a few moments and, by the way, a lot of her written testimony, 

I am sure her testimony when she sits at the table as well, goes 

to how she was treated. I think anyone who imagined their wife 

or their daughter or sister being treated that way would scream 

and go crazy. 

And, interestingly enough, part of her testimony goes to the issue 

of treatment by the FBI. And I tried to look at it from both sides. 

A lot of it has to do with the bind that you seem to find yourselves 

into; in other words, you get to the situation late, I am not saying 

that is your fault, the jurisdictional problems happen so often, so 

by the time you get there the evidence is gone, you have got all 

kinds of problems. She is sitting right behind you listening to you. 

Does this help a situation like hers, somebody who has been assaulted and raped? I am just curious. 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Mr. Chairman, with respect to the first part of 

your question regarding the change in the voluntary reporting procedures, we have to go back to the fact that under 33 C.F.R. cruise 

lines are only required to report violations within the 12 miles, regardless of nationality of the perpetrator or the victim, regardless 

of flag or ownership. Beyond that, they are only required to report 

under the law beyond those 12 miles if it is a U.S.-flagged vessel. 

As you mentioned in your statement, very few are U.S.-flagged vessels. 

So in our view, and I think the cruise lines agreed and the Coast 

Guard certainly did, there was a gap in terms of what was being 

required to be reported involving U.S. nationals beyond the 12 mile 

limit. So in September of last year, we got together for the first 

time with the Coast Guard and the cruise lines to talk about how 

we might remedy that. And I will echo what Admiral Justice has 

said, that the cruise lines brought that to us. They are very interested in coming up with a scheme to require, in terms of an agreement between us and them, require reporting to us. And that is 

what I think we have arrived at. 

So in answer to your first question, I think we have expanded 

well beyond what was originally required under the law to a whole 

new area of things that will be reported to the FBI and to the 

Coast Guard. You see those set out in the letter and in the form 

what those things will be. 

With respect to Ms. Dishman’s case, I can only speak from what 

information I have been able to gather. And to answer some of RepVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
17

resentative Matsui’s concerns, in fact, when this occurred, and I 

think the date was February 21 of last year, the FBI did respond. 

The following day was able to bring an evidence response team on 

board to do evidence collection. About 20 people were interviewed. 

The subject was, in fact, polygraphed. The rape kit that was collected was taken and held as evidence. The matter was presented 

to the U.S. Attorney’s office and it was declined for prosecution. 

That is not to suggest that Ms. Dishman was not the victim of 

a sexual assault. It means only that, in the view of the U.S. Attorney’s office, insufficient evidence had been obtained to support an 

indictment and a conviction. That is a routine determination, not 

that any case is routine, but that is routinely the case, especially 

in the situation of a cruise ship where often the accuser and the 

accused may know each other in some way, typically not a stranger 

involvement. And so the circumstances change a little bit. The 

prosecutors and, frankly, the FBI have to view everything that we 

can obtain in the way of evidence to see whether it will support an 

indictment and a prosecution. 

And then finally, whether this new agreement in any way 

changes how that might have played out. I am not so certain. The 

purpose of the agreement is really to increase the level of reporting 

so that when U.S. nationals are involved we at least have an opportunity, the FBI, the Coast Guard, and other law enforcement 

agencies, if it is appropriate, have an opportunity to look into it to 

see whether in fact there is jurisdiction. 

As everyone has mentioned here, the jurisdiction issue is very 

tricky and it is a very tangled web. So the idea is, first, to get increased levels of reporting that we can track, and then ultimately 

put together some trend analyses based on those that might inform 

the industry and the public if it is deemed to be appropriate. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. My last question, Mr. Hernandez. As a trial lawyer, I have noticed a lot of my clients did not get in trouble because 

of the offense, they got in trouble because of obstruction of justice. 

I am just wondering, a lot of Ms. Dishman’s testimony, and others, 

by the way, sounds like they believe that there was some blocking 

of the FBI and others from getting to the bottom of the issue. 

Would you have the same kind of problems, the FBI, in trying to 

pull together an obstruction of justice case? The same problems 

would take place? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. I am not certain because I do not know the 

facts that well about what actually transpired there on the ship. 

But without rendering a legal opinion about obstruction of justice, 

if there is no actual intent to impede an investigation, it is a very 

difficult burden to meet. And I am not aware of an intent to impede 

a known investigation at that point last year. Were there an attempt to impede the investigation, I think it would be worthy of 

presentation to the U.S. Attorney’s office. I am just not aware that 

was the case there. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. You said something about Ms. Dishman’s case. 

When you all gather the information and present it to the U.S. Attorney, is it typical for you to present it with a recommendation? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Often, depending on what we have seen because 

we are closer to the actual events. But typically, the facts are presented and the U.S. Attorney’s office or the Assistant U.S. Attorney 

18

makes a decision based on what he or she sees. Ultimately, they 

are the ones who will have to present that in court. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. By the way, were any victims’ groups a part of 

the discussions with regard to the agreement that came forth? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. No. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. 

Hernandez and Admiral Justice, thank you very much for your testimony. I tried to outline in my opening statement, and Mr. 

Rayfield and I were talking as the Chairman was asking questions, 

it seems to me that part of this is the by-product of the fact that 

the cruise industry by its nature has changed. We had the rather 

romantic notions in the past of the Titanic coming over, that was 

not so romantic because it did not work out so well, but people 

going back and forth across the Atlantic. 

But in the last 15 or 20 years it has become, as Ms. Brown indicated, sort of a vacation venue. I think that because nobody on this 

dais is going to arrest anybody or prosecute anybody for crimes, our 

focus needs to be what laws can we amend or come up with that 

do a better job of dealing with the situations that are going to come 

before the Committee. 

I just want to walk through. Yesterday, under the able leadership of Chairman Cummings, we passed a bill dealing with pollution on ships. And because of the Annex 6 of the MARPOL Agreement, that gives us international reach. We also have treaties with 

our partners that deal with safety, that if an engine blows up or 

minimum requirements are concerned, jurisdiction of the United 

States extends to those situations as well. It seems to me where 

we have fallen short in this country is not on your end, it is on the 

fact that we have not negotiated agreements with other countries 

that say that United States citizens who travel on foreign flag 

ships should be just as safe from crime, rape, murder as they are 

from a malfunctioning boiler or from the pollution on the ships. 

So if I could, so that I have a better understanding as we attempt to do our job as legislators, maybe walk you through some 

of the existing statutes and you tell me if I am right or wrong and 

what suggestions either or both of you would make. 

Mr. Hernandez, you referenced 33 C.F.R. My interpretation, and 

basically that indicates that the United States has the ability on 

overnight voyages—there is a reporting requirement for felonies 

that occur in a place that is subject to the jurisdiction of the United 

States. I think I understood you in your testimony, Mr. Hernandez, 

but can a foreign flag vessel that is operating outside the territorial 

sea be a place that is subject to the jurisdiction of the United 

States of America? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, if the perpetrator or the victim is a U.S. 

national, or that cruise ship will at some point during its voyage 

make a port of call in a U.S. port, either at the beginning, the end, 

or sometime in between. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. And then the other section that we sort of reference is the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction that is 

contained in Section 7 of Title 18, that indicates that the United 

States may exercise jurisdiction over certain felony crimes that 

19

occur aboard a foreign flagged vessel. Section 7 applies to jurisdiction to an offense committed by or against a national of the United 

States. And Section 8 asserts the jurisdiction, subject to international law, over an offense committed by or against a national 

on one coming in and out of the ports. 

Is your interpretation of where we are currently that U.S. citizens who travel aboard a foreign flagged cruise vessel that embarks or disembarks passengers at a U.S. port has the complete 

protection of the United States laws relative to felonies committed 

against them? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes. That is true. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. And you also mentioned in your testimony the ownership question. If a ship is owned by a foreign corporation but there are some American citizens, U.S. nationals who 

own stock in that company, is there a threshold of ownership that 

triggers that ownership requirement even for a foreign flag vessel? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. I know that the language of the regulation 

reads ‘‘wholly owned or in part,’’ I just do not know what level ‘‘in 

part’’——

Mr. LATOURETTE. That was my question. Is one guy owning 10 

shares part or does he have to achieve 50 percent of the corporation? Maybe if someone at the Bureau has looked at that and you 

could get back to us, I would appreciate that. 

Lastly, Mr. Hernandez, you talked about the letter that you received from the CLIA people yesterday accepting some things. In 

getting ready for this hearing, there was an Ohio family who lost 

a son and, at least in my reading of it, there was a pretty wide discrepancy between when the people in charge of the ship knew that 

someone was missing to when notification was made to the Coast 

Guard and/or the FBI. 

Did that letter that you referenced, this agreement on notification, put in place the time frame for, for example, when is the operator of a cruise ship required—not required, it is a voluntary agreement—but have they agreed on a time frame on when they are 

going to make that notification to either the Coast Guard or the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. That was not contained in the letter. The letter 

was a response to the plan that was put forward essentially agreeing to abide by those policies. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Just my editorial comment and then I 

will yield back. In the case that I am referencing, I think it was 

like an eight hour gap. I understand that people can go missing. 

And somebody made the comment that you might not be in your 

cabin, you may be in somebody else’s cabin. So I understand that 

you have to search the ship and you have to search maybe the port 

of call where you are to make sure someone is really missing so we 

are not sending out false alarms. 

But it does seem to me that once the captain of the ship realizes 

that there is a report of a missing person, maybe one notification 

that can be made, and then after you have done your confirmatory 

stuff you figure out that, yes, this person really is missing and we 

need to get the Coast Guard involved. But to just wait eight hours, 

twelve hours to try and figure out that somebody is not there does 

not seem reasonable to me. Admiral? 

20

Admiral JUSTICE. I agree with you, sir. I will say though our experience has been, and particularly in the last couple of months, 

there is no hesitation from the cruise ships to let us know if they 

found somebody missing. We have had two extraordinary cases just 

in the last month. With one individual, it was maybe seven hours 

before it was recognized that he was missing, but as soon as it was 

recognized, we were called and fortunately we were able to find 

him. In a case just this last week where two people were immediately known to be gone, we got the call right away and were able 

to get out there and effect a rescue. I think the response piece is 

there, sir. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Has anybody broached that question? I 

heard what you said, that there is no reluctance on their part. But 

have either of your agencies sort of reached out to them and said, 

hey, while we are asking you to come up with voluntary agreements on how we handle these sorts of things, has the time question ever been broached in those discussions, like when they call 

you and say we think somebody is missing? 

Admiral JUSTICE. No, sir. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Mr. Hernandez? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, that has not come up in discussion. The 

cruise lines representatives I think are in a better position to comment about how that works when someone is actually reported as 

missing. But my basic understanding is that it does take a while 

often to establish that someone is missing and it is not possible in 

every instance to basically stop the ship, turn the ship around and 

begin to look. But I think they are in a better position to talk about 

that. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I get that. I have never been on a cruise but 

I bet it is hard to stop a ship, it is hard to turn it around, I bet 

some people that people think are missing really do not turn out 

to be missing. But it does seem to me, having been in the crime 

business as a former prosecutor, that the quicker you have the report and seal things down, or at least secure the evidence, the better the chances of either solving the crime or prosecuting the crime, 

or figuring out that you have a problem. But thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Just a follow-up on Mr. LaTourette’s questions. 

Admiral, the two cases that you mentioned, were there witnesses 

to those people falling off the ship or whatever? 

Admiral JUSTICE. In the first case, no. Thus, it took I will say 

seven hours, but some period of time before it was recognized that 

the individual was missing. However, when the circumstances did 

come to the captain’s attention, an immediate call was made and 

a subsequent search fortunately found him treading water for 

many hours. 

In the second case just this weekend, yes, there was another couple that had been with the first couple that had left the area and 

then came back and it was apparent to them that the couple was 

missing. So they made the call right away. That happened just like 

that and the captain of the ship did turn that ship around right 

away, dropped his boats, and found the people. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. We may have to revisit that agreement based 

upon what was brought out a moment ago by Mr. LaTourette. 

21

Mr. Taylor. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, I got here late. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I am sorry. Ms. Brown. 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you. I think my first question will go to the 

FBI representative. There has been a lot of discussion about statistics in communities and compared to what happens on the cruise 

ships. Can you give me some information in comparison, also is the 

FBI involved in other resort areas, national parks and other things 

like that? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. It is hard to get a good handle on the statistics 

because they are not reported per se to our national database 

which produces the annual report that talks about crime statistics 

in cities. So I cannot really compare the fifty or so cases that we 

open each year, those are cases that have been opened, determined 

to have some investigative threshold basis met. Beyond that, many 

cases are reported to us that are not opened. I am really not able 

to answer that question. 

Ms. BROWN. Maybe you can answer this one. How does the FBI 

determine whether or not to pursue a case? When you are called 

in, what are some of the factors? I am sure it would be the same 

if we called you in to Jacksonville. 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. That is right. Some of the investigative thresholds that we have are national thresholds. For example, in almost 

no case will the FBI investigate a theft under $10,000 for reasons 

of the priority of the case, the level of work involved versus the 

level of investigative resources available, takes into account the 

U.S. Attorney’s office prosecutive thresholds, their interest in a 

case like that. 

So that is a good example of a threshold that is national that 

would apply to the cruise ships as well. The agreement that we 

have come to with the Coast Guard and with the cruise lines basically lays out those kinds of violations, those serious crimes for 

which we think there is a potential for prosecutive interest. That 

is a starting point. 

When we begin there, we have to then inquire about what we 

have been able to obtain in the way of evidence to support a presentation to the prosecutors. So there are several factors that come 

into play. If witnesses are unavailable or witnesses have poor recollection of events, if physical evidence is not available, if we have 

a situation where it might be one person says this, another person 

says this, we really have just one against the other, those are difficult cases to push forward. All those determinations are made 

early on and then that is presented in almost every case of a serious crime to the U.S. Attorney’s office for a prosecutive opinion. So 

there are levels of inquiry at the investigative level and also at the 

prosecutive level. 

Ms. BROWN. Okay. Mr. Justice, I have a question for you. I have 

been on several cruises. And let me just say, I think the Coast 

Guard does an excellent job. I want to thank you for your rescue 

efforts. But my question is, you recently recovered a couple of people, I do not understand how they get over into the water. I do not 

understand that. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Ma’am, our understanding of the case this 

weekend is they were on the balcony of their stateroom and there 

22

was an accident and they went over the side. Fortunately, they did 

not get knocked out when they hit the water and they were able 

to tread water for the period time while both the cruise ship rescue 

boats searched and then our Coast Guard helicopter was able to locate them and pick them up. The water was warm and they were 

very fortunate. 

Ms. BROWN. Yes, they were. Is it that there is something wrong 

with the design of the ship? I just do not understand how you get 

over the side. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Ma’am, that is a great question. There are absolute standards set by IMO, International Maritime Organization, 

for the height of rails, there is a standard for how many rungs are 

in the rails. It is an accepted structure that ships comply with, and 

we make sure they comply with that. Beyond that, if they need to 

be higher, maybe that could be changed. I really cannot comment 

beyond that. 

Ms. BROWN. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. Mr. Coble. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to have you all 

with us this morning. Gentlemen, of all the cruise ships operating, 

how many are U.S. flagged? I am sure not many. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Not many, yes, sir. We think there are no more 

than three that we know of. 

Mr. COBLE. Of the total, which would be what, a couple hundred? 

