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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

80–392 PDF 2013

S. HRG. 110–1223 

CRUISE SHIP SAFETY: EXAMINING POTENTIAL 

STEPS FOR KEEPING AMERICANS SAFE AT SEA 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION 

AND MERCHANT MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, 

SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JUNE 19, 2008 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

MARGARET L. CUMMISKY, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

LILA HARPER HELMS, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director 

CHRISTINE D. KURTH, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel 

PAUL NAGLE, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND MERCHANT 

MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, 

Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon, Ranking 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on June 19, 2008 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Carper .................................................................................. 4 

Statement of Senator Kerry .................................................................................... 2 

Statement of Senator Lautenberg .......................................................................... 1 

WITNESSES

Carver, Kendall, President, International Cruise Victims Association, Inc. ...... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 

Dale, Terry, President and CEO, Cruise Lines International Association 

(CLIA), accompanied by James Alan Fox, Ph.D. ............................................... 19 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Fortier, Evelyn, Vice President, Policy, Rape, Abuse and Incest National 

Network (RAINN) ................................................................................................ 11 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 14 

Fox, Ph.D., James Alan, Lipman Family Professor of Criminal Justice at 

Northeastern University, Visiting Fellow, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics ..................................................................................... 46 

Klein, Ph.D., Ross A., Professor of Social Work, Memorial University of Newfoundland .............................................................................................................. 32 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35 

APPENDIX

Coarsey, Carolyn V., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Family Assistance Foundation, Atlanta, Georgia, prepared statement .................................................................... 62 

Letter, dated June 16, 2008, from Donna K. Esposito, MCC, President, 

NACOA to Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg ............................................................... 76 

Letter, dated June 18, 2008, from William Connors, Executive Director and 

COO, National Business Travel Association to Hon. Frank Lautenberg and 

Hon. Gordon Smith .............................................................................................. 77 

Letter, dated June 18, 2008, from Cheryl Corey, Hudak, CTC, President, 

American Society of Travel Agents to Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg and Hon. 

Gordon H. Smith .................................................................................................. 75 

Letter, dated June 18, 2008, from Roger Dow, President and CEO, Travel 

Industry Association to Hon. Frank Lautenberg and Hon. Gordon Smith ..... 74 

Letter, dated June 18, 2008, from Steve Tracas, President and CEO, Vacation.com to Hon. Frank Lautenberg and Hon. Gordon Smith .......................... 76 

Letter, dated June 19, 2008, from Michelle Fee, CTC, CEO, Cruise Planners 

to Hon. Frank Lautenberg and Hon. Gordon Smith ......................................... 78 

Letter, dated June 19, 2008, from Kenneth McLean, Director and CEO, Bahamas Maritime Authority to Hon. Frank Lautenberg and Hon. Gordon 

Smith ..................................................................................................................... 79 

Letter, dated June 19, 2008, from Kurt A. Nagle, President, American Association of Port Authorities to Hon. Frank Lautenberg ..................................... 78 

Letter, dated June 19, 2008, from Robert C. Powers, Assistant Director, 

Office of Congressional Affairs, Federal Bureau of Investigation to Hon. 

Frank R. Lautenberg ........................................................................................... 64 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to: 

Terry Dale ......................................................................................................... 70 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg to: 

Terry Dale ......................................................................................................... 67 

Daniel D. Roberts ............................................................................................. 65 

Roberts, Daniel D., Deputy Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, prepared statement ..................................................................................... 61 

(1) 

CRUISE SHIP SAFETY: EXAMINING POTENTIAL 

STEPS FOR KEEPING AMERICANS SAFE AT SEA 

THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND

MERCHANT MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND

SECURITY, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg, 

Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thank you very much for joining us on the 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security. 

This hearing is going to be on cruise ship safety. And Senator 

John Kerry, who is on his way, will be joining us. I thought that 

I would get the process started, and so I have wrested the chairmanship back, and we’ll go on for a while. Now I’m told that Senator Kerry is going to be here shortly. But I will make my opening 

statement and, depending on Senator Kerry’s arrival, we’ll perhaps 

start with the statements from the witnesses, as well. I thank you 

all for being here. 

Cruises are supposed to be dream vacations, but for too many 

families these dreams turn into nightmares. Over the past few 

years we have heard a rising tide of reports about incidents on 

cruise ships. These incidents range from claims of sexual assault 

and rape to passengers who go missing at sea. 

One of the victims was a resident of Pine Hills, New Jersey, and 

her tragedy occurred on Mother’s Day of this year. Her name was 

Mindy Jordan, and she was looking forward to a relaxing vacation 

in Bermuda and, instead, she disappeared on the Atlantic Ocean. 

When her family tried desperately to find out what happened to 

her, the cruise line referred them, would you believe, to the claims 

department. In the words of Mindy’s cousin Emily, who is here 

with us today, it’s as if she was a piece of luggage. The investigation into Mindy’s disappearance is ongoing; and in the meantime, 

Mindy Jordan’s two children are left without their mother. 

And I want to be clear, the way Mindy’s family was treated is 

horrible. It’s unacceptable. It’s difficult to even get basic data on 

what types of crimes occur at sea, and how often they happen. And 

2 

if parents want to take their family to the Jersey shore or Disney 

World, but want information about public safety, they can either 

get it online or call the local authorities and they’ll get what they 

need. But, if parents want to take their family on a cruise, there 

is nowhere to get public safety information. 

Now, this Subcommittee had a hard time getting this data from 

the FBI. And if the Senate Committee that oversees maritime safety and security has a hard time getting that information, imagine 

the frustration of an American family trying to plan a trip. 

One problem is that almost no cruise ships fly an American flag. 

Instead, they fly flags of convenience from other nations. But, because these cruise ships are registered in foreign countries, our 

government cannot investigate certain incidents at sea, and it cannot require cruise lines to report on some crimes. These ships dock 

at our ports. We need to use every tool at our disposal to provide 

the greatest level of safety and security for them. I hope that we 

can use this hearing to discuss proposals to achieve that level of 

safety. 

The Government needs to act to ensure that American families 

on cruises are safe. I look forward to hearing the opinions of our 

witnesses. 

We’re joined by Senator Kerry, who’s going to chair this hearing. 

I thank him for his leadership and interest in this important issue. 

Senator Kerry? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

Senator KERRY [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Lautenberg. 

Thanks a lot for kicking this off. And I apologize for being a moment late. 

I appreciate your leadership, and I appreciate the opportunity to 

chair the Subcommittee for this particular hearing. And I’m grateful for the comments that you just made, which are important. 