Admiral JUSTICE. That is right. 

Mr. COBLE. Does the U.S. have the authority to require foreign 

flagged cruise ships to carry Federal marshals aboard? 

Admiral JUSTICE. No, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. I would think not either. Let me revisit what Mr. 

LaTourette said. I am not sure I grasped the answer. How does the 

U.S. jurisdiction over passenger safety and security measures onboard the vessel compare to jurisdiction over violations of Federal 

environmental laws onboard the vessel? I may have missed that response, but if you would say something to me about that. 

Admiral JUSTICE. If you could ask the question again, sir. I am 

sorry. 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. LaTourette touched on it, but how does U.S. jurisdiction over passenger safety and security measures onboard the 

vessel compare to jurisdiction over violations of Federal environmental laws onboard the vessel, pollution, for example. 

Admiral JUSTICE. I think they parallel. It has to do with what 

happens if you call in a U.S. port or it happens within our territorial seas, then there is jurisdiction. 

Mr. COBLE. So one does not enjoy superiority over another, you 

do not think? 

Admiral JUSTICE. To the best of my knowledge, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Hernandez, any comment? Then let me ask one 

more question. Is there a penalty for a failure to report an applicable crime that occurs aboard a cruise vessel? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Sorry, sir, could you repeat that. 

Mr. COBLE. Is there a penalty for a failure to report an applicable crime that occurs aboard a cruise vessel? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. What is the penalty? 

23

Admiral JUSTICE. Fine or imprisonment, sir. I do not know the 

details. 

Mr. COBLE. Then let me ask you this. To whom would that report 

be forwarded? I assume Coast Guard or FBI. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. Coast Guard or FBI? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. What are the international security and safety standards with which a cruise vessel must comply while on the high seas 

or on an international cruise? That is a general question and it 

may be too general. 

Admiral JUSTICE. There are many of them, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. I would like to know that. If you could get back to 

us on that, Admiral. 

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. Again gentlemen, good to have you with us. Mr. 

Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Coble. Ms. Matsui. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the questions 

have all been very good. From your testimony, both of you, you 

have indicated that there is this agreement regarding the reporting 

of crimes. I found it very interesting that you did not also meet 

with or have the victims’ groups be a part of this when you were 

developing this. 

I compliment you on what is going on now. There seems to be 

some movement as far as realizing the situation is serious enough 

to start looking at it and looking at the number of maybe unreported crimes. It seems to me you are trying to do everything you 

possibly can with your own jurisdictions in order to get to some 

sort of reasonable sense—you have got the reports coming, you are 

kind of in an area where it is difficult because you are on the high 

seas for the most part, these ships are not American flag ships. But 

some of this, particularly, Mr. Hernandez, you were saying a lot of 

these things cannot be investigated or prosecuted for lack of evidence, maybe the time delay and all. 

So it seems to me we have to step back further again in the 

sense that should there not be a protocol developed on the ship 

itself as to how to secure the evidence, what steps must be taken 

so that you are confident that you have got the evidence and the 

victim herself does not have to do everything, gather up the evidence, put it together and all of that. Could there be a situation 

where both of you work with the cruise industry to develop some 

sort of protocol? Have you considered that at all? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes. In fact, we have worked with the cruise 

lines for at least the past three years to put on training, FBI agent 

training for cruise line security personnel. We have worked with 

three of the lines and are just about to begin a training session 

with a fourth line to talk about things like that, evidence retention, 

preservation of crime scenes. 

We are in fact also putting together a Power Point presentation 

which we hope to export to the various cruise lines so that they can 

view it on their own time. There has been no reluctance on the part 

of the cruise lines to engage in that kind of training. In fact, they 

have solicited it from us. We have been able to give them as much 

24

as we can but they would, frankly, like more to cover exactly the 

kind of situation you are describing Congressman. 

Ms. MATSUI. You say you have been working with them for three 

years? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes. 

Ms. MATSUI. I know that my constituent had this happen to her 

last year. 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Right. 

Ms. MATSUI. Apparently, they did not have the training because, 

what I can understand from my constituent, there was nobody 

there who understood what was going on. It was quite difficult for 

her. Is there a way that we could factor that in perhaps, as far as 

when situations like this arise where the right things were not 

done, that we can go back? Because, frankly, I think the problem 

is at the very beginning. If you have an assault, you do not know 

what to do, you do not know who to call, and it was the way that 

Ms. Dishman was handled, it was very difficult. 

It was difficult for her even to come forward. But she did. 

So is there a way that you can get engaged even further with the 

victims so you understand what happens in their situation? If the 

cruise lines are really adamant about making sure that people are 

safe, I think they should go beyond just reporting. It is the whole 

series of steps that in essence led Laurie to being here today. 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. There are certainly opportunities to train more. 

And with respect to evidence collection, preservation of crime 

scenes, it is not always a security person from the cruise line that 

shows up first. So you may have a cabin attendant that walks in 

and does not understand what he or she sees, cleans the room. 

We can do more. Our resources are such that it is difficult to 

train person-on-person the kinds of numbers we are talking about. 

With 200 cruise lines and the numbers of employees involved, it is 

difficult to do more than we have done. That is why we are moving 

toward something that we can send out that the cruise lines can 

use to make sure that their employees see it—basic crime scene 

preservation, not so much evidence collection, we would hope that 

would be held until law enforcement personnel can get there. But 

it is a huge industry and it is something that we are working on, 

but it certainly needs more attention. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Ms. Matsui. Let me just ask you this, 

Mr. Hernandez, on the training. I am just going to ask about the 

training. Do you know about how many cruise industry folks you 

all train in a given training period? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. I do not have those numbers, sir. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Could you get that for us, please? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Sure. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Could you also get us, and maybe you may be 

able to answer this for us, generally what is entailed in that training? And I would also be curious as to whether it is your opinion 

that that should be a requirement for people who are going to be 

dealing with—are these basically sort of law enforcement people 

from the ship who get the training? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. As I understand it, generally cruise ship security personnel would get the training. As far as my opinion about 

25

whether it should be required, obviously, more training would be 

better than less training. I think the cruise lines representatives 

that are here can answer to that in terms of what that would actually involve, how we would set that up. Probably the FBI could not 

provide all that training but there may be other resources that 

would be available to provide some of that. 

With respect to your question about what the training entails, as 

I said before, basically, preservation of evidence and I am guessing 

some information about protection of witnesses, keeping witnesses 

aside, that kind of thing. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. The reason why I asked you that is because 

when reading Ms. Dishman’s testimony, there is one statement 

that—well, there is a lot that is of concern to any law enforcement 

person—but she said that after the sexual assault she was told to 

go back and gather her clothing and what have you, I guess the 

sheets, and she said she folded them up very carefully and brought 

them back to the law enforcement people on the ship, the security 

folks, and then they treated the stuff as if it did not matter. So 

there was not the preservation of evidence. 

But she said something else that concerned me, and that was 

that the person who she said raped her was I think a custodian 

who was sort of doubling as a security officer that night. I think 

part of her alarm was that one of the very people she thought was 

supposed to be protecting her ended up being the one who hurt her. 

I think that is one of law enforcement’s greatest nightmares, and 

I do not care what level you are on, state, local, ship, whatever, 

that those who are intended to protect end up harming. 

That is why I was curious about the training and how that might 

be a part. I think we have a possibility of a win-win here. But I 

think the industry has got to do its part. It has got to be a twosided street. I think still people want to know that when they get 

on ships, this goes back again to what the Judge said, Congressman Poe, one victim is one too many. 

I want to thank you all for your testimony. 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yes, Mr. Coble? 

Mr. COBLE. Can I ask one more question? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Certainly. 

Mr. COBLE. I will be very brief. I asked you about foreign flagged 

ships. I assume that the U.S. does have the authority to require 

Federal marshals to be aboard a U.S. flagged ship; is that correct? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. Admiral, what authority would these officials have 

beyond U.S. waters? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Authority wherever the ship goes until it got 

to a foreign nation’s territorial seas. 

Mr. COBLE. Say again, I did not get that. 

Admiral JUSTICE. They would have authority through international waters until that ship got to a foreign nation’s territorial 

seas. 

Mr. COBLE. Okay. How often is this done? How often do Federal 

marshals accompany U.S. flagged cruises? 

Admiral JUSTICE. I do not have an answer to that, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. Can you get that for us? 

26

Admiral JUSTICE. Yes, sir. 

[The information follows:]

27


34792.007
28

Mr. COBLE. I thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Congressman Poe? 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, no questions. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Just one other thing. You all have been working 

with the industry to craft this agreement. Is your responsibility 

now over? In other words, is this something that is ongoing? I am 

just curious. I know that you have reached a critical point because 

you have got now a document. But I am wondering where you see 

this as going from here? 

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Actually, many of the cruise lines have been 

voluntarily reporting much of this information for a while. And so 

we now will begin to populate our database with what is coming 

in so that we can track it in the future. We will monitor this for 

an indefinite period to work out any bugs in terms of how this 

works with respect to reporting. We have guidance and policy to go 

out to our field offices and our legal attache offices on how to handle these reports when they come in. So there is more work to be 

done. 

It is a first step but I think a critical and an important first step 

to get everybody on the same page. The cruise lines, as I mentioned 

before, were as much behind doing this as we were. They wanted 

to find a way to standardize the reporting to make sure that everybody within the industry understands how the reporting should be 

done, what kinds of things should be reported. So I view it as a 

very positive first step that we will continue to work on. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And Admiral? 

Admiral JUSTICE. Sir, last December I sat here in front of you 

and told you I had no statistics, no answer. This year I am here 

saying that we have got a plan. Maybe next year I will be here and 

give you the results of that plan. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I promise, if there is breath in my body, and in 

yours, by the way——

[Laughter.] 

Mr. CUMMINGS. You will be back so that we can see. One of the 

things that I do believe is that in order for Congress to effectively 

and efficiently do its job, we have to constantly have oversight and 

accountability. I learned that from one of my mentors, Ms. Brown. 

You have got to have accountability. And so what we will do is we 

will schedule to bring folks back to see exactly how the agreement 

is working. What do you think is a good time line, because you all 

know the kind of stats here, and I am going to ask the cruise industry the same thing, but I am just curious whether it is six 

months, a year? 

Admiral JUSTICE. I think six months would be fair. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. We will see you in about six months then. Thank 

you very much. 

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Ms. Brown? 

Ms. BROWN. Before we move on, I want something to be cleared 

up. I think it would be important for the members to get the information on why our ships are foreign-flagged. That is economics and 

it has something to do with how the ships are built and where they 

are built, the taxes, and all of that. So perhaps you can direct the 

staff to give us that information. 

29

Mr. CUMMINGS. We will definitely do that. And staff also said 

that maybe we might want to have a hearing on that. But we will 

get you the information, Ms. Brown. Because you are absolutely 

right. 

Ms. BROWN. Absolutely. And as far as the information that was 

requested, I am sure that information is not going to be readily 

available because part of it is Homeland security and, as you know, 

we work carefully with them on security as far as the entire industry, not just the cruise ships but the whole homeland security, 

whether it is cruises, or trains, or airplanes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. On the issue of the cruise ship, are you talking 

about when I said six months? 

Ms. BROWN. No, no, no. I am going back to the other matters, 

the concerns about the flag ships and then the question that he 

asked about security. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I promise you we will be on top of that. 

Again with regard to the cruise ship situation, I want to thank 

you all very much for your work. I think what you have done with 

the industry shows what can be done by those of you who are involved in trying to address an issue that because of the laws and 

the treaties and whatever make things difficult. I think so often 

what we do not do is do what you all have done, and that is to sit 

down and try to work something out. 

Is it perfect? I do not know. Will it be effective? I do not know. 

Will it need more fine tuning? I do not know. But we will take a 

look at it in six months and see. We look forward to seeing you 

then. Thank you very much. 

Our next panel please come forward now. Ken Carver, president 

of International Cruise Victims Organization; Ms. Laurie Dishman; 

Mr. John Hickey; Dr. Ross Klein. 

I want to thank all of you for being here. We have one more 

panel, so we are going to have to hold you to five minutes, unfortunately. We will first hear from you, Mr. Carver. And again, we 

thank you all for being here. 

TESTIMONY OF KEN CARVER, PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL 

CRUISE VICTIM ORGANIZATION; LAURIE DISHMAN; JOHN 

HICKEY; ROSS A. KLEIN, PROFESSOR, MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND 

Mr. CARVER. It is a pleasure to be here. We appreciate this hearing. I am here really representing myself as a victim and as president of a group of victims called International Cruise Victims. I 

think my daughter’s story has been well told. Chris Shays told it 

this morning with more passion than I can tell it. She went missing. We had to trace her to a cruise ship. The cruise ship after a 

few days got back to us and said she was on the ship but could 

have gotten off. 

In effect, for us to figure out what happened on that cruise ship, 

we had to hire an international detective agency, Kroll and Associates. We ended up going to two law firms, one in Massachusetts 

and then we had to go to a law firm in Florida, to issue injunctions 

against the cruise ship because we made one decision—we wanted 

to talk to the steward on that ship. The FBI failed to interview 

30

anybody on Merrian’s ship. They were not notified until five weeks 

after she disappeared and then interviewed no one. 

Because of all the questions, we felt we had to take action. So 

we found out in January of 2005, this is four and a half months 

after she disappeared, that in fact our daughter had been reported 

missing daily for five days by the steward on her cruise ship and 

the supervisor said to the steward, just do your job. Five days. At 

the end of the cruise, the steward asked what do we do with the 

belongings? He said, put them in a bag and put them in my locker. 

And then we have court documents in which the cruise ship and 

the management of Royal Caribbean Cruise Line disposed of her 

items, except a bag which had her name in it and that was put in 

storage. Until we came to them, they had taken no action and 

would never have taken action on our daughter. 

When we told this story a year ago, Christopher Shays, who was 

here this morning, asked Larry Kaye, who is behind me, how do 

you react to Mr. Carver’s testimony? And Larry Kaye said I think 

what happened to Mr. Carver was absolutely horrible and 

unexcusable. Now the cruise line’s defense was it was that supervisor; if it were not for him, we would have had no problems. 

So Chris Shays asked Larry Kaye, do you think the supervisor 

was the one responsible? Larry Kaye came back and said, I think 

he is one of the individuals responsible. Because, clearly, the documents which were included in your material show a whole group 

of people in the third week of September setting up the cover-up 

of my daughter’s disappearance. When Chris Shays asked Captain 

Wright from Royal Caribbean last March what did he think, why 

did you treat the family this way, his response was, it was my understanding that we did our best once we were aware of the disappearance of Ms. Carver. That was the third week in September. 

It was not until March of 2005, after I had gone to the Board of 

Directors, did we get anything from the cruise line, and that has 

clearly been documented. 

At that point Carol and I thought we were the only two people 

in the world that had had this happen. And then a book came out 

in July of 2005 called The Devil in the Deep Blue Sea, and it made 

this statement: ‘‘An examination of sexual cases found a pattern of 

cover-ups that often began as soon as the crime was reported at 

sea, in international waters where the only police are the ship’s security officers.’’ I realized that is exactly what happened to us. 

So in December of 2005 we had another hearing, and I think you 

participated in that. After that hearing, that hearing discussed my 

daughter’s case, the George Smith case, I came away with the conclusion that there is a major problem with the cruise lines. So I 

said to my wife maybe we ought to have a group of victims. She 

said, well, that might make sense. So I contacted other families 

that I knew—the Smith family, the Michael Pham family, Jean 

Scavones, who lost a son—and we started a little group in January 

of 2006, just 15 months ago, called International Cruise Victims. 