In 2008 alone, it’s estimated that about 12.6 million Americans 

will board a cruise ship from United States ports. Roughly 300 

cruise ships are in service worldwide, and there are plans, apparently, to add another 22 that will service North America over the 

course of the next several years. 

What we want to do today is take a closer look at the safety situation that exists with respect to those ships—I’m not talking about 

the safety with respect to the seaworthiness of the ships, but safety 

with respect to the passengers aboard them—and whether or not 

there is a need for the Congress to take additional steps to secure 

American passengers onboard these ships. 

I particularly want to thank one of our witnesses this morning, 

Mr. Kendall Carver, who has been vigilant in his efforts to improve 

safety abroad cruise ships worldwide, and who has done so under 

very difficult personal circumstances. 

Four years ago, Mr. Carver’s daughter, Merrian, who was a constituent of mine—which is how I became aware of this issue and 

interested in it—was living in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and she 

went missing in the summer of 2004, leaving her father and the 

rest of her family to pick up the pieces after her disappearance. 

And I might say that the circumstances which he and his family 

3 

were put through were really quite extraordinary and quite disturbing. 

Three weeks after anyone had last heard from Merrian, Mr. 

Carver contacted the cruise line for which she had purchased a 

ticket. And what he was told was, frankly, quite shocking. The 

cruise line was unsure as to whether Merrian had ever disembarked from the ship. He was told that the cruise line had been 

aware of the fact that she had not slept in her room after the second night of the cruise, and that most of her belongings, which had 

remained onboard after the ship had docked, had been given to 

charity. Most shocking to Mr. Carver was the fact that the cruise 

line had not notified law enforcement authorities about Merrian’s 

disappearance. Three weeks following the ship’s return, the FBI remained unaware of the fact that Merrian was unaccounted for. 

As Mr. Carver will describe in his testimony, her story is, regrettably, not an isolated case. Despite being owned by American citizens and headquartered in the United States, cruise ships operate 

under foreign flags, allowing them to avoid United States law when 

they’re beyond U.S. territorial waters. With respect to jurisdiction 

over crimes, the law is murky at best. To many observers, these 

circumstances have created an ideal destination, if you will, for 

prospective criminals. 

We’ll hear from our witnesses today as to efforts that have been 

made by the industry to improve safety and reporting standards. 

Under current law, cruise lines are under no obligation to report 

a crime that occurs outside U.S. territorial waters, even when the 

crime involves an American citizen. 

Now, I do recognize, and the record needs to show, that a voluntary agreement has been reached between the FBI, the Coast 

Guard, and the cruise ship industry. But, I have to tell you—and 

I think Senator Lautenberg’s comments about the sort of transparency of this information sort of underscored—that it may be appropriate to be somewhat wary of a voluntary agreement that has 

an industry reporting on incidents that have the potential of actually damaging the reputation or deterring people from doing the 

very thing that the industry wants, which is coming onboard their 

ships, going on a cruise. 

So, I think, you know, the wariness or, caution of the Committee 

in accepting that as adequate is underscored by the fact, already 

referred to by Senator Lautenberg, that under this agreement we 

found it difficult to get easy access to the information that was 

available from the FBI. Now, I’m not sure how much transparency 

there is if the Chair of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee with jurisdiction over this issue has difficulty in accessing that information. 

It’s clear that the cruise industry has taken steps to meet with 

the victims and the survivors of victims, and I hope that the many 

recommendations that have been made as to how to improve security are going to be fully implemented. 

So, I look forward, today, to hearing from our witnesses as to 

how we provide a sort of lead-pipe guarantee to people, and how 

we have a structure in place where nobody has any questions about 

this, where there’s no uncertainty, where there’s no murkiness and 

everybody is confident that we have put in place best practices as 

4 

to how American citizens ought to be protected, and, frankly, how 

an industry ought to act in everybody’s best interests. 

I’ve been working with Congresswoman Matsui, who is deeply invested in this issue, to craft legislation that will be introduced later 

this month in both the House and the Senate, and we want this 

to be thoughtful legislation. We’re not seeking to do injury to anybody; we just want to be smart and thoughtful about how we establish a credible structure, where there is a very clear legal uncertainty as a consequence of jurisdictional issues and flag issues. 

The legislation will seek to improve safety and reporting standards within the industry, and it will ensure that cruise ships have 

the ability and the expertise to properly preserve evidence when 

crimes do occur. 

I’m a former prosecutor and I very much understand the difficulties of gathering evidence. I have prosecuted rape cases, sexual assault cases. I know how complicated that can be. And if you have 

untrained personnel, who don’t properly gather fresh, immediate 

evidence, you often wind up with a case where a victim is twice victimized, once obviously by the crime, and, the second time, the system that’s supposed to prosecute it. So, I want to make sure that 

we have sufficient efforts. 

I’m watching the ongoing efforts to pass legislation in California 

which would require independent Ocean Rangers to be placed onboard cruise ships, and I’m considering whether or not that would 

be appropriate to be administered at the Federal level. 

So, I hope this hearing will be helpful, frankly, for all of us, in 

trying to fashion the most effective response. 

Our witnesses are Kendall Carver, president of the International 

Cruise Victims Association—— 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator KERRY. Oh, yes, Senator. 

Senator CARPER. Could I just make a brief statement? 

Senator KERRY. Absolutely. I’ll come back to you. Let me just introduce the panel. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks very much. 

Senator KERRY. Mr. Carver has been working consistently to improve cruise safety standards. Evelyn Fortier, the vice president of 

policy at the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, RAINN, 

the Nation’s anti-sexual-assault organization, and she’s worked extensively on crime legislation as a long-time Senate staffer, and is 

a former constituent, having lived in Brookline, Massachusetts. 

Terry Dale is President and CEO of Cruise Lines International Association. We appreciate you being here today. And Dr. Ross Klein 

is professor of social work at Memorial University of Newfoundland, and has written extensively on the cruise industry. So, we’re 

grateful to all of you for being here. 

Senator Carper? 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, this is not an issue that I’ve thought a lot about, and 

perhaps others in our panel have not thought about it either. Our 

youngest son just graduated from high school, and later this sumVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
5 

mer he’ll be going on a cruise with close family friends of ours. And 

so, this sort of caught my eye, caught my attention. 

Like our Chairman, I’ve spent some time on cruises, but they 

were on ships that were painted gray, in the Navy, and I’ve never 

had the privilege of taking a cruise of the nature that we’re discussing here today. 

But, Mr. Chairman, we’re grateful to you for holding the hearing. 