You can go to our web site and you can see that group. That group 

started from zero 15 months ago and it is now gone around the 

world. We have members in 10 different countries, a separate chapter in Australia. 

31

Now what conclusions have I reached during the past year? The 

last thing I ever thought I would do is represent a group of victims. 

But here are the conclusions I have reached. 

One, we agree with page 246 of The Devil in the Deep Blue Sea 

where it says ‘‘Avoiding negative publicity, it seemed, was a higher 

priority than seeing justice done.’’ That was a statement from the 

book and I have to agree with that 100 percent. 

Two, cruise lines take the position they do not investigate crimes. 

I am glad to see the cruise lines have brought all of their security 

officers, because in my daughter’s case they clearly said we are 

under no obligation to investigate, and we have that in written 

form from other crew members. The only thing they say they do, 

and on a voluntary basis—and I think it is amazing that they just 

signed an agreement yesterday with the Coast Guard and FBI, 

without consulting anybody else, to short-stop legislation, to voluntarily give them information. 

Three, if the cruise line officials make efforts to cover up crimes, 

contrary to what was said this morning by the previous witness, 

there appears to be no penalty against the cruise line. Merrian’s 

case is extremely well documented. They took every step they could 

to cover up her disappearance. What they did not suspect is that 

we would spend $75,000 to force that steward to testify. And there 

is no penalty. They violated absolutely every protocol that they 

had, and they are listed earlier in my testimony. 

Lastly, in the cruise line industry, and I hesitate to say this but 

I have to say it because I believe it, there is a pattern of cover up. 

Let me give you some examples. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Carver, I am going to have to ask you to 

wrap up. 

Mr. CARVER. Okay. Well, in our testimony, we have proposed, if 

you go to our web site, extensive documentation of changes to make 

to the cruise line industry. A year ago we presented a 10 point program. Let me just make one quote from Peter Ratcliffe, who is 

CEO of P&O/Princess Division. He said in February at a press conference in Australia, ‘‘We are also focusing our attention on the 

proposals from the ICV advocacy organization headed in Australia 

by Mr. Brimble.’’ That is the separate chapter. ‘‘We recognize that 

these proposals reflect the legitimate interests of the people involved in the safety and security of passengers on board our vessels.’’ And here we have the president of one of the cruise lines saying, hey, these documents need to be given serious consideration. 

I do not think any voluntary assignment will ever do anything. I 

think we have proposed positive programs to make changes. 

I really thank you for the time we have had to present this. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank you. 

Ms. Dishman, we want to thank you for being here today. I have 

read your testimony. I know that it is not necessarily easy to do 

this, but we do appreciate you being here. Please. 

Ms. DISHMAN. Good morning, my name is Laurie Dishman. 

Thank you, Chairman, the Committee, and my Congresswoman, 

Doris Matsui. I am pleased to be here today. I prepared and filed 

a statement for the record detailing my experience during the last 

year. Today I would like to share with each of you how that crime 

32

affected me and share my proposed solutions so that no one else 

has to go through a similar experience. 

A year ago my best friend and I went on a cruise to celebrate 

30 years of friendship. We wanted to relax and have an umbrella 

drink in our hand. But those innocent feelings of excitement and 

relaxation and celebration are no longer a part of my life. On February 21 of last year, a Royal Caribbean security guard raped me. 

Over and over, I tried to resist, with him forcing me down and 

keeping me from moving until I became unconscious. When I 

awoke the next morning my neck hurt and was sore. As I got up 

and looked in the mirror, I had bruises on my throat. I was horrified and shocked, crying and falling to the floor. The terror of that 

experience still overwhelms me. The sounds, the images, the feelings of helplessness, the shame are all demons that pound in my 

head and tear at my heart. 

I continued to have only men around me after the rape and it 

was traumatizing over and over to not have anyone other than 

Michelle who could help me. Instead, I was asked to fill out statements, after telling them what had happened. And then the purser 

stands up and says, ‘‘It sounds as if you need to control your drinking.’’ I just wanted to see the doctor and get off the ship, but they 

said I had to fill out statements and then I could see the doctor. 

Imagine having to stay in a place where you had been raped and 

writing what had happened. I did not feel safe and these people 

continued to make me feel pressure in getting things in writing. 

I felt raped again when the doctor gave Michelle and me two garbage bags and told us to go back to the cabin and collect the evidence. We carried the garbage bags through the hallways back to 

the infirmary under supervision of the male head security officer. 

I have never heard of something like this where the victim continues to be revictimized over and over with no where to go, stuck 

in the middle of the ocean. I was able to see the doctor after I collected the evidence and wrote my statement, sitting there in the 

room with a male nurse and finally a female nurse, the only female 

after I had been raped, to perform parts of the rape kit, and then 

it was all men again. I had never felt safe, especially in the hallways, because the infirmary was by the crew area and being that 

close was horrible. 

I continued to tell the staff captain that I just wanted to go 

home, and the feeling was like nobody was helping me. They even 

suggested that we get off the ship and go to Mexico. And then 

Michelle protected me and we had to ask to change cabins, and so 

they finally did. Nothing was immediate, like they claim. Everything was slow motion and they were trying to figure out how to 

protect themselves. We got off the ship and the cruise line flew us 

back to L.A. where the FBI picked us up and told us they were taking this very seriously. They took our statements and photographed 

my neck injury, and then said they would board the ship when it 

docked in San Pedro. 

Michelle and I returned home. Thank God for my mom and dad 

and my sisters and brother. I felt safe again. Immediately I went 

to my doctor to get tested for HIV and STDs and x-rays on my 

neck. I also began therapy treatment called EMDR. Julie, my FBI 

agent, later called me and told me the Assistant U.S. Attorney was 

33

declining my case. I asked why, and she told me there was not 

enough evidence, it was a he said-she said case. They would not 

give me any information about the man who raped me and said it 

was confidential. 

I felt the FBI revictimized me. I now wanted to talk directly to 

the U.S. Attorney to explain to me why the evidence, my interview, 

the photographs of my neck, the tampon that this man impacted 

into me, was not enough. Was it because the security officer and 

the purser sat on the bed where the crime occurred, or maybe because the doctor and security required Michelle and I to collect the 

evidence, or could it just be because they did not criminally prosecute these cases. 

I was then told that they had not even tested my blood. Did they 

not believe me? Later I learned that the security guard was really 

a janitor with a record, including lying, falsifying of records, insubordination, and anger problems. He was drinking alcohol in the 

lounge the night in question. I later learned he was served by his 

fellow crew members, the bartenders, and the cruise line gave him 

a security badge and they believed him. 

I was told by the Department of Justice they actually declined 

my case on February 26, the same day the FBI boarded the ship. 

I asked the chief prosecutor how long does it usually take when the 

FBI collects the evidence and for the Assistant U.S. Attorney to decide. He said, well, it could take a month or four years, depending 

on the case. 

So I asked him, how could you decline my case the same day the 

FBI boarded the ship and even before they tested my blood? Why 

was he not kept in jail? What was the rush? I felt revictimized by 

the Department of Justice. And one thing I want to add to my 

statement today is that today was the first time the FBI has ever 

mentioned a polygraph test that was taken on the 26th. 

So I am here today asking for you to look at this, as important 

not only for myself but before there is another woman who is raped 

by a security guard who is really a janitor, where the FBI gives us 

less than a day, where the Department of Justice closes another 

file, and everyone tramples on justice. In February 2000, there was 

another passenger who sailed from L.A., Janet Kelly, who was victimized by a cruise line and ignored by the same FBI and Department of Justice. The rapist went free and he ended up on another 

cruise line. I read her story in a Time Magazine article. 

She appeared at the last hearing in March 2006 to tell her story 

and she recommended changes, including Federal marshals and 

many other good ideas. I know now nothing changed from 2000 

when she was raped, or from hearings last year when she testified 

to the time of my cruise. I became the next Janet Kelly. There have 

been others between us, too. Will the Committee help us? Can you 

work together and prevent someone from being the next Laurie 

Dishman? 

For the past year, I have thought each day what could be done 

differently to stop this from happening again. I took the last week 

off to prepare my recommendations for changes. I do not have time 

to discuss them all but I hope you read them. This cruise industry 

cannot be trusted. Please read my suggestions. They are attached 

to my statement. 

34

In closing, thank you to the Committee for allowing me the honor 

of appearing here today, and a special thank you to Doris Matsui 

and her staff, who listened to me and have made this important 

hearing happen. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. You thanked us, but we thank you, we really do. 

We hear you. 

Dr. Klein. 

Mr. KLEIN. I am pleased to have the opportunity to assist the 

Subcommittee in its deliberations about crime against Americans 

on cruise ships. My comments focus largely on the issue of sexual 

assault. These comments are framed, in part, by the cruise industry claims that a person is safer on a cruise ship than on land, and 

that the crime rate on cruise ships is lower than that in the U.S. 

generally. My basic point, it is an incontrovertible fact that sexual 

assault and sex-related incidents are a problem for the cruise industry and the first step in dealing with the problem is to admit 

that it exists and to understand its landscape and complexity. 

Last March the Committee heard testimony from Dr. James Fox 

asserting that compared against their home communities, passengers have an appreciably lower risk of sexual assault while enjoying a vacation cruise. Based on the numbers given to Dr. Fox 

by the cruise industry, and the method he used to extrapolate from 

industry-wide passenger load figures, his claim that cruise ships 

are safer is a fair conclusion. However, as with any mathematical 

computation, if the numbers going into the equation are unreliable, 

then the result is also unreliable. 

Using Dr. Fox’s method but focusing on one cruise line and the 

data they provided in discovery hearings, I conclude that one has 

a 50 percent greater chance of sexual assault on a Royal Caribbean 

International ship as compared to the U.S. generally. I also assert 

that the pattern of Royal Caribbean is consistent with that of other 

mass market cruise lines operating similar ships of similar style. 

In contrast to Dr. Fox’s assertion that the rate of sexual assault on 

cruise ships is 17.6 per 100,000, I find a rate that is almost three 

times greater—48.065 per 100,000. And if we include sexual battery into these figures, the number is almost 65 per 100,000, 

roughly twice the rate for sexual assault in the U.S., which is 32.2 

per 100,000. 

It is useful to consider factors that likely influence the reporting 

of incidents of sexual assault. After all, the numbers we are dealing 

with only include reports of assault, and these, like on land, reflect 

only a portion of actual cases. While some disincentives to reporting assault are common to cruise ships and land, the cruise ship 

is a unique environment and produces its own issues. 

One factor in under-reporting, as we have just heard most eloquently, is the fear of secondary victimization. This takes on a different flavor aboard a cruise ship where a victim who is a crew 

member is left having to work with their victimizer and continue 

to be in that environment even after the attack. In effect, the person who has been victimized is first victimized by their harassment 

or assault, is then revictimized by the employer often refusing to 

deal with the problem, and then revictimized again because the victimizer knows by now that he or she can get away with the behavior pattern. 

35

In the case of passengers, the secondary victimization may be a 

bit different. Often the cruise line’s first response to an assault or 

sex-related incident is damage control. Their role is to contain the 

damage to the cruise line rather than deal with the victim’s complain. I have heard often from victims that dealing with the cruise 

line personnel is at times worse than the actual assault. If the complaint goes forward after the cruise is over, then the victim is likely 

to be further victimized by a tendency for cruise lines to blame the 

victim for their own victimization. 

Once a crime is reported, there are obviously problems with preserving evidence, and I think we have heard that fairly well. As 

well, victims will often delay making a report of an assault because 

of fear of reprisal while they are on the ship and will wait until 

they get home. Once they get home they may not report it because 

they want to let go of what had happened. 

There are features of shipboard culture that are also relevant to 

consider. First, is that passengers come onboard a ship believing 

the cruise industry’s mantra that cruise ships are safe. Of course, 

as a result, they go about enjoying themselves, they let down their 

guard, even let their children run around without supervision, assuming that they can trust what the cruise lines have said. Unfortunately, that may not be the fact. 

Shipboard culture also includes alcohol consumption. There are 

many cases of assault where the victim was plied with alcohol before an attack, including under-aged passengers, or where the victim became inebriated on their own and with reduced defenses 

were assaulted. This is not an indictment against alcohol or bars, 

but simply reflects a risk that is inherent in the ship’s culture. Passengers on vacation, out to have a good time, have furthest from 

their mind the need to protect themselves from unwanted overtures 

from crew or officers. And the cruise line, again, encourages them 

that there is nothing to be concerned about. 

About eight years ago the cruise industry, in response to court 

cases dealing with sexual assaults, came out with what they called 

their zero tolerance policy to crime. This was signed on by four corporations comprising more than 80 percent of the ships visiting 

U.S. ports. That zero tolerance policy was a commitment to report 

all crimes occurring on cruise ships against U.S. citizens. We would 

not be here today I would not think if, in fact, that zero tolerance 

policy was being followed after the PR campaign of putting it forward. 

One of the emerging issues, and I just want to mention it very 

briefly, is the disappearance of passengers as well as crew members from cruise ships. Unfortunately, the best data set of these 

events, and it is included in my submission, is one I have put together from media reports and reports from people on board ships. 

I would hope in a short time that we would have a more comprehensive and accurate accounting of these events as well as of 

sexual assaults. Without accurate information we cannot adequately address the full breadth and scope of the problem. 

Thank you for this opportunity to address the Committee. I hope 

I have helped provide some insight. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I recognize Mr. LaTourette for a unanimous consent request. 

36

Mr. LATOURETTE. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will 

not be able to stay for your testimony, Mr. Hickey. I want to thank 

all of you for your testimony. I have been notified that another 

committee requires my votes for the next hour. So, Mr. Chairman, 

I would ask unanimous consent that Mr. Boustany, who is a member of the full Committee but not a member of this Subcommittee, 

be permitted to participate and take my place for the next 60 minutes or so. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you, Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Hickey. 

Mr. HICKEY. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Congressman 

Cummings for inviting me to speak today before the Subcommittee. 

I am truly honored. 

For 27 years I have practiced law in the cruise line capital of the 

world, Miami, Florida. I am a trial lawyer. For the first 17 years 

of my career I represented cruise lines, railroads, insurance companies, and major corporations. For the last 10 years I have fought 

the cruise lines and have represented passengers and crew members against cruise lines and against large corporations. 

The passengers I represent are people from all across the United 

States. They are all of your constituents, constitutes of you, Mr. 

Cummings, of you, Ms. Brown and Mr. Mica, my fellow Floridians, 

and they are one of the 10 million United States citizens who take 

cruises every year. 

The cruise lines market to Americans, they depend on Americans. And although I have heard it said that, yes, Florida’s economic engine is in large part contributed to by the cruise lines, certainly it is those ten million Americans every year who contribute 

billions of dollars to the coffers of the cruise lines, representatives 

of whom are sitting behind me at this time. 

I stand by the statement made on page 2 of my paper, which is—

and I am going to get more into this, in the three and a half minutes I am going to explore my 27 years of experience with you. But 

the passenger or crew member seeking justice against the cruise 

line is met with more obstacles than in any other area of the law. 

I can explain that and I can also answer some of the questions I 

have heard raised earlier. Congressman Coble raised some questions that I can perhaps shed some light on in regard to regulations and penalties. 