We appreciate, certainly, each of our witnesses for coming today 

and sharing your time with us, and your testimony, and for responding to our questions as we try to ensure that all cruise ship 

travelers are as safe as feasible. 

Crime on cruise ships is an issue that most of us know relatively 

little about, and this could be because it is so rare, as the cruise 

industry claims; it could also be because the information is not 

made public, as some of our victims groups claim; or, it could simply be that people don’t like to think about it, especially when 

they’re planning their big vacation. 

What I look forward to hearing today is a discussion about people’s expectation with regard to protection from crime on a cruise 

ship. What should people expect, as far as law enforcement and 

prosecution of crimes that do occur on cruise ships? And how far 

off is that expectation from the situation they find when they board 

the ship, much as our own son will board a ship this summer. 

I would also like to explore how we can ensure that people are 

fully informed about the crime protection and prevention system 

that will or will not be available to them before they buy passage 

on a cruise ship. 

Again, welcome. Thank you for joining us. We look forward to 

your testimony. 

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much, Senator Carper. 

We did refer to those deployments as cruises, didn’t we? I forgot 

that. 

Senator CARPER. Yes, they were. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator KERRY. Mr. Carver, you want to lead off, sir? And thank 

you for being here with us. 

STATEMENT OF KENDALL CARVER, PRESIDENT, 

INTERNATIONAL CRUISE VICTIMS ASSOCIATION 

Mr. CARVER. I would like, first of all, to thank the Chairman and 

Members of the Committee for the opportunity to be here today. 

I come to you, both as a victim and as President of a group called 

International Cruise Victims, an organization formed by people 

that have been treated poorly as victims of cruise-line crimes. Prior 

to that, I spent 18 years as President and CEO of an insurance 

company in New York City. And this is the last thing I ever 

thought I would be doing. 

Each member that had joined ICV since it was founded in January 2006, which is not that long ago, has had a similar painful experience to mine. 

Senator Kerry has given, briefly, a story of Merrian. She disappeared. We had to trace her. Police finally traced her to a creditcard transaction which put her on a Celebrity Cruise Ship. We 

called the cruise ship. Got back to us in a couple of days, and they 

6 

said, ‘‘Yup, she was on the ship, but, after a couple of days, didn’t 

use her room, but that’s not uncommon.’’ And, ‘‘Did she get off?’’ 

‘‘We don’t know whether she did or not.’’ So, that just left us up 

in the air. Merrian had a 13-year-old daughter. 

A brief summary of the facts after that took place are as follows. 

The cruise line failed to report Merrian missing to the FBI for 

5 weeks, and that’s only after we had contacted the cruise line. 

They disposed of her property at once, giving most of it away to 

charity, and took a bag with her name on it and put it in storage 

with her name and Social Security number, gave her things away 

to charity. When we asked immediately for video, ‘‘Was there any 

video?’’ their answer was, ‘‘We got there too late.’’ We were 25 days 

into it. He said, ‘‘You got here too late. We’ve already erased it.’’ 

In January of this year, I was advised by a senior officer of Royal 

Caribbean that, in fact, they did have the video, they did keep it, 

and they did review it, for 3 months. We had an individual go on 

the cruise ship, a detective. They said there was no video. So, all 

the time, they were lying to us about the video. 

They made a report to the FBI that said nothing happened on 

that cruise. They told our detectives that the cabin steward made 

no reports concerning Merrian. And we later learned, 4 and a half 

months later, through depositions, that, in fact, he had reported 

her missing daily for 5 days. His boss told him to forget it and do 

his job. And, at the end, he said, ‘‘What do I do with the things 

in the room?’’ he said, ‘‘Just put them in a bag, put it in my locker,’’ 

and they gave them away. 

The cruise line would not permit an interview with the steward 

or the security officer. For us to interview that individual, we made 

a decision—we wanted to speak to one person on that ship that had 

seen Merrian. We had to hire an international detective agency, 

Kroll & Associates, hire two law firms, take court action in Massachusetts and then Florida, and spend $75,000 and 4 and a half 

months to get a deposition from the steward, who, in effect, then 

indicated to us for the first time he had reported Merrian missing 

from the very beginning. So, in effect, they’d been lying to us from 

day one concerning our daughter. 

In Congressional hearings in December 2005 and March 2006, 

representatives, under oath, from Royal Caribbean indicated: as 

soon as they knew about Merrian’s disappearance, they cooperated 

with the family. Hey, as soon as they knew about Merrian’s disappearance—you’ll see it in the material—which is the third week, 

they started the cover up concerning our daughter. 

When you’re a victim, you think you’re the only person in the 

world that’s a victim of a crime. Then a book came out, in December—or in July 2005, called ‘‘The Devil in the Deep Blue Sea.’’ And 

if you read that book—and it’s actually in my testimony—it says 

coverup is a standard operating procedure for cruise lines, and they 

get the person off the ship, and that’s exactly what had happened 

to us. 

At the first Congressional hearing, in 2005, I concluded that I 

couldn’t change the cruise line industry. Other people couldn’t do 

it on their own. So, we formed a group called International Cruise 

Victims. We now have several hundred members in 16 countries. 

7 

In March 2006, I testified for the first time in the House of Representatives. There were six victims that testified at that meeting. 

But, we surprised the group. At the end, instead of just telling our 

tragic story, we presented a ten-point program for safety. 

I’m here to say that we have met with the cruise lines four different times—only after a Congressional Committee ordered them 

to last year—on those points. And, to this day, nothing has been 

agreed to by the cruise lines regarding those points. They say, ‘‘Oh, 

those are great ideas. We’ll think about it.’’ But, we never get the 

answer of what their commitment is. And there is no commitment. 

So, what have we learned in this process? If you look at my testimony, you’ll find two memorandums. One’s a legal memorandum of 

law, which, in effect, says, ‘‘We are under no obligation to investigate crimes on cruise ships.’’ They then go on to say, ‘‘We’re not 

equipped to investigate crimes on a cruise ship.’’ And you can add 

to that, they also don’t take responsibility for the medical care on 

a ship, nor do they take responsibility for excursions. So, in effect, 

they don’t take responsibility. I don’t care how many security officers. That is their legal position. 

So, last year, the Congressional Committee requested that CLIA 

and ICV meet while the—ICV meet with the FBI to discuss these 

matters. In effect, at that meeting, on July 25, I believe it was, we 

met with the FBI, and the FBI said, ‘‘We do not have the resources 

to follow up on crimes on cruise ships.’’ So, in effect, the cruise 

lines do nothing, the FBI says, ‘‘We do not have the resources.’’ So, 

when a crime occurs on a cruise ship, nobody does nothing. 