In my paper, I share a hypothetical. In the hypothetical I went 

through various scenarios of passengers, typical passengers, your 

constituents, the American people who are on cruise ships every 

day and what they go through. I take these calls and my staff take 

these calls every working day and sometimes on weekends from 

folks all across the country. I am not going to, and I do not have 

time to go through the hypotheticals. There are basically six involved. 

One is Lisa Smith, and these are all fictitious names, of course, 

involved in a rape. One of the problems involved in these sexual 

assault cases is getting the statistics. Let me tell you, and what Dr. 

Klein has addressed, statistically, what we get from the cruise lines 

is a different answer every time we ask the question. In sworn inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
37

terrogatories in a case I have pending in Miami, Florida, the Royal 

Caribbean Cruise Line just swore that in a three year period the 

number of sexual assaults was 17. Yet, not a year ago, before the 

United States Congress, Congressman Shays’ Subcommittee, that 

very same cruise line submitted statistics that indicated there were 

approximately 66, in a slightly different time frame but the same 

number of years, and there were overlapping years. I submit to you 

that the rate of sexual assaults has not changed that much. 

What we are not getting from the cruise lines in fact is their 

database. They keep a database on these sexual assaults and we 

are not getting that and you are not getting that. What you are 

getting and what I am getting in law suits every day in Miami, 

Florida, when I fight down there in the trenches, is a lawyer-generated document with a self-chosen definition for sexual assault 

and sexual battery. I get different numbers every time I ask the 

question. 

The other scenario I put forth is Maria Casa, who went overboard. This is loosely written about a woman from Wisconsin who 

went overboard in 2004 off the coast of Mexico. Annette Meisner 

I believe is her name. She went overboard and subsequently died 

it is believed; she has been declared dead. The security camera 

trained supposedly on the landing where she had the fight with the 

officer, who it is suspected may have pushed her off, was not functioning that night. 

There is another scenario in there about the mother of this 

woman, Beatrice Casa, who suffers a heart attack and goes to the 

ship’s infirmary and is misdiagnosed as indigestion and subsequently suffers a massive heart attach. We get calls on a weekly 

basis about the medical care on cruise ships. It is substandard and 

the cruise lines, through two recent decisions—I know my time is 

running out but I want to get to the end of this—two recent decisions, one out of Florida, are marching their way toward immunization from lawsuits of medical malpractice. This is a situation where 

folks are out there in the middle of the Atlantic or the Pacific and 

it is an isolated situation they are in, they have no choice but to 

go to these doctors. 

Next, Fred and Ethel Mertz, those may not be fictitious names, 

I do not know, but Fred and Ethel go on an excursion and they are 

robbed on a beach in Nassau. I chose that because there are numerous incidents, not just in Nassau, not just in the Bahamas, I 

love the Bahamas, but there are numerous cases arising out of people getting assaulted on these beaches. The fact is, on the one 

hand, the cruise lines say that the excursions are hand picked, they 

are monitored, they are continuously reviewed, but they are not. In 

fact, when a law suit is brought or if a lawyer is consulted, the 

cruise lines raise the fact that the excursion is an independent contractor. 

I want to get to two other scenarios and then I am going to finish 

up. Two actually involve crew members. You might say what do we 

care about these foreign crew members, you might ask me that 

question. The answer is, these crew members, some of whom are 

in the marine department and some of whom are in the hotel department, those folks are in charge of the safety and security of all 

those Americans who are on board those cruise ships. So if those 

38

folks are not healthy, and those folks are getting into trouble, we 

have got a problem. I cite in my paper an real life incident, and 

I am not kidding, where a life boat in a drill was suspended approximately 60 to 90 feet in the air, depending upon who you talk 

to, and the release mechanism for the life boat, these life boats are 

held on cables and lowered into the water, the release mechanism 

came loose and dropped to the ocean below, injuring five of the 

eight individuals on board. I am representing those individuals 

against the cruise line, which is Royal Caribbean Cruise Line. A 

similar incident happened one year before. There were no injuries, 

but a similar accident happened one year before. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Hickey, I am going to have to ask you to 

wrap up. I let you go two and a half minutes over. 

Mr. HICKEY. Thank you, sir. I am going to go right to the end 

about the legislation that is being urged, at least by me, today. I 

would of course be glad and look forward to questions. 

One, Congress should consider amending the Death on the High 

Seas Act so that victims of cruise ship negligence are treated the 

same as victims of commercial aviation accidents. I make a very 

brief point here. People who die in cruise ship accidents and on the 

high seas are limited to economic damages. Actually, on page 12, 

at the top, I made an error in my paper. I said ‘‘non-economic’’ and 

I meant they are limited to economic damages. 

Two, Congress should consider requiring the cruise lines to preserve crime scene evidence. That has been discussed here today. 

Three, Congress should consider creating a central database to 

collect information about crime on cruise ships. 

Four, Congress should consider providing whistleblower protection for cruise line employees who report crimes. 

Five, finally, Congress should consider amending the Federal Arbitration Act to make it even clearer that the Act does not apply 

to actions brought by seamen under the Jones Act or for any other 

remedies. In other words, we have this Jones Act in place to protect these seamen and yet, through a recent 11th circuit opinion 

and now the new clauses in contracts with these crew members, 

cruise lines are forcing through this law crew members to arbitrate 

in the Philippines or whatever home country, and therefore we 

have this Jones Act and it is not protecting these crew members, 

and these crew members are in turn protecting American citizens. 

Thank you, Mr. Cummings, and thank you, esteemed members. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. We thank you, and all of you. 

Ms. Dishman, did you get any assistance from the FBI’s Office 

of Victims Assistance? 

Ms. DISHMAN. I had a victims witness program, I had a victims 

specialist. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Was that helpful to you? 

Ms. DISHMAN. It was. My victim specialist, Serge Hernandez, 

was the reason why I was able to get the meeting with the Department of Justice. The FBI actually continued to question why this 

was necessary, what more would they need to tell me to help me 

understand that there just was simply was not enough evidence. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Anybody sitting up here, Ms. Dishman, you cannot see what we see, but sitting up here when you were testifying, 

there were women who were crying. I said it before and I will say 

39

it again, and one of our Congressmen on this side of the aisle said 

it, when you have a person who goes through something, I think 

it is kind of important that whoever is trying to remedy that situation try, try,—I cannot put myself in the shoes of a woman, but I 

know one thing, I would not want what happened to you happen 

to any woman in my life—but to try to put themselves in your position. 

The reason why I am saying this is because you said you hope 

that we will listen to you and you hope that we would try to do 

something to help you, we are going to do the best we can. But 

when you sit here and you see women crying, and it was not little 

lightweight tears either, that is something that we cannot just disregard. I thank them for being here and supporting you. 

Let me go to you, Mr. Hickey. A little bit earlier, Mr. LaTourette 

asked the question about the laws that we presently have, what we 

are presently dealing with. Were you here when the FBI testified? 

Mr. HICKEY. Yes, sir, I was. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. We are legislators. It is nice when we can convince people to voluntarily do things. But we are legislators. When 

you look at the present laws and treaties and these agreements 

that we have or do not have, are there things that you would like 

to see us do? I know you have your suggestions. But as legislators, 

are there things that you would like to see us do? And then I do 

not know how familiar you all are with the agreement. You may 

have heard the FBI say they felt that it was a giant step in the 

right direction, and you heard the Coast Guard say that it was excellent. I am just wondering how you all feel about that. 

Mr. HICKEY. Mr. Cummings, if I could. There are a couple of 

things that you have to understand, and I do not know if I am coming across too loud. First of all, the Coast Guard I believe said that 

there is a criminal penalty for not reporting certain crimes that 

occur at sea. But in a way that is begging the question, because 

while there is a criminal penalty if a statute was violated, the fact 

is, and I believe the Coast Guard so testified, there is not a requirement for the reporting beyond the 12 mile limit. So there may 

be a criminal penalty if you violate the law, but the law as we 

know it today is pretty narrow. 

Secondly, to talk about the agreement, and I know I am skipping 

around a little bit and if I am not answering the aspect of your 

question that you are focused on, please tell me, but as to the 

agreement, I believe I have seen a draft form of that agreement. 

Whenever the FBI and folks in this Government say we are working with the industry, and I know this industry, I get this knot in 

my stomach and I think maybe the American people are going to 

get it again. I think Congresswoman Matsui brought up, well, I 

hear you are working with the industry, are you working with the 

victims’ rights folks? Are you working with the 10 million people 

that you all represent, that we are all a part of, that go on cruises 

every single year. Their trade association says that their market is 

40,000 and there are a lot of American citizens out there. 

And so I do not think a voluntary agreement is good enough. We 

have seen problems. That is why we are here. We are here because 

of problems in the past. We are here because, frankly, a lot of the 

publicity generated from the George Smith case. When push comes 

40

to shove, that is what happened. Congressman Shays got involved, 

and thank God that he did, and thank God for all of you spending 

your time and energy on this. The American people I am sure will 

thank you if, in fact, something constructive comes out of this, and 

I am sure it will. 

But no, I do not think that voluntary is good enough. Yes, think 

the laws are too narrow. And we see, for example, the limitations, 

I think it was Mr. Coble that asked about the marshals, and there 

were other questions I wanted to address of Congressman Coble, 

about the marshals on ships. I believe there are no marshals ever 

on these cruise ships. That is my understanding. I don’t know 

about jurisdiction, but of course, you folks are the folks who can 

change the jurisdictional aspect about that. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I am going to get to you next, Dr. Klein, but I 

really would like for you all to, once you get a chance to see the 

final document, to provide us with your written comments. I asked 

the question, as you probably heard a little bit earlier, I don’t necessarily, Mr. Hickey, I understand what you just said about when, 

you have the Coast Guard and the FBI working with the industry, 

I understand the distrust, and trust is very important. 

But it doesn’t concern me, as a matter of fact, as you heard me 

say, I am glad they were working together, we have a different 

view on that. What does concern me, however, is when groups like 

the one represented by Mr. Carver are not a part of the process, 

at least to have some comments or what have you. After all, it is 

people like Ms. Dishman and others who, and you, Mr. Carver, who 

are in a position to take this whole issue to the level that we see 

it on today. 

So I think it just seems to me, I think that is a glaring error, 

when those comments are not a part of the process. 

Dr. Klein? 

Mr. KLEIN. I will be as brief as I can, I won’t go on too much. 

For me, I find that the voluntary arrangements do not work and 

are not a route to go. I prepared a couple of years ago a brief for 

Bluewater Network dealing with environmental issues and ran out 

very carefully the pros and cons of voluntary versus legislative approaches. I would be more than happy to provide to the Committee 

that documents as background. 

Let me just give a couple of examples in terms of why I come to 

this conclusion. In 2002, Crystal Cruises gave a commitment to the 

City of Monterrey, California, that it would not discharge anything 

while in the Monterrey Sanctuary off the west coast of California. 

Several months after it was there, it was disclosed that in fact the 

cruise line discharged 36,000 gallons of raw sewage and gray 

water. When the vice president of the company was asked by the 

local community why he didn’t report it when it happened, his response was, we didn’t break the law, we only broke our word. 

Hawaii has a memorandum of understanding that the industry 

recently pulled out of. The first year, there were between 14 and 

16 violations of that voluntary arrangement, including violations of 

a written commitment by Royal Caribbean and other cruise lines 

that they discharge nothing within 12 miles of the coastline. The 

MOU was with a four mile mark, they violated it. 

41

And most recently, in Washington State, there were MOU violations, both in the first two years. The most recent violation was a 

case where the cruise ship was fined for 10 violations of discharging within Washington State waters. The cruise line came forward and said, wait, three of those happened in Canada, we 

shouldn’t be fined because Canada doesn’t fine us. The State came 

back and said, fine, we won’t fine you for those three, we will only 

fine you for the seven. And the cruise line said, we will pay you 

$100,000 anyway to show our commitment to the marine environment of the State of Washington. Those are the only things I wanted to say. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Dr. Klein, I want to make sure my comrades 

here have an opportunity to speak. 

Mr. Boustany. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think in fairness we 

will go to Mr. Coble first if that is okay with you. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, sir, I appreciate that. 

It is good to have you all with us, Ms. Dishman, especially you. 

Ms. Dishman, the United States attorney declined to prosecute the 

case involving your situation, is that correct? 

Ms. DISHMAN. Yes. 

Mr. COBLE. And I presume that no criminal charges were preferred? 

Ms. DISHMAN. No. 

Mr. COBLE. Did any representative, Ms. Dishman, of the cruise 

line, suggest that you contact the FBI or the Coast Guard to report 

the incidence of the assault? 

Ms. DISHMAN. No, they basically, when meeting with the staff 

captain, gave me what my options would be when the crime had 

occurred. 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Carver, in your testimony you include suggestions on how to enhance passenger safety and security aboard 

cruise vessels. Have you approached the cruise lines to discuss the 

possibility of implementing some of those suggestions? 

Mr. CARVER. The answer is absolutely yes. I had a meeting with 

the President of Celebrity Cruise Line last June at his request. I 

said, here they are, there are 60 pages, we are willing to sit down 

and talk about them, because this is a serious document. This was 

not made up by me, it was made up by experts in the world. And 

I didn’t get an invitation to further explore that conversation. 

But we do have, in my testimony, we see the president of P&O 

Princess Lines in Australia saying that their highest priority is to 

look at our ten point program and they represent legitimate suggestions for the cruise line industry. I think it is amazing that a 

group of victims with no money, just telling the cruise lines what 

they should do, and they are not off the wall documents, they are 

serious documents. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Hickey, what should future passengers know or do to better 

equip them to deal with unpleasant incidents that may be forthcoming? 

Mr. HICKEY. I think one thing, and there are a lot of suggestions 

that Mr. Carver and Dr. Klein have that may be more powerful 

than this, but I think at a minimum, when a passenger comes on 

42

board, a piece of literature that should be put in their hands, rather than or in addition to the 20 pages ticket that they get with all 

the ways in which the cruise line will prevent them from suing 

them, I think they ought to get a notice that if you get into trouble, 

you can call the FBI at this phone number. That would be a simple 

start. 

Because they do get a lot of literature, and they do get the fine 

print on a booklet which is called their ticket. It is basically a lot 

of exclusions and exculpatory clauses. I think that was one start. 

Because as Ms. Dishman said, and I hear this from folks, when I 

get the calls, I hear this from folks, I didn’t know where to go. I 

am on their ship. 

If I get robbed outside this building here, or even inside this 

building, I can walk outside and go to a police officer. And if I get 

robbed in my hotel right down the street, I can go outside and get 

a police officer and say, hey, somebody robbed me in that hotel, or 

one of the employees of the hotel robbed me. On a cruise ship, I 

can’t walk off. 

Mr. COBLE. Yes, there is an isolation factor there. 

Ms. Dishman, was there ever any sort of a settlement presented 

to you? 

Ms. DISHMAN. A settlement presented to me, in pursuing this civilly, was the recommendation from the Department of Justice. That 

is why I am here today with Congress. He told me to pursue this 

with Congress and civilly. As far as a settlement, what I have seen 

from the attorneys that work for Royal Caribbean, and I also invite 

any of you to have a copy of the deposing that was just done of my 

case with their law firm, their job is to get in there and take care 

of this. It is like they want to put you away in a box and make 

you go away. 