And if you look at my testimony, you’ll find a chart of crimes 

prosecuted by the FBI. You’ll see that in 2005 there were only 50 

cases opened and only four convictions of any crime on a cruise 

ship, while—any crime on the high sea. That’s more than cruise 

ships. So, that proves nobody’s being prosecuted on these cases. 

Last month, on May 16, Cruise Critic, which is kind of a procruise-line Internet site that sells cruise ships, did a survey. Seventeen-hundred people responded to that, and 10 percent of the people, when asked the question, ‘‘Have you ever been affected by a 

crime, minor or major, on a cruise ship?’’ said yes. Now, I’m here 

to say, if there was a resort in this country where 10 percent of 

the customers said they were affected by a crime at that resort, 

they’d probably be closed down or a major investigation. This is a 

cruise line blog that took that survey. 

In September 2007, Elijah Cummings, after three hearings with 

the cruise line, said, ‘‘Hey, I’ve had enough. You’ve got 90 days. 

Tell me what you’re going to do. Tell me what you’re going to do 

to improve safety.’’ So, they produced this report, gentlemen, 30- 

some pages long. And if you carefully read the report—they delivered it December 19—they didn’t commit to anything in this report. 

They said, ‘‘Oh, that’s a great idea. We’ll promote it. We’ll further 

study it.’’ But, there were no commitments after being requested. 

After all of these commitments—no results—action is starting to 

be taken. In April, the House of Representatives, and amendment 

was added to the Coast Guard reapportionment bill requiring that 

cruise lines report, on the Internet quarterly, all of their crimes. 

Now, if that can get through the Senate, that will be a major step. 

8 

And that is the last thing they want to do, is to go public with their 

crimes. 

Because of lack of concern of the cruise industry having any regulations, the State of California has moved forward to have their 

own bill requiring an Ocean Ranger on each cruise ship in or out 

of California waters. 

In May 12, in a hearing which I spoke at in California—I’ve 

spoke at several of them—the cruise lines responded that if that 

bill was passed, they would ‘‘stop going to certain California ports, 

like San Francisco and San Diego, if you put one security guy on 

our ship.’’ The question, gentlemen, is, what do they have to hide? 

They should welcome them. If their crimes are as low as they are, 

they should welcome somebody coming on to verify that information. 

Since 1999, the cruise lines have had a stated policy of zero tolerance for crime. That would infer to me that there’s nothing they 

wouldn’t do to prevent crimes on a cruise ship. And yet, with all 

the recommendations, I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s nothing they will accept concerning crimes. They should be willing to 

accept anything that would prevent crimes on cruise ships. 

I now look at their zero tolerance in a different way. I look at 

their zero tolerance for crimes as zero tolerance for any legislation 

that would have any effect to control the cruise lines. 

Last year, gentlemen, they spent $2,800,000 lobbying in Washington. Very effective, very powerful lobby. Wal-Mart spent 

$280,000. This is a foreign corporation. 

Now, frankly, we have no money to lobby. We’re volunteers. 

Only, we have the victims stories and their passion for change that 

makes ICV work every day. Fortunately, Members of the Senate 

and the House were elected by the people to represent the people 

of this country and not the lobbyists for a foreign corporation. 

It’s clear to me that comprehensive legislation is needed, since 

the cruise lines have shown no willingness to voluntarily commit 

to make substantial changes in their current practices. 

I look forward to answering your questions, and I appreciate the 

opportunity to present this testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Carver follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KENDALL CARVER, PRESIDENT, 

INTERNATIONAL CRUISE VICTIMS ASSOCIATION, INC. 

I would first like to thank the Chairman and Members of this Committee for giving me the opportunity to participate before this Committee. I am here today both 

as a victim and as President of International Cruise Victims (ICV), an organization 

formed by people who have experienced tragedies on cruises and who have been 

treated poorly by cruise lines. My prior working experience was to serve as President and CEO for 18 years of an insurance company in New York City. 

As a victim, I have personally felt the pain, not only of losing our daughter, 

Merrian Carver, but also having to struggle with the cover-up by a major cruise line 

of the facts concerning her disappearance. She had been a passenger on a Celebrity 

Cruise Ship, which is owned by Royal Caribbean. 

Each member that has joined ICV since it was founded in January 2006, has had 

similar painful experiences. Having listened to the stories of these other victims, I 

feel that I now know something about what counselors must feel when they hear 

the tragic stories from their patients. (See Attachment III) 

I would first like to review quickly the tragic events of our daughter’s disappearance. We were first made aware of a problem when our granddaughter called to tell 

9 

us that Merrian was not returning her calls. We then started to search for Merrian, 

and contacted the police in Cambridge, Massachusetts where she lived. 

The police found out 3 weeks later through credit card records that she had 

booked the cruise, and we contacted the cruise line. After a couple of days they confirmed that she had been on a Celebrity Cruise ship. Only after we contacted them 

did they make a report to the FBI 1 week later. This was 5 weeks after she disappeared. Moreover, we found out that the cruise line had previously disposed of 

her property without attempting to contact her family or the FBI. 

A brief summary of the facts concerning her disappearance are as follows: 

• The cruise line failed to report that Merrian was missing to the FBI until 5 

weeks after she went missing and only after we contacted the cruise line. 

• They disposed of her property by giving most of it away to charity despite their 

protocol, which calls for property left on a ship to be held for 90 days. 

• When we asked about video records, which could show things relevant to 

Merrian’s disappearance, they told us they had no records and there had been 

no review concerning Merrian. However, in January, 2008, 3 years after we had 

asked for and subpoenaed information concerning these video’s, one of their senior personnel admitted in writing that we had been lied to concerning the surveillance tapes; their retention and review by ship’s personnel. (See Attachment 

II) 

• They made a report to the FBI indicating that nothing had happened on the 

cruise. Their internal documents show that during the third week in September 

their officials were coordinating a cover-up of the disappearance. (See Attachment II) 

• They told our Detectives that the cabin steward had made no reports concerning Merrian, but we later learned through the depositions that he had reported her missing from her cabin for 5 days during the cruise and was told 

by his supervisor to ‘‘forget it and just do your job’’. 

• The cruise line would not permit an interview with the steward or the security 

officer responsible for the surveillance system. We had to hire private investigators, two law firms, take court action in two states and spend over $75,000 over 

41⁄2 months in order to have our lawyers depose the steward—an effort that 

many families of victims would not have been able to make. Only after this 

court ordered deposition on January 16 and 17, 2005, did we realize that they 

had been lying to us from the beginning. 

• In Congressional Hearing in December of 2005 and again in March 2006, under 

oath the representatives of Royal Caribbean indicated that they cooperated with 

the family as soon as they were aware of her disappearance. In fact, they really 

began the cover-up of her disappearance starting the third week of September 

2004 and cooperated later only in response to court orders. (See Attachment II) 

However, even to this day, we have not received items that were requested and 

subpoenaed in 2004–2005. 

In July of 2005, I read a book, ‘‘The Devil in the Deep Blue Sea’’ by Kristoffer 

Garvin. On page 246 he wrote, ‘‘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 

water where the only police are the ship’s security officers.’’ I realized that our treatment fell within this pattern. (See Attachment II) 

After the first Congressional hearing in December of 2005, I concluded that we 

needed to organize a group of victims in order to have a chance to get changes made 

in the practices of the cruise industry. I contacted other known victims, and together, we decide to form International Cruise Victims. After 28 months of existence, this group now has members in 16 different countries with a separate chapter 

in Australia. Members of this subcommittee and their staff members can review the 

stories of these victims on our website at www.internationalcruisevictims.org. (See 

Attachment III) 

When I and other victims testified at the Congressional Hearing in March 2006, 

we shared our stories to show the need for substantial changes in cruise line practices and we presented a 10-point program developed by ICV members to improve 

safety on cruise ships. I, along with other ICV members, have personally attended 

several meetings with CLIA and cruise lines representatives concerning suggestions 

made by our members. The standard answer from them is the ‘‘these are great 

ideas, however we have another approach.’’ Even after all of these meetings, the 

problem is that we have seen no firm written commitments for any significant 

change. (See Attachment IV) 

What have we learned during this past couple of years concerning this industry? 

10 

1. Cruise Ships take the legal position that they are not required to investigate 

crimes on cruise ships and are not equipped to do so. This is documented in 

various items we have available. These documents indicate that any information they give to the FBI or Coast Guard is provided on a purely voluntary 

basis. In addition, they take to position that they are also are not responsible 

for the medical care or accidents that occur on excursions that they have chosen, promoted and also make a substantial commission on when sold to their 

passengers.(See Attachment I) 

2. At the request of a Congressional Committee in March of 2007, we met with 

the FBI on July 25, 2007, to review this matter. At this meeting the FBI clearly 

indicated that they do not have the resources to follow up on the various crimes 

that occur on cruise ships. Records indicate that in 2005 only 50 cases were 

opened and there were only 4 convictions of people committing crimes. (See Attachment I) 

3. Since the cruise ships do not investigate crimes and report them only on a 

voluntary basis to the FBI and since the FBI says they do not have the resources to follow up on those crimes that are reported, most criminals are not 

apprehended or punished for the crimes they commit on cruise ships. As Representative Christopher Shays has indicated, ‘‘it is the perfect place to commit 

a crime.’’ 

4. In addition, a well-known Internet site, Cruise Critic, in an editorial dated 

May 16, 2008, cites results of a survey of 1700 people that have taken a cruise 

and found that 10 percent of respondents said yes to the question: ‘‘Have you ever 

been affected by crime, minor or major, on a cruise ship?’’ Dr. Ross Klein, Professor of social work at Memorial University of Newfoundland, indicates that, 

‘‘These numbers would suggest that as many as one million Americans have 

been victims of a crime on a cruise ship.’’ If a resort had 10 percent of their 

customers indicate that they had been affected by a crime at that resort, there 

would be extensive investigations by legal authorities. (See Attachment I) 

5. With the added concern of terrorism, Passengers on cruise ships need the 

same protection as passengers have on airlines that currently have independent 

national Sky Marshalls for protection. In the October 16, 2006 issue of the Insurance Journal, an article titled, ‘‘Maritime Terrorism Risk Extends to Cruise 

Ships and Ferry Boats’’, states that cruise ships and ferry boats need more protection than they now have against terrorist attacks that could kill and injure 

many passengers and cause serious financial losses. This conclusion is based on 

a new RAND Corporation report. (See Attachment V) 

In the September 2007 House Hearings, chaired by Elijah Cummings, the representatives of the cruise lines were given 90 days to provide to his Committee a 

report on what they were willing to do. This report was delivered to the Committee 

on December 19, 2007. A careful review of this report shows that after all the various meetings and Congressional hearings the cruise lines are unwilling to commit 

in writing to any real changes from what they’re doing currently. (See Attachment 

IV) 

As a result of their unwillingness to make commitments for change, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, on April 24, 2008, passed an Amendment to the Coast 

Guard Reauthorization Act measuring crime on cruise ships to require cruise lines 

to make public their actual crime statistics of missing persons and crimes on cruise 

ships and to make that information available to the public. Assuming this also 

passes the Senate, this will be one step forward to at least make public the crimes 

on cruise ships. 

Because of the concern regarding the lack of regulation of the cruise line industry, 

legislation has also recently been introduced in California to place appropriate California licensed independent security, called Ocean Rangers, on cruise ships as they 

enter or leave California waters. This bill has gone through several committees in 

the California legislature and on May 28, 2008 was passed by the California Senate 

25 to 12. 

The cruise line industry has strongly opposed this California initiative to place 

one security officer on their ships by threatening in testimony to the California Senate Committee on Appropriations on May 12, 2008, that they would bypass California ports if the legislation passed. In view of the crime rates reported by the 

Cruise Critic survey, the industry should gladly accept independent security and 

thereby provide their passengers with the same protections that they would have 

in major resorts in this country where the police are called if a crime occurs. 

We need to address solutions to this problem, in order to protect future passengers and crew. The goal of ICV is not to damage cruise lines but to hold them 

11 

* [All attachments referred to in this document are retained in the Committee’s files.] 

accountable for the safety of future passengers and crewmembers 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. 

Since 1999 cruise lines have had a stated policy that they have a zero tolerance 

for crimes. This would infer that there is nothing that they would not do to prevent 

crimes on cruise ships. However, after our several meetings with representatives of 

cruise lines to explore various suggestions coming from victims and their families, 

the cruise lines have yet to commit in writing to any changes. (See Attachment IV) 

Meanwhile, they aggressively oppose any new legislation to improve the safety on 

cruise ships. In fact, in 2007 this foreign cruise line industry spent over $2,800,000 

in Washington for lobbying. In contrast, Wal-Mart spent $280,000. 

Frankly, we have no money to lobby, only the many victims and their passion for 

change that are working for ICV every day. Fortunately, you were elected by the 

people you represent and not the lobbyist for a foreign corporation. 