Mr. COBLE. Again, thanks to all of you. Mr. Chairman, I want 

to thank the gentleman from Louisiana for having yielded. I appreciate that, and I yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. Ms. Brown? 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me just be clear. As a female and as a mother, I am very 

sensitive to the issues that we are discussing. I found law enforcement across the board, whether it is in the cruise line or in the 

neighborhood, they are not very sensitive in dealing with women 

that are victims and we need to address it across the board. This 

is not an isolated incident. This is a problem throughout law enforcement. 

I am very interested in looking at the recommendations. Because 

I have not seen the recommendations, Mr. Chairman. 

I guess the other issue is, I need to be clear that we are dealing 

with victims and the issues about discharge and other things are 

for another hearing. So I just want to see the recommendations and 

as we move forward, I am very interested in making sure that we 

have procedures in place that will protect the victims and making 

sure that we have proper reporting. Also, the security that may be 

necessary, additional security on the ships. 

Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you. 

43

I want to thank you, Ms. Brown. There is no doubt about it, I 

think anybody who knows Congresswoman Corrine Brown knows 

that she simply seeks justice in every form. So I appreciate your 

comments. 

Mr. Boustany. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, if you don’t mind, we will go to 

Mr. Young next. 

Mr. YOUNG. I thank the gentleman and thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate these hearings. 

I will have to say right up front, I am a big supporter of the industry and the effect they have upon my State. I have done a little 

research on what occurs on cruise ships versus what occurs on 

land. Overall, I would say the cruise industry, although the victims 

will not agree with me, have done an outstanding job, and can do 

better. But it always strikes me awfully strangely that when there 

is a success in an industry, there seems to be those in the legal 

profession who will try to figure out some way they can get into 

their skivvies. And that bothers me a great deal. 

If this is to protect the victims, we can do something to protect 

the victims, I will help that. But remember, this is a cruise industry. These are people that go into really a floating city. Yes, we can 

have background checks on our cruise. But we can’t check every 

passenger that goes on board that ship. We don’t know the conduct 

or what they are going to do. We just had a 20 year old and a 22 

year old fall off 60 feet into the water. Do we build higher walls? 

That is a possibility. Will the public like that? I am not sure. That 

is something that you have to ask the public. 

As far as the crew, yes, we can work better on that. But it strikes 

me that there is a tendency, Mr. Chairman, to look upon this as 

yes, to help the victims, but maybe there is something else behind 

it that they can make sure that there is a manner of wealth that 

is generated by lawsuits that may not hold the merit. I would suggest, respectfully—I can say what I wish, and please be quiet——

Mr. CUMMINGS. Excuse me, would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. YOUNG. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I would just ask that the audience refrain from 

statements, please. The gentleman has the floor and we must 

maintain a high level of decorum. 

Mr. YOUNG. They are working together to try to make sure this 

works. Remember who you are dealing with, and that is the general public. These are floating cities. There are actually a large 

part of people that go on these cruises to have a good time. And 

yes, it may not turn out that way. 

But we have to look and make sure that we do the best we can 

to solve problems without setting a land mine to try to hurt an industry that has been very beneficial to my State. I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank the gentleman for his statement. 

Let me just say to the gentleman, before you got here, I have 

said it now probably six or seven times, that I wanted this to be 

a fair hearing where we looked at the situation and even probably 

one of the most profound statements that was made was made by 

Congressman Poe, who talked about fairness. And what we are trying to do, and we also talked, Congressman Young, how we had to 

44

look at the situation and we had to measure our response, so that 

our response would match the significance and the seriousness of 

the situation. 

So I just wanted you to understand that. I do appreciate your 

comment. 

Ms. Matsui. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, I believe this is not a hearing on trial lawyers at all. 

Laurie Dishman came to me as a constituent, and she was very, 

very brave to do that. It is very difficult, as Ms. Brown has said, 

for women to have to deal with assault and rape. And she is an 

ordinary person, doing her work in Sacramento, California, with 

neighbors. I know it is really very difficult for you. 

My hope is through this hearing we might be more enlightened. 

I had actually thought that it would be wonderful to take a cruise. 

I have a couple of wonderful grandchildren, aged 3 and 6 months, 

and I thought it would be great to take my little family on a cruise. 

I saw all the commercials on television and thought, isn’t this wonderful, the parents can go off somewhere, maybe the kids will have 

their own area. And it was a wonderful presentation. Because I am 

always trying to think about ways to put the family together. 

Until Laurie came to me, who by the way, she tried everything 

before she came to me. It was only when she came to me that she 

was able actually to get her medical records. And I don’t believe 

you should have to go to a member of Congress to do that. 

But I must say that I hope that we could keep this discussion 

on a plane where we can come to some solutions here. It was very 

painful for Laurie to come here. Mr. Carver, the pain you had to 

go through, and in essence, to do the work you have done honors 

your daughter. My feeling is that there are some really good suggestions here. I know the victims have some wonderful suggestions. 

I would certainly encourage the industry to get together with 

some of these victims in a manner in which we want to move forward to have a safe industry, where we could have fun. I really 

think there are a lot of suggestions that were presented here that 

would be wonderful to move forward on. 

I am not at all saying that we shouldn’t have cruises. I think it 

would be wonderful. And I want to go on a cruise. But I am hesitant now, I am hesitant. And there are going to be people out there 

like me who are hesitant. I hope that the cruise industry can get 

together with the victims and with others like us, so we can work 

toward some sort of solution here. 

We understand that this is a different situation, being on a ship. 

Having said that, though, I think Judge Poe said it, one victim is 

too many. So I thank you very much for being here and I appreciate very much the opportunity to say a few words. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Boustany. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate that we are having 

this hearing in the first place, given that cruises should be an enjoyable event for those who take them. I came in late, so I have 

only heard some of the testimony. But it is truly disturbing to hear 

what has been said. 

45

As we look at what happens, I am a physician, I have dealt with 

health care and I understand we are dealing with health care concerns on cruise lines now. We have crime, we have the environment 

where there is also the possibility of terrorism. These are all things 

that we need to look at. 

But I really have one basic, fundamental question. I would like 

to ask each of the witnesses this. I know Mr. Carver partially answered it earlier when he was asked about whether he has approached the cruise lines and talked to them about adopting certain measures. 

If we are going to look at prevention in particular, I would like 

to know, what can the cruise lines do? What recommendations do 

you have to the cruise lines that they could undertake, provided 

they are willing to do so? 

Mr. CARVER. A year ago, I presented this ten point program. I 

don’t know if you have had time to review it. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. I apologize, I have not had a chance to look 

through it. 

Mr. CARVER. Well, it was just a very brief summary. But if you 

look at it, it is a pretty common sense piece of paper. At that hearing, I went to Michael Crye at the break and I said, Michael, you 

and I ought to work together. I have since written him a letter, to 

which I did not receive a response. I think what the cruise line did 

with the FBI and Coast Guard today, I have to say was a move 

to shortcut legislation. If it is necessary that these things are going 

to be reported, then hey, let’s make it a law. Let’s not make it voluntary. Because I have no sympathy, no sense that it will happen. 

So if it is a matter to shortcut legislation, I really object to that. 

We were excluded, Congress was excluded. If they are going to do 

all these things, then let’s put it into law. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Are there any other suggestions? 

Mr. CARVER. The program, it is very detailed. One of the suggestions, we have had three people go off a ship in the last three days, 

just fall off overboard. In our detailed proposal, which is here, we 

have actually suggested structural changes to correct that problem, 

to keep people from just, if they are drunk or whatever, falling off 

a ship. 

One of the strong suggestions that I have, which I fear that the 

cruise line would shudder at, is that there be independent security 

on those ships that, when a crime happens, they don’t report to the 

cruise line, their job is to address the issue. If you go on our web 

site, you will find a very detailed report, how this can be set up 

with the other countries where those ships are flagged. 

It is like a sky marshal on an airplane today. When the cruise 

lines take the position that they do, that they don’t investigate 

crimes on ships, they just contact the FBI, that is not workable. I 

think that is one of the major things that should be done. And 

frankly, I think it would be good for the cruise lines to do that, because it would give the passengers a sense, and you can read my 

documents, of comfort, of safety, that if something happens, there 

is going to be somebody there who is independent, like you call the 

police here in town and they are right there. On a cruise ship, 

there is no one to call that is there to support your position. I think 

that is the most significant thing that could be done. The details 

46

are actually on our web site, in minute detail, concerning the need 

for outside security on board those cruise ships. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Do any of you care to comment on what was said 

here, or to elaborate further? 

Ms. DISHMAN. I agree with Mr. Carver. I do recommend something, such as like a Federal marshal. Here in my case we had a 

security guard who was normally a janitor. I have now found out 

that there were only three security guards on duty for 3,000 passengers. You are talking about a Royal Caribbean city that is lawless. There are no laws. Not only was I raped, but I had no sense 

of anywhere to go and what to do. 

I agree with Mr. Carver, some type of independent security. And 

not only does the cruise line need to work with this, but also the 

FBI and Department of Justice needs to help communicate with 

them and with each other. My Department of Justice was not even 

aware that my assistant U.S. attorney had declined my case the 

day that the FBI boarded the ship. So I just feel that all of us together can help make this happen. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Dr. Klein, do you want to comment? 

Mr. KLEIN. Yes, please. I don’t work with the International 

Cruise Victims Organization, so my position isn’t the same as 

theirs, but I think it is consistent. I would make two points. One 

is I think the industry needs to be honest about the risk. I think 

to say that a cruise is the safest environment one can be in is misleading. And I am not suggesting they go out and say, we are dangerous. But I think they need to be realistic with passengers, to 

take care on cruise ships like they do on land. 

The other thing is, from my view, and I am trying to remember 

where I put it, I think it is in my last book, I argue that there 

should be independent ombudspeople onboard a cruise ship who 

are not part of the officer structure and are not beholden to the 

cruise line. Having someone independent, a passenger or a crew 

member who has been assaulted or otherwise has had a crime committed against themselves can go to and deal with. I think this is 

critically important, both for the victim, but I think that when we 

think about crimes perpetrated by crew members, if a crew member knows that there is a system in place, that they are going to 

get caught, there is now going to be an impediment to them committing those crimes. 

So for me, in my ideal world, those would be the first two things 

we should be looking at. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you. We have talked about legislative 

remedies, we have talked about legal remedies. But I wanted to 

focus a little bit on prevention and where things could go in terms 

of preventing these types of events and problems. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Taylor. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, just a couple of quick observations, 

to Mr. Carver’s point of losing a family member and the ship never 

recorded it. It strikes me that yesterday, I bought a $12.90 pair of 

vice grip pliers at a Wal-Mart and the lady at the checkout counter 

forgot to demagnetize it. So as I was walking out of the Wal-Mart 

with a $12.90 pair of pliers, the alarm goes off. You would think 

47

if we could do something like that for a pair of pliers, we could find 

some way to have a name tag. I recently visited Mr. Boustany’s 

State for Mardi Gras. The hotel where I stayed, I had to have an 

arm band to get in. Almost every fair or festival I have ever visited 

requires something similar to that. 

So again, I have followed the cruise ship industry with some 

amount of interest. They have the laws exactly the way they want 

them. They don’t pay taxes, they are considered foreign entities. 

They come here and their folks don’t pay minimum wage. They 

don’t live by the ocean laws. Apparently on several occasions, they 

have decided they are not responsible to live by the pollution laws. 

And yet, if I am not mistaken, something like 98 percent of all 

people who ever set foot on a cruise ship will be Americans. I think 

we as a Nation have to decide, are we going to wait for a 9/11 type 

event to take place, where a large number of Americans are put at 

risk, possibly a large number of them hurt before we respond? Or 

are we going to start taking at least incremental steps to rein in 

this industry where so many Americans participate, and yet it is 

almost virtually outside the scope of American law? 

So I will just pass that on. I appreciate our witnesses being here. 

There are actually instances where foreign-flag vessels operate out 

of American ports on a daily basis, go 12 miles out to sea, turn 

around and go back and they are exempt from the same laws as 

the tugboat to their left or the fishing vessel to their right, because 

they are operating under something called a cruise to nowhere. We 

tried to address this the last time the Democrats had control of the 

House, and the folks from the cruise ship industry were sitting in 

the back of this room, did an excellent job of killing that in the 

Senate. I am sure they got a bonus out of the deal, and yet the 

loophole in the law exists. 

So it is something we need to look into. I very much appreciate 

your having this hearing. I hope it doesn’t take a 9/11 type event 

before this huge vulnerability occurs. For example, if I were to get 

on an airplane with a bag and the bag is down in the hold of the 

aircraft, I can’t leave that plane unless the bag is also removed. 

The reason for that is, they don’t want someone getting on a plane 

with a bomb and at the last minute acting like they have stomach 

ache and getting off, and then the plane takes off and the bomb 

explodes. 

In the instance of Mr. Carver’s daughter, you would think that 

there would be the same sort of security mechanism where a passenger could get on, and maybe the passenger voluntarily jumps 

overboard and leaves a bomb behind. There ought to be a way, 

again, going back to that pair of vice grips analogy, there ought to 

be a way to track that passenger while they are on the vessel. I 

can’t believe it is out of the realm of our technological expertise. 

I can’t believe that it is cost prohibitive. Again, a $12 pair of pliers, 

compared to that, the loss of human life, this needs to be addressed. Again, the vast majority of the people who are going to get 

on those ships are Americans. I think we owe it to our fellow Americans to try and address this. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank you for your comments, and I 

want to thank our witnesses. I just want to go back to one thing, 

48

Mr. Carver. It really concerns some things that just about everybody up here has said. It is an interesting observation, in your 

written testimony you wrote these words, which really struck me. 

You said, ‘‘We need to address solutions to this problem in order 

to protect future passengers. The goal of the ICV,’’ that is your organization, ‘‘is not to damage cruise lines, but to hold them accountable for the safety of future passengers and crew members, 

and to require prompt and accurate reports to authorities of 

crimes, deaths, disappearances and other matters that would normally be investigated if they had occurred on land.’’

As I sit here and listen to you, listen to Ms. Dishman, and listening to Ms. Brown, Ms. Matsui, Mr. Boustany and Mr. Taylor and 

others, I think that you have come to the table saying, we want to 

work to come up with solutions, we are not, we have been through 

some horrible pain and we have to live with that pain until we die. 

We just don’t want others to have to go through what we went 

through. 

I hope the industry, who is about to come up next, I hope they 

are listening very carefully. Because I think one of the things that 

we are going to have to do is we need to try to revisit this agreement, so that hopefully we can have all the parties coming together. 

But I want to thank you for your attitude, which is one of trying 

to come to a solution. Because we can argue and argue and argue 

and we still don’t come up with a solution. Then like you said, Ms. 

Dishman, a few years from now, or maybe even next week, there 

is another Ms. Dishman going through the same things. 

We are going to hear from the industry now, but again, I thank 

you all. Is there anything else? 

Thank you all so much. We really appreciate all of you. 

We will call up the next panel now. 

Mr. Terry Dale, the President of Cruise Lines International Association; Mr. Charles Mandigo, Director of Fleet Security, Holland 

America Lines, Inc.; Mr. Gary Bald, Senior Vice President and 

Global Chief Security Officer, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.; and 

Mr. Larry Kaye, Senior Partner, Kaye, Rose and Partners. 

Mr. Dale? 

TESTIMONY OF TERRY DALE, PRESIDENT, CRUISE LINES 

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION; CHARLES MANDIGO, DIRECTOR OF FLEET SECURITY, HOLLAND AMERICA LINES, INC.; 

GARY BALD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, GLOBAL CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER, ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD.; LARRY 

KAYE, SENIOR PARTNER, KAYE, ROSE AND PARTNERS 

Mr. DALE. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee. My name is Terry Dale, and I am the President and 

Chief Executive Officer of Cruise Lines International Association. 

Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony on behalf of 

our members. 

First, I wish to express our sincere condolences to those individuals we have heard from today. Nothing I can say today can take 

away from their pain and their grief. Any experience of this type, 

however rare, causes the industry to increase its efforts for safety 

and security. The cruise industry wants to do the right thing. 

49

CLIA is North America’s largest cruise industry organization, 

with a membership of 21 member cruise lines, 16,500 travel agencies and 100 executive partners. By way of background, in 2006, 

CLIA merged with the International Council of Cruise Lines, ICCL, 

thereby expanding its membership and its mission. CLIA participates in the regulatory and policy development process, while supporting measures that foster a safe, secure and healthy cruise vacation. It also provides travel agent training, research and marketing 

communications. 

Here to support the industry today are senior executives from 

our travel industry partners. I would like to invite them to stand: 

American Society of Travel Agents, the National Association of 

Cruise-Oriented Agencies, Vacation.com, and Cruise Shops. Together with CLIA’s agency members, this group represents millions 

of satisfied and happy cruise vacationers. We thank these organizations for their support today. 

Mr. Chairman, I am here today, however, to emphasize to the 

members of the Subcommittee several important facts. Cruising is 

safe. This year, over 12 million passengers will board cruise ships. 

Ensuring their safety and security is our highest priority. I am 

proud to say that the industry has an enviable record when it 

comes to safety and security. The U.S. Coast Guard, in a comprehensive report, has emphasized that passenger vessels are 

among the safest way to travel. We know of no reason for that 

opinion to have changed. We find this statement true today, because and due to our stringent security policies and procedures. 

A cruise vessel is comparable to a secure building with a controlled environment, limited access and 24 hour security team. 

Heightened security measures are standard for cruise ships today. 

The cruise industry has comprehensive security measures in place 

to ensure the safety and security of all our guests. A security officer 

and trained security staff are on every vessel, whose duties are 

solely to provide safety and security to our guests and crew. The 

gentlemen seated next to me are corporate security officers for the 

cruise lines, as well as veterans of the FBI. 

All crew members employed aboard our vessels are required to 

obtain a U.S. visa and are subject to State Department background 

checks. Cruising is one of the most popular vacation options, in 

large part because of its excellent safety record and high level of 

onboard service. 

The cruise industry cares about its passengers. Our passengers 

make the strongest statement about its safety and security. More 

than 55 percent of cruisers today are repeat cruisers. In addition, 

cruise passengers have a total satisfaction of 95 percent. We must 

be doing some things right to have these types of ratings. 

The cruise industry has a zero tolerance for crime. Our industry 

takes all allegations and incidents of crime onboard seriously and 

reports them to the proper authorities. While even one incident is 

one incident too many that occurs on a passenger vessel, the industry continues to reiterate its commitment to ensure the safety of 

our guests. 

In the rare occurrence it is needed, CLIA member lines have 

trained staff to support families and individuals during emergency 

situations. In this past year, many of our member lines have 

50

strengthened their guest support teams, both onboard and shoreside, to aid in grief and trauma counseling, to ensure that individuals and families receive proper assistance. In addition, onboard 

security staff receive comprehensive training from agencies such as 

the FBI, CBP and U.S. Coast Guard in evidence collection and 

crime scene preservation. 

Our FBI agreement. To further demonstrate the industry’s commitment to safety and security, I am pleased to announce today a 

formal agreement between CLIA, the FBI and the U.S. Coast 

Guard. This agreement further clarifies reporting procedures for all 

serious violations of U.S. law alleged to have occurred aboard our 

cruise ships and outlines the jurisdiction that the United States 

has over these crimes. CLIA worked with the FBI and the Coast 

Guard over the past year to create uniform reporting requirements 

which are supplemental to existing laws. 

Let me hasten to add, Mr. Chairman, that the industry is willing 

to work with this Committee to further clarify the regulations. We 

sought this agreement to further the industry’s own zero tolerance 

for crime policy adopted in 1999. Let there be no doubt that we are 

fully committed to bringing criminals hurting anyone on our cruise 

ships to justice. A more detailed explanation of laws and regulations governing crime reporting will be provided in the testimony 

of Mr. Larry Kaye. 

Statistics demonstrate the industry’s commitment to safety. 

While virtually no place on land or sea is totally risk-free, the number of reported incidents of serious crime from cruise lines is extremely low, no matter what benchmark or standard is used. This 

statement was made by nationally renowned criminologist Dr. 

James Alan Fox of Northeastern University, who is here with us 

today and testified last year before the House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations. 

I would also like to address concern regarding the accuracy of 

what was reported at the January 2006 hearing. We stand by the 

data that was submitted as being honest and accurate. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would again like to express our 

sympathies and heart-felt remorse to the individuals here today. 

CLIA and its 21 member cruise lines are constantly reviewing industry practices and procedures. We will apply any lessons learned 

that can be learned to ensure the safety of our passengers. Thank 

you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Mandigo? 

Mr. MANDIGO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

If I could ask for my whole statement to be entered into the 

record and for brevity, I will go ahead and shorten that for an oral 

presentation. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. So ordered. Let me just say this, I want you all 

to say what you have to say. But we are going to have a vote probably at around 15, 20 after. You can do it however you wish. There 

may be a point, though, if we can finish this, we won’t have to 

come back. I don’t want to cut you short. I want you to stay within 

the five minutes, but just keep that in mind. Because if we go past 

that, say 1:30, we are going to have to come back. I don’t mind 

51

coming back, I will be here until tomorrow if necessary. I just want 

to make you all aware of that. 

Mr. MANDIGO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, on behalf of Holland 

America Line, I thank you for inviting me to testify before you 

today. I am the Director of Fleet Security for Holland America 

Line, a Carnival company, a position I have held for nearly four 

years. As Director of Fleet Security, I am responsible for Holland 

American Lines’ security programs and for compliance with all security directives by governments and other regulatory agencies as 

to terminal, ship, passenger and cruise security practices and procedures. 

Immediately prior to joining Holland America Lines, I served 

with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for 27 years, working out 

of offices in New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C. and Seattle. 

Over the course of my career, I was responsible for cases involving 

all matters within the FBI’s jurisdiction, including anti-terrorism, 

intelligence and crimes on the high sea. In my final assignment, I 

served as Special Agent in Charge of the Seattle office of the FBI, 

where I was responsible for all FBI matters within the State of 

Washington. 

Holland America Line is one of a number of brands owned by 

Carnival Corporation, which in total operates a fleet of 82 modern 

passenger vessels serving worldwide markets. Holland America 

Lines strives to provide a safe and secure cruise experience for its 

passengers and is committed to taking the measures necessary to 

enure the security of its passengers. 

The first step in preserving passenger security is deterrence. 

However, Holland America Line also recognizes the importance of 

ensuring the appropriate handling and response to any report of a 

possible crime. Accordingly, all crew are provided basic training in 

security. The chief of security and his team have primary responsibility for responding to any incident. Members of the security force 

are trained in appropriate investigative techniques, such as crime 

scene and evidence preservation. Our security officers generally 

have backgrounds in Federal and local law enforcement or military 

backgrounds with significant security and peacekeeping experience. 

Holland America Line takes operational security aboard its vessels seriously and cooperates closely with its flag and port States 

to report and investigate security incidents as appropriate. In 

short, the safety of Holland America Lines crews and passengers 

is our highest priority. 

I appreciate the opportunity to appear here before you today, and 

I will answer any questions you may have. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Mandigo. 

Mr. Bald? 

Mr. BALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. And thank you for inviting me here today to address 

the questions that this Committee has. 

My name, as you mentioned, is Gary Bald. I am the Senior Vice 

President for Security for Royal Caribbean Cruises. 

Let me begin first by extending my heart-felt sympathies and 

apologies to Mr. Carver, whom I met for the first time today and 

had an opportunity to chat with him. I look forward to the opporVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
52

tunity, as I expressed before this hearing, to meet with him and 

to discuss his concerns and his suggestions for how we can improve 

security that we afford to our guests on board. I would also like to 

extend my sympathies to Ms. Dishman for the traumatic experience that she had on our cruise ship. I have not had a chance to 

meet Ms. Dishman. We have invited her down to speak to us, to 

talk to us about her concerns, but her lawyer has suggested that 

there may be a better time to do that later. 

Before joining Royal Caribbean in June of 2006, I retired from 

the FBI, where I spent nearly 29 years. I gained broad experience 

in both national security and criminal law enforcement. In my most 

recent position at the FBI, I served as the Executive Assistant Director for the National Security Branch, which is the third seniormost position in the Bureau. In that position, I headed the Bureau’s counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence and intelligence programs worldwide, and directed the efforts of approximately 19,000 

employees. I spent most of my FBI career in the field, conducting 

or supervising criminal investigations and aiding criminal prosecutions. In short, my life’s work has been dedicated to security and 

I intend to continue that to proceed. 

Nothing is more important to Royal Caribbean than the safety of 

our guests and our crew members. Both our actions and our record, 

I believe, prove that. Of course, we are not perfect, although we 

strive to be. In those moments when we do fall short of our own 

expectations, we make every effort that we can to learn from them 

and to strengthen our policies and our procedures. We work hard 

to keep our guests and employees safe. However, even one crime 

is one crime too many. We take every allegation of a crime seriously, reporting allegations to the FBI and to other authorities 

where appropriate. It is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of allegations that we report to the FBI would never receive 

their scrutiny were they to occur on land. 

I want to briefly address the statistics that our industry provided 

to Congressman Shays and his Subcommittee, as has been mentioned briefly before. Mr. Chairman, based on everything I know 

about the matter, I believe the information Royal Caribbean provided to Congressman Shays is true and accurate. It was at that 

time and it is still today. If I were given the opportunity to resubmit those statistics, they would be identical, based on what his request was. 

Royal Caribbean is a company, I believe, with a high degree of 

integrity. I believed this to be true when I accepted my position 

there last June and I believe it to be true today. I will mention that 

if it were not true, or if I find it is not true at any time during my 

employment, I will cease my employment with Royal Caribbean. In 

my opinion, any suggestion to the contrary on the statistics we provided to Congressman Shays distort the fact and ignore the truth. 

Royal Caribbean has worked diligently to improve guest and 

crew safety. I would like to give you just a few examples of what 

we are doing. A fuller list of initiatives is in my written testimony, 

which I request be made a matter of record. 

First, we are improving onboard security. This includes spending 

more than $25 million, that is $25 million, Mr. Chairman, to update and expand our onboard video surveillance, focusing training 

53

on evidence preservation and placing more security on board certain ships in a program that we are currently piloting. Second, we 

are strengthening our ability to provide guest with special assistance, working closely with the Family Assistance Foundation, formalizing our rapid response guest care team, which is available 24 

hours a day to travel to any ship around the world, and building 

a relationship with the FBI’s Office of Victim Assistance. 

Third, we have improved our onboard SeaPass system and bolstered our alcohol policies. Our SeaPass system helps our security 

staff know which guests are crew members are on board and which 

are not at any given time. We have made a significant modification 

to our SeaPass process, subsequent to Mr. Carver’s losing his 

daughter. Previously, guests were not required to swipe their 

SeaPass cards when disembarking at the end of a cruise. Today 

they are required to do so, and it gives us accountability, much 

more reliably, to say who is on board our ships and who is not. 

Additionally, we have implemented an award-winning alcohol 

training program and other innovations to assist us in responsible 

alcohol service. We are doing much more than this, but these demonstrate some of the significant efforts that we are making for our 

guests and crew. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, I would refer you to my testimony, where 

you will find a chronological list of 13 examples of security initiatives that have been taken over the last year, plus that I believe 

speak to some of the issues and questions that have been raised 

here today. 

Before ending my remarks, I would like to address the testimony 

of Ms. Dishman. Clearly, she is very upset by the events that occurred during her cruise, and as I mentioned, I am sincerely sorry 

about those events and I extend my deepest sympathies to her. We 

tried to help her in every way that we could, and we accomplished 

that in some respects, but in others, frankly, we came up short. 

I want to make one fact very clear to the Subcommittee. As soon 

as Ms. Dishman reported her allegation, our ship’s personnel took 

immediate action. We immediately offered medical assistance to 

Ms. Dishman and we promptly notified the FBI and provided it 

with all information that they requested. Ten FBI agents boarded 

the ship and conducted an investigation, including interviews of 

witnesses. Ultimately, after completing its investigation, the FBI 

decided not to arrest or charge anyone with a crime. 

In some ways, however, we came up short. We apparently did not 

adequately secure Ms. Dishman’s cabin. Although it appears that 

this had no effect on the FBI’s investigation, the manner in which 

we carried out this task was neither consistent with our policies 

and practices nor our ethical obligation to our guests. We should 

have done more to support Ms. Dishman’s personal and emotional 

needs onboard the ship. We also should have provided Ms. 

Dishman with additional information sooner than she requested. I 

am sorry for that delay. 

Learning from those events, we have now authorized our staff to 

release certain critical information to claimed victims. Given the 

strict liability that cruise lines face, we sometimes respond like 

other large companies facing a lawsuit: we become too defensive. 

Despite this fact, we will be providing more information sooner 

54

from this point forward. Again, Mr. Chairman, I refer you to my 

written testimony for details as to those changes. 

We are using the lessons that we have learned in two important 

areas. First, in our effectiveness in responding to incidents. in my 

view, Royal Caribbean is very adept at handling routine issues and 

guest-related incidents. However, in situations such as Ms. 

Dishman’s, involving intimate contact between a guest and a crew 

member, or between two guests, we are less practiced, primarily 

because these incidents occur so infrequently. This also increases 

our chances of making a mistake. 

I was hired by Royal Caribbean to assist the company in many 

ways. None is more important than in situations like this. I am 

working to improve training, incident communication and oversight 

to address these areas. 

Second is guest support. In response to our need to improve our 

efforts to provide personal and emotional support, we have created 

the guest care team, which I mentioned earlier. This dedicated 

team has been primarily pressed into duty in response to medical 

emergencies, but has also supported victims of alleged sexual assaults. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Bald, could you wrap up? I have let you go 

three minutes over. Just wrap it up. 

Mr. BALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. It is not that it is not very interesting. 

Mr. BALD. Thank you. 

This team has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from 

alleged victims, our gussets and their families. I believe this represents a very strong commitment to this very important area. 

We continue to learn ways to improve our performance and I 

hope these efforts demonstrate our commitment to our guests and 

to their well-being. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me here today. 

Cruising is one of the safest vacations a person could possibly take, 

as millions of people each year experience. I would be happy to answer any questions that you have. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kaye? 

Mr. KAYE. Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee and 

other members, I want to thank you very much for inviting me to 

testify today concerning the legal regime for cruise lines in the 

areas of passenger security, law enforcement, crime and casualty 

reporting and U.S. jurisdiction. I am senior partner of a maritime 

law firm based in Los Angeles. I have been practicing law for almost 30 years, and my entire career has focused on maritime 

issues and international legal jurisdictional issues. 