It is clear to me that comprehensive legislative action is needed since the cruise 

lines have shown no willingness to voluntary commit to make substantial changes 

in their current practices in order to protect passengers on cruise lines. I will look 

forward to answering any questions that you might have concerning this subject. 

INTERNATIONAL CRUISE VICTIMS ASSOCIATION, INC. (ICV) 

SUPPLEMENTAL ATTACHMENTS*

Submitted by Kendall Carver 

Section I Attachments—Reported Crime Rates on Cruise Ship and FBI Record of 

Convictions 

Section II Attachments—Documents concerning the Cover-up of Merrian Carver 

Disappearance 

Section III Attachments—ICV Victims of Cruise Lines 

Section IV Attachments—Summary of Results of Various Meetings with IVC Victims and CLIA 

Section V Attachments—Maritime Terrorism Rand Corporation Report 

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much, Mr. Carver. We appreciate that important testimony. 

Ms. Fortier? 

STATEMENT OF EVELYN FORTIER, VICE PRESIDENT, 

POLICY, RAPE, ABUSE AND INCEST NATIONAL 

NETWORK (RAINN) 

Ms. FORTIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the 

Subcommittee, for holding this hearing, which is very timely, given 

that incidents of sexual assault and missing persons continue to be 

reported. And, according to the FBI, about half of all crimes on the 

high seas that are reported to them involve sexual assault on 

cruises. 

I am with RAINN, the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, which is the Nation’s largest anti-sexual-assault organization. Our mission is to end sexual assault in the U.S. by improving 

services to victims, educating the public about sexual assault, and 

striving to bring rapists to justice. 

We created and operate the National Sexual Assault Hotline, 

which is a toll-free number, at 800–656–HOPE, which is available 

to victims 24/7, and we operate it in partnership with 1105 rape 

crisis centers around the Nation, located in every state and the 

District of Columbia. 

12 

We also created the National Sexual Assault Online Hotline, 

which is the first web-based resource for victims, and it’s available 

at RAINN.org. 

I’d like to begin by asking you to imagine how you might feel if 

you had long saved and planned for a cruise vacation, and then 

abruptly had to end your voyage because you had been traumatized 

by a sexual assault while on the cruise. This happened to Laurie 

Dishman, of California, and others like her. For years, she put a 

bit of salary aside, each pay period, to save up for her dream of a 

sunny cruise vacation with one of her close childhood friends. She 

planned the troop—excuse me—she planned the trip in minute detail after collaborating with her friend on what destination, what 

to bring, and what amenities they could afford. 

On the trip, a crew member, attired in a cruise security officer’s 

uniform, approached her at the bar and questioned her in a way 

that she found unnerving. Hours later, the same crew member 

knocked at the door of her cabin, which had no peephole, and she 

opened the door slightly to identify the visitor, at which point he 

physically forced the door of her cabin open, pushed her onto the 

bed, and raped her. She reached out to other cruise personnel who 

entered her room and sat on the bed on which she was raped, 

thereby potentially contaminating the crime-scene evidence. These 

personnel suggested she be the one to collect any evidence she 

thought might be relevant and bring it to personnel on the ship. 

While she was coping with the life-shattering effects of having 

been raped, she later learned that the man who had raped her was 

no security guard, but actually a janitor who had been asked to fill 

in for the security guard. 

And, unfortunately, hers seems not to be an isolated case. Other 

United States citizens have come forward to report sexual assaults 

on cruises, and described feeling helpless or virtually alone in the 

hours after they were victimized. 

If you are sexually assaulted while on a cruise vacation, you, like 

Laurie Dishman of California, who’s in the audience today, may 

find that any hope of your securing justice is extremely remote, 

perhaps even nonexistent. 

Next, I’d like to turn to what you can expect if you’re raped during a cruise voyage. Remember that the cruise industry is somewhat unique among businesses that provide services to U.S. consumers, in that most cruise vessels sail under foreign flags and 

don’t have to comply with many U.S. laws, as already noted by the 

Chairman. This is illustrated further when you compare the potential experience of an American rape victim at sea to the likely experience of a rape victim on shore in the United States. 

First, if you’re raped on land, consider what happens. You have 

the option to call our hotline number, toll free, any time of the day 

or night, or visit our online hotline, through which you may immediately receive free and confidential online help from trained, rapecrisis personnel. Those who staff these hotlines are located at rape 

crisis centers around the country, and so, a local rape crisis center 

affiliated with RAINN may offer to send their personnel to meet 

you, and personally escort you to the nearest hospital or police station. At the hospital, medical personnel can be counted on to evaluate you for injuries, take your medical history, and compile a rape 

13 

kit, which will be sent to a crime lab for analysis. And if you’ve reported the assault to the local authorities, you can expect someone 

from a nearby police department will interview you, that the police 

investigating the crime have the necessary jurisdiction to do so, 

that the police will preserve physical evidence for trial, that certain 

local or State criminal laws will govern, and that certain protocols 

will be followed in the police investigation. 

If you, a U.S. citizen, are raped during a cruise, by contrast, your 

situation is potentially very different, and you can be far less certain of what will happen next. Because most cruise ships are foreign flagged, because the perpetrator may be a foreign national, 

and because you might be in international waters, you face a host 

of legal uncertainties. And these are in addition to your having to 

cope, far from home, with the emotional and physical consequences 

of having been assaulted. You won’t have any rape crisis personnel 

onboard to support you, let alone law enforcement officials to come 

to your aid. You might turn to cruise ship employees for help, only 

to later find that the cruise line has a vested interest in shielding 

themselves against negative publicity or legal jeopardy. And you 

might wonder how any security personnel hired by the cruise line 

will react if presented with any situation that might give rise to 

a potential conflict of interest between their employer and yourself. 

At this point in time, you probably have three options, but every 

one of those options has potential drawbacks. 

Option one is to disembark at the next port and report the crime 

to the local authorities onshore. But, you might not speak the same 

language as the local police, and not know the local customs. And 

maybe you didn’t know to contact your nearest U.S. embassy or 

consulate. You might find out later that you approached the wrong 

authorities in the wrong jurisdiction. And the local authorities 

might not want to assume jurisdiction if they perceive that the sexual assault occurred in international waters. And if local authorities do investigate, key evidence may have disappeared by the time 

you contact them, because, unless someone onboard assumed responsibility for securing the crime scene, evidence may have already been contaminated or cleaned by the time the police arrive. 

And even if the local investigation proceeds, you have significant 

obstacles. You might have to take time off from work and return 

again to the local jurisdiction for an extended period, a jurisdiction 

which you’re completely unfamiliar with the legal customs. 

Your second option as a victim would involve reporting the crime 

to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in cooperation with the 

cruise line. The FBI can investigate crimes reported to it by the 

cruise lines, but typically wouldn’t be in a position to act as an onboard police force immediately after the assault happens. And, 

while you wait for the FBI, here again, there’s the risk that no one 

will assume responsibility for securing the crime scene or ensuring 

that potential witnesses do not collaborate. It’s also not certain that 

a cruise victim will receive adequate medical care or that trained 

personnel will collect DNA or other evidence immediately after the 

assault. 

Finally, for a victim of sexual assault, a third option is to disembark at the ship’s next port of call and take the next flight 

home. This might be appealing, because you want to quickly get 

14 

out of a bad situation. But, if you leave the ship without having 

reported, the cruise line may refuse, later, to accept your complaint 

of having been assaulted. 

Finally, I’d like to conclude with some recommendations for Congress. RAINN suggests that, one, we impose stricter requirements 

for reporting onboard incidents of sexual assault and authorize 

Federal officials to impose penalties for noncompliance with this requirement. 

Second, we suggest that you provide victims who report sexual 

assaults during cruises with immediate access, via telephone or the 

Web, to rape crisis personnel who are trained to meet the unique 

needs of Americans traveling overseas, so that cruise victims know 

they’re not alone. 

Third, we suggest that Congress ensure greater oversight of 

training and conduct of crew members on ships, in collaboration 

with the cruise industry. 

Fourth, we need to ensure that cruise lines are accountable to 

the public to fully report all incidents of sexual assault. We applaud Congresswoman Matsui, as well as Congressman Shays, Poe, 

and Maloney, for recently introducing an amendment that would 

require cruise crimes to be publicly disclosed online. 

Fifth, we suggest improving the screening and training of crew 

members who work with passengers. 

And finally, cruise lines should educate their passengers, before 

the ship departs, about the onboard risk of sexual assault and what 

to do if they or a friend or a relative is assaulted during the voyage. 

In closing, thank you for your time and inviting me to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Fortier follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EVELYN FORTIER, VICE PRESIDENT, POLICY, RAPE, ABUSE

AND INCEST NATIONAL NETWORK (RAINN) 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for scheduling today’s hearing. This hearing is very timely, because high profile cases in which cruise 

passengers or crewmembers were raped, sexually assaulted, or disappeared continue 

to be reported. The safety of the nine or ten million United States citizens who take 

a cruise each year should be of vital importance to all of us; and the issue of cruise 

ship safety merits Congress’ continued attention. 

I want to begin by asking you to imagine how you might feel if you had long saved 

and planned for a cruise vacation, and then had to abruptly end your voyage because you had been traumatized by a sexual assault while on the cruise. Specifically, imagine that for years you’ve put a bit of your salary aside each pay period 

to save up for your dream of a sunny cruise vacation with one of your close childhood friends. You have planned the trip in minute detail, after collaborating with 

your friend on which destination, what to bring with you on the trip, and which 

amenities you can afford. 

On the trip, a crewmember attired in a cruise security officer’s uniform approaches you at the bar and questions you in a way you find unnerving. Hours later, 

this same crewmember knocks at the door of your cabin, which has no peephole, 

and, once you open the door to identify the visitor, he physically forces the door of 

your cabin open. He pushes you onto the bed in your cabin and rapes you. You reach 

out to other cruise line personnel, who enter your room and sit on the bed in which 

you were raped (thereby potentially contaminating the crime scene evidence). These 

cruise personnel suggest you collect any evidence you feel might be relevant and 

bring it to medical personnel on the ship. While you are coping with the life-shattering effects of having been raped, you later learn that the man who raped you was 

no security guard, but rather a janitor who filled in for the security guard. 

Regrettably, this is how one American cruise line passenger described her experience during testimony before another congressional committee last year. And, unforVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
15 

tunately, hers seems not to be an isolated case. Numerous other United States citizens who have reported sexual assaults while on cruises described feeling helpless 

or virtually alone in the hours after they were victimized. If you are sexually assaulted while on a cruise vacation, you, like Laurie Dishman of Sacramento, California (the rape survivor described above) may find that any hope of your securing 

justice is extremely remote, perhaps even nonexistent. 

What Can You Expect If You Are Raped During A Cruise Voyage? 

The cruise industry is somewhat unique among businesses that provide services 

to U.S. consumers in that most cruise vessels sail under foreign flags and do not 

have to comply with many U.S. labor, environmental, or other regulations. The 

uniqueness of the cruise industry’s situation, compared to many other businesses 

operated in the United States, becomes even more apparent when you compare the 

potential experience of an American rape victim at sea to the likely experience of 

an American rape victim on shore. 

First, consider what happens after you are raped on land. You have the option 

to call the National Sexual Assault Hotline, 800–656–HOPE, toll free, any time of 

the day or night, or to visit the National Sexual Assault Online Hotline at 

www.rainn.org, from anywhere in the country, through which you may immediately 

receive free and confidential online help from trained rape crisis personnel. Those 

who staff these hotlines are located at rape crisis centers around the country, and 

the availability of these services means you are not alone. Hotline staff and volunteers will provide you with immediate emotional support, and your local rape crisis 

center may offer to send their personnel to meet you and personally escort you to 

the nearest hospital or police station. 

At the hospital, medical personnel can be counted on to evaluate you for injuries, 

take your medical history, and compile a rape kit containing DNA and other evidence. You also can expect that any DNA evidence collected during this examination 

will be sent to a crime lab for analysis, hopefully to be used later in identifying and 

prosecuting a potential suspect. The collection of DNA at this point in time preserves evidence for the future, for use in any later legal case. Protocols govern how 

this DNA is to be collected, analyzed, stored, and used in the criminal case. 

If you immediately reported the assault to the local authorities, you can also expect that someone from a nearby police department will interview you and perhaps 

a suspect as well as any other witnesses. Your experience dealing with the criminal 

justice system ultimately may not be pleasant or result in your hoped for outcome, 

but along the way you can be fairly confident of certain things: that the police investigating the crime have the necessary jurisdiction to do so, that the police will preserve physical evidence for a possible trial, that certain local or state criminal laws 

will govern in your case, and that certain protocols will be followed in the police 

investigation. It’s also within the realm of possibility that a local prosecutor will find 

your case deserving of prosecution and your predator is brought to justice. A victim 

advocate may be assigned to offer guidance and support to you along the way; also, 

you and your family members or close friends have the option of seeking counseling 

at your local rape crisis center, to assist in your long-term recovery. 