I began my career as a Federal judicial law clerk to the Chief 

Judge of the Southern District of California. I authored the chapter 

in the leading legal treatise on cruise ships, Benedict on Admiralty, 

entitled Government Regulation, which is used today as a reference 

by judges, lawyers and educators. I have had the privilege of testifying before Congress and the California legislature concerning 

issues in the cruise industry and have bene consulted and retained 

as an expert witness in matters involving the legal treatment of 

cruise lines. 

55

I am counsel to most of the cruise lines operating in North America and to the Cruise Line International Association. 

I will tell you, in all honesty, the most important role I have in 

life is that of a husband and father of three children, two of whom 

are daughters. When I think of my own family, my heart goes out 

to every single victim of the kind of acts we have heard about 

today. Working in this industry for over a quarter of a century, I 

have personally observed the efforts of cruise lines to keep their 

ships safe. Frankly, nothing should have a higher priority. And I 

believe nothing does. 

The reality is that U.S. law enforcement agencies do have extra 

territorial jurisdiction under our present laws to investigate and 

prosecute crimes involving Americans on ships sailing on the high 

seas. And I believe the reach of the reporting requirements, as Mr. 

Chairman, you mentioned at the outset, do match the reach of the 

jurisdictional statutes. I believe they are in concert at the present 

time. 

More to the point, the FBI, as a matter of normal practice, is 

routinely requested by the cruise lines to ensure American passengers are protected wherever they travel. As a result, despite the 

unfortunate and inevitable tragedies that occur in an industry with 

more than 12 million patrons each year, cruise ships are and remain an extremely safe vacation choice. 

There are at least 20 statutes codified in Title 18 of the U.S. 

Code that create felonies for crimes committed in this special maritime jurisdiction. They extend to crimes in U.S. waters, crimes involving Americans on the high seas, and crimes involving Americans on foreign-flag vessels in foreign waters if the ship departs or 

arrives in the U.S. 

And just last year, Congress amended the abusive sexual contact 

statute, which is Section 2244 of Title 18, to make it a felony ‘‘to 

engage in sexual contact with another person without that person’s 

permission.’’ Even in the absence of force, threats, intoxication or 

coercion, that felony is punishable by two years in a Federal prison. 

And with respect to the observation by Congresswoman Matsui, 

her concern about the lack of prosecutions, there are currently at 

least a dozen published court opinions upholding indictment and 

convictions of crimes at sea on passenger ships, both on the high 

seas and in foreign waters under these Federal statutes that I have 

described or similar State statutes that presently exist in Florida, 

California and Alaska. 

The cases that I have discussed all echo the bedrock legal principle of international law embodied in the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea, that a nation has jurisdiction over the 

citizens of its territory and a nation has jurisdiction over crimes 

that have an effect in its territory when the victim returns here. 

Now, when it comes to the reporting of crimes, Federal law does 

impose mandatory crime reporting requirements on all cruise ships 

sailing to or from the U.S. These are the regulations for the security of passenger vessels that were first enacted in 1996 and have 

been beefed up three times since. They do impose fines and penalties, including revocation of licenses and monetary fines. 

The cruise industry has always deemed those requirements to 

apply to crimes against Americans during any part of a voyage to 

56

or from the U.S., and it is interesting to note that those regulations 

define the term voyage as ‘‘the entire course of travel from the first 

port at which the vessel embarks passenger until it is returned to 

that port.’’ You heard the FBI testify earlier that those regulations 

do reach crimes that occur outside 12 miles and indeed, both the 

FBI in 2000 and the Coast Guard in 2002 published circulars saying that the regulations applied outside the 12 mile limit. 

But Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, this is not an 

issue we need to debate. If anyone thinks the rules are unclear, 

let’s work together to fix that. The people who most need to know 

it is clear are those that would perpetrate any sort of criminal act 

against my family, your family or the millions of families that travel on ships every year. All we need do is add a sentence to the regulations, the existing regulations that say, these regulations apply 

to any crime on any ship sailing to or from the U.S. I know of no 

one in this room today that would oppose such a measure. 

I want to conclude by mentioning very briefly that in addition to 

the very broad criminal jurisdiction and reporting requirements, 

passengers have complete redress to civil remedies under the civil 

justice system. And in fact, a much more stringent standard of liability applies in the cruise industry and to any comparable businesses on land. A guest in a hotel, theme park, resort, office building, restaurant or shopping mall could not hold any of those entities liable for an alleged assault by an employee absent negligent 

hiring of someone with a known criminal past. But if the same incident is alleged to have occurred on a cruise ship, this cruise line 

is strictly liable without regard to fault. 

We all know that money could never ease the pain a victim has 

endured. But that alone is a powerful incentive for cruise companies to eradicate crime. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I have worked in 

this industry a very long time. The folks I know who see to our 

safety are good people with honest motives. They are mothers, father, sisters and brothers, no different than you and me. They routinely sail on these ships with their own families. 

But as long as anyone is victimized by a crime on a vacation 

cruise, we have failed to do our job. I sincerely hope we can work 

together with the Federal agencies to do whatever is needed to protect all of them. And I thank you very much. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you. I thank all of you for your testimony. 

Mr. Dale, I want to go back to you. You said something that just 

struck my curiosity. You said that you would work to further clarify the agreement. What did you mean by that. You have heard, 

as you can see, that has been a theme that I have been sort of 

harping on. I am trying to figure out some solutions to problems. 

Unfortunately here in the Congress, things seem to happen slowly. 

I am trying to speed up the process. Probably one of the easiest 

ways to speed up the process is to get the industry working with 

the other partners to come up with some solutions. Then perhaps, 

hopefully we won’t have to, but to back that up with some laws or 

some change of laws, whatever. 

But I think, when I listened to Mr. Bald, as I listened to him, 

I said, now, this just makes sense. It seems like the kinds of things 

that he is talking about that they are doing in Royal Caribbean are 

57

the kinds of things that Mr. Taylor was referring to. Probably need 

to do more. 

So I am trying to figure out, and I think all of you all expressed 

your concerns and sympathy and condolences with regard to the 

victims here. But I want to take, sympathy, that is important. But 

keep in mind why they are here. They are not here so much for 

themselves. They are here because they care about other people, 

people they don’t even know, which says a lot. I am sure they spent 

their own money trying to get here, took off from work. So I am 

trying to figure out, I don’t know what that means, further clarifying the agreement. Clearly, we have to revisit this agreement. I 

just want to hear what you had to say about that. 

Mr. DALE. I share your desire to work in an efficient and inclusive manner for this clarity. That means bringing the stakeholders 

together. We have been working for over a decade on our security 

committee with the FBI, who is a member of and participates, the 

Coast Guard, which is a member of and an active participant, CBP. 

Today, I extend the invitation to meet with the folks here today so 

that we are inclusive and that we hear their concerns and that we 

move forward in clarifying, if anything does in fact need further 

clarification. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. So you are going to be willing to meet with——

Mr. DALE. I will. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I would hope that you would include Mr. Bald 

in that. 

Mr. DALE. Absolutely. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. The reason why I say that is because, as I listened to the things he said, and I have talked to him before. First 

of all, we have, and certainly to Mr. Mandigo, we have a lot of respect for the FBI. I think it was good, I have said it in private and 

I will say it in public, I think it is a very important move to take 

the security that seriously that you would get folks who have been 

in the FBI for over 25 years or whatever you all said to be a part 

of that. 

I guess the thing that I am wondering about is the things that 

they are doing at Royal Caribbean, are you all trying to make that 

industry-wide? Are you looking at other things in addition to those 

things? Because it sounds like we are on the right track? 

Mr. DALE. Absolutely. We need to be compassionate caretakers 

of our guests. The success of our future business depends on that. 

So across our entire fleet of 21 member cruise lines, we are developing and in many cases have already very solid programs in place 

for care of our passengers who are the unfortunate recipients of an 

unpleasant experience. But it very important to us as an industry. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. One of the things that Mr. Bald said, and I kind 

of scribbled it down, but basically what he said was that although 

these things, when you look at the total picture, may happen infrequently, he has to be prepared for even those things. I don’t want 

us to get so busy counting how many times it happens here or happens there that we lose the bigger picture. And that is the bigger 

picture that every single person needs to be safe, every single person needs to, I would love for Ms. Dishman to be in a position to 

say, you know what, because of all the things that have been done, 

I know I will feel comfortable walking onto a ship again. That is 

58

my goal. I am just telling you. I just hope that we can move more 

toward that. 

Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I apologize for not being here for your oral testimony, but I did 

have the chance in preparation for this hearing to read your written testimony. I thank you for your testimony today. 

While I think I am appreciative of your expressions of sympathy 

to earlier witnesses today, I think I was concerned by a number of 

other observations made during the hearing, Mr. Carver’s experience in particular. I guess I am concerned how a passenger could 

disappear on the second day of a seven day cruise on a ship that 

spent a lot of time in U.S. territorial waters and there was no notification to the FBI and then obviously some other things followed. 

Could anyone on the panel tell us how you would respond to that 

today? Because clearly there wasn’t such a hot response then. 

Mr. BALD. Mr. LaTourette, if I could respond to that. First, I 

would like to caveat my comments. It is very difficult to be in a 

situation such as this and to speak about a loss like Mr. Carver 

had and not appear to sound calloused. And I don’t want that to 

come across that way. The loss that he suffered, I just can’t imagine. 

But to respond to your question, there were some unusual circumstances involving Mr. Carver’s daughter. She came on board 

with two purses and a manila envelope. She didn’t come on with 

the normal luggage. That made it a bit more difficult for us to recognize that she had not been in her stateroom every day. 

However, having said that, our stateroom attendant did have her 

antennas up, his or her antennas up, and did report to the supervisor that the stateroom attendant felt that Ms. Carver was not 

spending time in her cabin. We made an error, our supervisor did 

not report that further. That is something that is absolutely 

against our policy. We dismissed that employee. 

However, it doesn’t change the fact that Ms. Carver disappeared 

and that it took us an extended period of time to recognize that before it came to our attention and gave us the opportunity to report 

it. 

Your final question was, what would happen differently today. I 

believe that the policy that we have today is the same one we had 

in place at that time, and that is to report a missing person or a 

crime on board our cruise ships immediately to the FBI. The challenge for us in that situation was, the people that make that reporting to the FBI did not become aware of Ms. Carver’s disappearance for an extended period of time. I would like to think that we 

have done enough in the way of education and training for our 

crew members to make sure that that doesn’t happen again. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I thank you very much for that response. 

I want to echo the Chairman’s call that this thing really gets 

worked out best when all involved come to some accommodation 

and do it themselves. If it is dependent upon the Congress, we do 

move a little slowly. And actually, Mr. Chairman, the staff has reminded me that the Marconi operator on the Republic testified before the Congress in favor of having 24 hour telegraph operations 

59

in 1911. The Congress, in its speedy fashion, enacted those requirements in 1912, after the Titanic disaster. 

I want to talk a little bit about the training that the FBI agent 

talked a little bit about, specifically not focusing on any specific 

case. But do you know whether the training, either the FBI training that is currently ongoing or training that the industry is engaged in, is training the medical officers relative to rape kits and 

the collection of evidence and the preservation of evidence? Mr. 

Bald? 

Mr. BALD. Thank you, sir. I do not know whether the training 

that the medical personnel on board our ships is receiving involves 

the FBI. To my knowledge, it does not. However, the FBI has been 

extensively involved with us. They have trained, we have a program where they train each of our security officers on the securing 

of a crime scene or an incident scene, the preservation of evidence. 

I have worked with Charlie Mandigo, who has an initiative with 

the FBI to provide a train the trainer type training in those same 

areas at Quantico, Virginia. We will push that forward very quickly. 

As far as the rape kit, as you refer to it, the instructions, I have 

actually had the opportunity to look at a rape it. It is actually a 

pelvic examination kit. The directions for using that kit are on the 

inside of the top cover. Fortunately, we are dealing with medical 

doctors and they have a high level of intellect and a capability to 

apply those directions. 

One situation I would like to discuss briefly, in the situation of 

Ms. Dishman, to the extent that the information that has been reported today and that Ms. Dishman relates, that we had a medical 

officer who instructed a guest to return to her stateroom to collect 

evidence, that is not our policy. It is something that we have to correct through training, and I will make sure we do that. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I appreciate that, and just so I’m clear, maybe 

that the suggestion would be, having handled a number of rape 

cases in my earlier life, there is nothing more important than the 

correct processing of, I call it a rape kit, when it comes to a variety 

of things. One, because it has the potential to imprison someone 

who is guilty, it also has the potential to exonerate someone who 

is not guilty. So it is really to everyone’s best interest that that evidence be collected in a proper manner and go through a proper 

chain of evidence. Because defense lawyers are very skilled at destroying the chain of evidence. 

So I would just throw out that I would wish that the industry 

consider perhaps a little additional training on the collection, since 

sexual assaults seem to be things that people have talked about 

today. 

Then the last question, Mr. Chairman, if I could, when Mr. 

Carver testified he had attached to his testimony and on his web 

site, ten points that he wishes the industry would consider. And 

ask that either you, Mr. Dale, or Mr. Mandigo, if you have examined those 10 points and if you have any response to their efficacy. 

Mr. DALE. I have examined those. We will be happy to discuss 

those with him when we get together to clarify the agreement. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Good. Mr. Mandigo? 

60

Mr. MANDIGO. Yes. At the time those were received, they were 

reviewed in detail and responses were provided at that time to 

ICCL for consideration for their review. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Mandigo, what did you just say? 

Mr. MANDIGO. I said that we did have them and they were distributed throughout the industry for people like in my position to 

make comments on. They were in turn provided back to, at that 

time, ICCL. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Can we get a copy of that? 

Mr. MANDIGO. I will make that inquiry. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I guess what I am trying to get to, before we go 

to Mr. Brown, I have been around here 11 years. And there are 

others who have been around here much longer than I have. 

But one of the things I notice about the Congress is that you can 

go around in circles all the time. I promised myself if God ever 

gave me an opportunity to be a chairman of a subcommittee, and 

He did, that I was going to try to get things done. It is nice to hear 

nice answers, and I think the reason why I am so impressed with 

Mr. Bald is because he actually, first of all, he admitted to things 

that were wrong. He said, we are going to address it, we have addressed it. That is why I said that I hope that he is a part of the 

process. Because that is what we need. We need to get this thing 

resolved, a can-do attitude. This is America. This is the United 

States. We sent folks to the moon. We ought to be able to protect 

our own citizens, no matter where they are. 

I think that Mr. Boustany a few minutes ago talked about prevention. That is what law enforcement is all about. You would love 

not to have a job, I am sure. So some kind of way that is in law 

enforcement, I know you want your job, Mr. Dale, but I guess what 

I am getting at is I am hoping that we just, I don’t want a situation 

where Mr. Carver and Ms. Dishman come in and the pour their 

hearts out and then we wait until the next hearing and nothing 

has happened. I don’t know when I met with you, Mr. Bald, not 

too long ago, but I have seen a lot happen ever since. And I have 

met with you in less than a month or two. And I have seen a lot 

happen just as a result of that conversation, which really impresses 

me. 

So all I am saying is, that is why I said, tell me, Mr. Dale, what 

do you mean by clarify. I don’t know what clarify means. It doesn’t 

mean very much to them. You can’t see what I see, but they are 

saying, what does that mean, clarify? 

So all I’m saying is, I am hoping that we can move the ball down 

the field, to borrow a football expression. 

Mr. MANDIGO. Mr. Chairman, if I could comment briefly. Within 

the kind of corporation we have, over 500 employees have been 

trained in care for these kinds of situations. They have responded 

to numerous incidents, both on ship and on ground. We have provided airfare, we have provided counseling, we have provided family support to these situations. Other things that are being done, 

as he has proposed, we are looking for technological solutions to address these issues of people going overboard, looking at some of the 

61

technologies that are out there. There are pilot projects in place 

that we are waiting for results. 

So it is not a question of sitting back and not doing anything, 

based on material some of the material that has come out of prior 

hearings. We are taking it very seriously, we have reviewed it and 

we have acted on it. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. You are going to be meeting with them? 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Then we will talk about some time lines. Because I do want time lines. I want to be able to revisit this so that 

we can see what kind of progress we are making. 

Ms. Brown. 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me just say thank 

you for holding this hearing to both you and the Ranking Member. 

I will be very brief. 

One of the things I was thinking in listening to the testimony, 

something that I always pushed is for female and minority participation. It would be very helpful in the law enforcement area that 

you have females and then female physicians. I am more comfortable with female physicians than male physicians, even though 

some times I do have very good male physicians. So that would be 

a recommendation that I would make, that part of your cure is to 

make sure that on the ships, you have female law enforcement people and female physicians to deal with incidents like this. 

Once again, I want to see the comprehensive recommendation. 

And I guess, let me ask you quickly, the question was whether or 

not it should be something in statute and someone commented how 

that we could add to make it in statute, or the recommendations 

that are moving forward, how do you feel about it? That is open 

to either one of the speakers, but particularly I want to hear from 

the lawyer. 

Mr. KAYE. Thank you, Ms. Brown. 

I think there are two issues here. One is clarifying that the reporting requirements do apply to any crime on a voyage to or from 

the U.S. That can easily be fixed at the regulatory level by simply 

amending the regulations. They have been amended three times 

since 1996. We shouldn’t have any confusion over that. The industry isn’t confused over that, but the agencies may be, from what 

I have heard today. 

So with regard to the ICD recommendations, I can verify that 

they have been very closely looked at. I sat down with Ken Carver, 

who is a wonderful human being, who has been suffering terribly 

at the loss of his daughter, sat down with him, we struck up a very 

good rapport. I have gone through those recommendations very 

carefully. Many of them were in place, but were unknown to the 

victims. Some of them have been added, as you have heard today. 

And some of them are still under review. 

The issue of putting a bracelet or an anklet on passengers is a 

tough one, because not every passenger wants to wear it. So if they 

don’t wear it, you can’t get the benefits of the technology. But there 

may be other ways. 

Ms. BROWN. I think the last time I was on a ship, they do put 

something on you when you get ready to leave, when you go into 

62

a certain port, then when you come back they double check it or 

something. So there is something in place as we speak. 

Mr. KAYE. Yes, there is an APass with your picture on it that is 

swiped and registers your presence on the vessel whenever you 

come or go. In the Merrian Carver instance, I believe that the 

passes were not being swiped at the termination of the cruise. And 

I believe that has been changed throughout the ICCL membership, 

so that every passenger, when leaving the ship at the end of the 

cruise, has to swipe the card. So now we have a record of anyone 

who didn’t get off at the end of the cruise. That was a direct result 

of the Merrian Carver incident. 

Ms. BROWN. Yes, Mr. Bald. 

Mr. BALD. Thank you, Congresswoman Brown, and thank you for 

your help in your prior life in assisting our many happy guests and 

booking cruises on our cruise ships. 

To your first point, where you discussed the need to have a 

woman involved in situations, our policy is and will continue to be 

that the senior-most female officer on board our ship is assigned 

as a liaison to any female claim victim. We don’t pass judgment on 

whether or not her claim is valid. We assign that woman and she 

is responsible for interacting on a day to day basis outside of an 

investigative component to meet her needs and to make sure that 

we are not overlooking something that would make her experience 

easier. 

Ms. BROWN. I also mentioned the medical as far as the physicians on board. I guess I am talking about hiring practices as you 

move forward, that would be helpful. 

Mr. BALD. I agree with you completely. In fact, we have changed 

the backgrounds of the people that we are looking to hire at the 

security department. I have sent my director over to personally do 

interviews in furtherance of a pilot project that we have on board. 

I have given them specific instructions to include women in that 

hiring process. We have actually been successful in recruiting some 

very outstanding women to play a role in security for us. 

Mr. KAYE. And one last point, Mr. Chairman, if I can briefly 

make this, the cruise industry since 1993, I believe, has had a very 

close working relationship with the American College of Emergency 

Physicians. Starting in, I believe, 1995, we adopted the American 

College of Emergency Physicians recommendations and guidelines 

for cruise ship medical care, which includes many, many things. 

But to address your point, they include only using licensed physicians who have certain levels of experience in certain areas, typically emergency medicine. Emergency medicine physicians, in turn, 

typically have experience with rape victims and trauma victims. So 

that is why most of the members carry rape kits and are equipped 

to use them. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Members, we have nine minutes before the vote. 

If you have questions, please. Mr. Taylor? 

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Bald, I am curious. A previous panel that had 

said, and I want you to tell me if this is correct or not, that a theft 

of less than $10,000 is not investigated by the FBI. Is that accurate? 

Mr. BALD. Sir, my understanding is that the FBI is implementing a prosecutive threshold established by the United States 

63

Attorneys Office that says anything below $10,000 loss will not be 

prosecuted federally. That does not mean that it doesn’t end up 

getting looked at by law enforcement. In fact, we will refer a situation below $10,000 to a State or local or foreign law enforcement 

agency if the FBI declines to pursue the investigation. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay. For instance, cruise ship sails out of New Orleans. So you are going to tell me, with all of New Orleans’ problems right now, lack of a police force right now, basically if $9,000 

is stolen from a passenger on a cruise ship that sails out of New 

Orleans, do you think it is going to get investigated? 

Mr. BALD. We will report that to the FBI. If the FBI tell us they 

will not investigate it, we will do our very best to find a law enforcement agency that will. As you can appreciate, the United 

States Attorneys Office sets thresholds. It does have an impact on 

us and on our guests. 

Mr. TAYLOR. When you said everything that should have been 

done with regard to Ms. Dishman’s cabin was not done, what 

should have been done? 

Mr. BALD. Sir, in response, I am going on the information, some 

information that has been brought to my attention over the last 

week. It came out in a deposition from a crew member. It was information that was not previously known to Royal Caribbean. And 

so generally it falls under the category of adequately securing the 

cabin. The cabin was ordered to be secured. There are now questions that are being raised as to whether or not that cabin was adequately secured. That is what I was referring to. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Is there a national registry where under the subject 

of let the buyer beware that a potential cruise ship customer could 

check out the history of a ship with regard to both allegations and 

convictions, resulting from allegations and actual crimes that took 

place on a ship or a given vessel? 

Mr. DALE. I am not aware of that, Congressman. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, I guess my question, Mr. Dale, is what good 

does it do to keep track of this if I, for example, wanted to board 

a Norwegian Cruise Line ship out of New Orleans, fill in the blank 

of a name, if I wanted to check out the record of that ship before 

I got on board? 

Mr. DALE. The point of sale for our industry begins with our 

travel agents. They research the alternatives for their customers 

and based on their research they make a recommendation on the 

appropriate fit for that customer. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay. Lastly, going back to the vice grips, $12.95, 

that Wal-Mart was able to keep track of, now I realize that there 

are only a limited number of portals at that store. But I had a very 

disturbing letter from someone from South Mississippi who also 

lost a loved one overboard. With the limited knowledge I have of 

maritime issues, I can see the challenge of trying to keep track of 

losing people overboard. I have personally been so seasick where I 

was tempted to jump overboard and just kill myself. So I can understand that situation. 

But given people who didn’t want to jump, someone who may 

have tripped, someone who for whatever reason slipped, has anyone ever approached your industry with what you considered a reaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:02 Sep 04, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\34792 HTRANS1 PsN: JASON
64

sonably priced device that would make you aware that someone 

has either intentionally or unintentionally fallen off your vessel? 

Mr. MANDIGO. Mr. Congressman, we have two pilots that are 

being conducted now that address that situation. And cost is not 

a factor in it. It is rather expensive, but that is not the consideration. They look very promising and we should be seeing results 

coming up in the next few months as to the ability to detect a person that goes overboard on a vessel. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Is that from the lack of a signal being emitted? Is 

it from a signal that is emitted by contact with seawater? What 

triggers the device? 

Mr. MANDIGO. It is an infrared device with smart technology to 

detect heat signals. 

Mr. TAYLOR. In the water? 

Mr. MANDIGO. Off the side of the vessel. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay, so something like a flare. 

Mr. MANDIGO. Something seen projecting more than minimal distance off the side of a vessel, based on a heat signature, it can distinguish if it is a person, sea gull, deck chair. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. We are trying to wrap this up. Ms. Matsui? 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know we are going to 

have to go for a vote. But I must say that, Mr. Bald, you have been 

at Royal Caribbean since June, is that right? And from your testimony, written and which you have talked about here, it seems like 

you are moving ahead in a way which we believe is optimistic. 

Mr. BALD. Thank you. 

Ms. MATSUI. Now, Laurie, I guess you came after Laurie had her 

situation. I must say, though, if I didn’t know anything else that 

was going on today and I just came and listened to your panel, I 

would have thought that everything was great. The cruise industry 

is fun, it is safe. I really have to say, I don’t believe we would have 

even come to his point if we could have this hearing today, if you 

didn’t hear from Laurie, if you didn’t hear from Mr. Carver. Because quite frankly, it is very difficult to push against an industry 

like yourself. 

So I am hopeful, I know that you expressed your sorrow and your 

condolences. But hopefully you go beyond that. Because as Laurie 

says, she doesn’t want another Ms. Dishman following up. I must 

say, I am going to hold your feet to the fire. Because I want to 

make sure that we can work together. I think the victims want to 

do this. And I think we should tear down those walls and say we 

have to work together. Because I want a successful, safe cruise industry. I want to be able to know that my constituents or anybody 

else, and Mr. Kaye, you have expressed feelings about your own 

daughters. Well, I want to make sure that my little granddaughter 

can go on there, too. 

So everyone should take this very personally. If we do that, I 

think we are moving in the right direction. Mr. Chairman, I thank 

you so much for having this hearing. I know that everybody appreciates it very much. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you. It is my understanding that Mr. 

Larsen has no questions. But thank you. 

Thank you, Ms. Matsui, for requesting the hearing. I really appreciate it. We thank all of you. 

65

I want to be very clear. We are going to revisit this issue in six 

months. In six months, I hope that the parties will get together 

and work together and see where we can build on, what we can 

build on. Mr. Bald, I would appreciate it if you, and you, Mr. 

Mandigo, and Mr. Dale would get us—Mr. Kaye said there are certain things that are already being done. I want to know what those 

are. I want to know what things happen from this day forward, 

particularly since there is an agreement now in place. 

And to Mr. Carver and Ms. Dishman, we want you to stay in contact with our staff, so that we can move this along. 

I am convinced, I am thoroughly convinced that we can make a 

difference. All of us coming together as Americans, we have a cando Country. We can do this. 

Thank you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 1:45 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

66


34792.008
67


34792.009
68


34792.010
69


34792.011
70


34792.012
71


34792.013
72


34792.014
73


34792.015
74


34792.016
75


34792.017
76


34792.018
77


34792.019
78


34792.020
79


34792.021
80


34792.022
81


34792.023
82


34792.024
83


34792.025
84


34792.026
85


34792.027
86


34792.028
87


34792.029
88


34792.030
89


34792.031
90


34792.032
91


34792.033
92


34792.034
93


34792.035
94


34792.036
95


34792.037
96


34792.038
97


34792.039
98


34792.040
99


34792.041
100


34792.042
101


34792.043
102


34792.044
103


34792.045
104


34792.046
105


34792.047
106


34792.048
107


34792.049
108


34792.050
109


34792.051
110


34792.052
111


34792.053
112


34792.054
113


34792.055
114


34792.056
115


34792.057
116


34792.058
117


34792.059
118


34792.060
119


34792.061
120


34792.062
121


34792.063
122


34792.064
123


34792.065
124


34792.066
125


34792.067
126


34792.068
127


34792.069
128


34792.070
129


34792.071
130


34792.072
131


34792.073
132


34792.074
133


34792.075
134


34792.076
135


34792.077
136


34792.078
137


34792.079
138


34792.080
139


34792.081
140


34792.082
141


34792.083
142


34792.084
143


34792.085
144


34792.086
145


34792.087
146


34792.088
147


34792.089
148


34792.090
149


34792.091
150


34792.092
151


34792.093
152


34792.094
153


34792.095
154


34792.096
155


34792.097
156


34792.098
157


34792.099
158


34792.100
159


34792.101
160


34792.102
161


34792.103
162


34792.104
163


34792.105
164


34792.106
165


34792.107
166


34792.108
167


34792.109
168


34792.110
169


34792.111
170


34792.112
171


34792.113
172


34792.114
173


34792.115
174


34792.116
175


34792.117
176


34792.118
177


34792.119
178


34792.120
179


34792.121
180


34792.122
181


34792.123
182


34792.124
183


34792.125
184


34792.126
185


34792.127
186


34792.128
187


34792.129
188


34792.130
189


34792.131
190


34792.132
191


34792.133
192


34792.134
193


34792.135
194


34792.136
195


34792.137
196


34792.138
197


34792.139
198


34792.140
199


34792.141
200


34792.142
201


34792.143
202


34792.144
203


34792.145
204


34792.146
205


34792.147
206


34792.148
207


34792.149
208


34792.150
209


34792.151
210


34792.152
211


34792.153
212


34792.154
213


34792.155
214


34792.156
215


34792.157
216


34792.158
217


34792.159
218


34792.160
219


34792.161
220


34792.162
221


34792.163
222


34792.164
223


34792.165
224


34792.166
225


34792.167
226


34792.168
227


34792.169
228


34792.170
229


34792.171
230


34792.172
231


34792.173
232


34792.174
233


34792.175
234


34792.176
235


34792.177
236


34792.178
237


34792.179
238


34792.180
239


34792.181
240


34792.182
241


34792.183
242


34792.184
243


34792.185
244


34792.186
245


34792.187
246


34792.188
247


34792.189
248


34792.190
249


34792.191
250


34792.192
251


34792.193
252


34792.194
253


34792.195
254


34792.196
255


34792.197
256


34792.198
257


34792.199
258


34792.200
259


34792.201
260


34792.202
261


34792.203
262


34792.204
263


34792.205
264


34792.206
265


34792.207
266


34792.208
267


34792.209
268


34792.210
269


34792.211
270


34792.212
271


34792.213
272


34792.214
273


34792.215
274


34792.216
275


34792.217
276


34792.218
277


34792.219
278


34792.220
279


34792.221
280


34792.222
281


34792.223
282


34792.224
283


34792.225
284


34792.226
285


34792.227
286


34792.228
287


34792.229
288


34792.230
289


34792.231
290


34792.232
291


34792.233
292


34792.234
293


34792.235
294


34792.236
295


34792.237
296


34792.238
297


34792.239
298


34792.240
299


34792.241
300


34792.242
301

Æ


34792.243