If you, a U.S. citizen, are raped during a cruise, by contrast, your situation is potentially quite different, and you can be far less certain of what will happen next. 

Because most cruise ships are foreign-flagged vessels, because the perpetrator may 

be a foreign national, and because you may be in international waters when the assault occurs, you face a host of legal uncertainties. For example, you cannot automatically assume that certain laws will cover the incident, due to messy jurisdictional issues that arise in some of these cases. 

Such uncertainties are in addition to your having to cope (far from home and absent your usual support network) with the emotional and physical consequences of 

having been assaulted. In the immediate aftermath of the assault, for example, you 

might not have a friend or family member traveling with you on board. You probably will not find any rape crisis personnel onboard to support you, let alone law 

enforcement officials to come to your aid on the ship. 

If traveling alone, you might turn to cruise ship employees for help, only to later 

find that the cruise line has a vested interest in shielding themselves against negative publicity or legal jeopardy (and protecting such interests may come at the expense of your own interest in securing justice and getting appropriate medical care). 

If you were assaulted by a crewmember, and you are a passenger on the ship, you 

might have good reason to wonder how any security personnel hired by the cruise 

line will react if presented with any situation giving rise to a potential conflict of 

interest between their employer’s legal situation and your safety. 

You may encounter someone onboard who can competently and sympathetically 

explain to you what needs to happen in order for you to report the crime to the 

16 

proper authorities and have the crime investigated. At this point in time, you probably have three options, each of which has certain drawbacks: 

Option #1: Your first option is to disembark at the next port and report the crime 

to the local authorities on shore. There is a good chance you will not speak the same 

language as the local police and are unfamiliar with local customs. Perhaps no one 

told you that you should approach your nearest U.S. embassy or consulate for assistance, and you did not initially seek their help. You might learn later that, due to 

jurisdictional uncertainties, the authorities you approached do not have sole jurisdiction over your case, and that perhaps you should have reported the crime to authorities in an entirely different jurisdiction. (Alternatively, the local authorities 

may not want to assume responsibility for the criminal investigation if they perceive 

that the sexual assault occurred in international waters.) 

If local authorities do decide to investigate, key evidence may have dissipated by 

the time you contact them. That’s because, unless someone onboard assumed responsibility for immediately securing the crime scene, evidence may already have 

been contaminated or cleaned by others by the time the local police arrive. Also, before local authorities show up, the offender may already have either collaborated 

with others, or been dismissed by the cruise line and escorted off the ship. (If the 

offender then travels to another country, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to find 

them again). 

Finally, even assuming the local investigation proceeds, and charges are brought 

against the perpetrator, you may face significant personal obstacles to cooperating 

with the prosecution. You may have to take time off from work and leave behind 

your friends or family in the United States to return again, perhaps more than once 

or for an extended period, to the foreign jurisdiction that is prosecuting the case. 

You may find, too, that you are completely unfamiliar with the legal system of that 

particular jurisdiction. 

Option #2: The obstacles presented above may seem overwhelming, and so perhaps you are inclined to pursue a different course of action. Your second option as 

a victim of sexual assault would involve reporting the crime to the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation (FBI), in cooperation with the cruise line. But this option, too, has 

drawbacks for you, as the FBI can investigate crimes reported to it by the cruise 

lines, but typically would not be in a position to act as an onboard police force immediately after your assault. 

The FBI typically will not board a ship to interview the victim or other potential 

witnesses to the crime until after the ship docks. In the meantime, here again, there 

is the risk that no one will assume responsibility for securing the crime scene or 

ensuring that potential witnesses do not collaborate or disperse. Once again, if the 

cruise line escorts the offender off the ship at the next port of call, or if the offender 

leaves, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to find them again. 

It also is not certain that a cruise victim will receive adequate medical care or 

that trained personnel will be available to collect DNA or other evidence immediately following an assault. (Laurie Dishman, who reported being raped by a crew 

member while on a cruise in 2006, testified last year that ship personnel expected 

her to do the job of collecting any crime scene evidence herself. She also was asked 

to pay for her own rape kit, which would not have been the case had she gone to 

a hospital in the United States.) 

Also, certain thresholds must be met for an FBI investigation to proceed and for 

Federal prosecutors to bring charges. In the case of a sexual assault, for example, 

where the victim’s consent is an issue, the case might not move beyond the initial 

phase of information gathering. The victim may find, after the FBI collects such information, that the chances of a Federal prosecutor pursuing rape charges are extremely remote. The decision whether or not to prosecute the case lies with Federal 

prosecutors; and these decisions are often made based on the severity of the crime, 

the likelihood of successful prosecution leading to conviction and, of course, available 

Federal resources. 

Option #3: For a victim of sexual assault, a third option is to disembark at the 

ship’s next port of call, and take the next flight home. In the immediate aftermath 

of the crime, the victim may find this option the most appealing of the three, because it allows the victim to quickly escape the surroundings in which the assault 

occurred as well as the perpetrator, who may still be lurking somewhere nearby. 

The victim may, however, later find—maybe years later—that the repercussions 

of having been raped continue to haunt him or her. Like many of rape’s survivors, 

in the weeks, months, or years after the assault, a cruise victim of sexual assault 

may experience flashbacks, depression, nightmares, employment difficulties, or 

other negative effects and in some cases, even be suicidal. Any hope of securing justice—which is often important to victims in their recovery—may have disappeared 

if the victim did not formally report the rape while onboard and the cruise line deVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
17 

1The FBI has stated that it investigates cruise sexual assaults as defined in Title 18 of the 

United States Code (U.S.C.), Sections 2241 through 2243 and 2244 (a) and (c), and that the principal law giving the U.S. jurisdiction over crimes committed on a ship is set forth in Sec. 7 of 

Title 18 of the U.S. Code. 

clines to record the complaint once the cruise has ended. Meanwhile, the offender 

gets a free pass to prey on additional victims. 

What Is Your Risk of Being Assaulted Aboard a Cruise? 

According to FBI testimony at another congressional hearing in March 2007, sexual ‘‘[s]exual 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 5 years at 

55 percent and 22 percent respectively.’’ The FBI also noted, at a different hearing 

last September, that the cruise lines reported 41 instances of sexual assault 1 during 

a six-month period in 2007: 

‘‘Since April 1, the cruise lines have reported 41 instances of sexual assault. Of 

these 41 incidents, 19 represented allegations of sexual activity generally categorized as rape, three of which occurred on shore, and, thus, outside the jurisdiction of the FBI. Based on the 41 reports, the FBI opened 13 investigative 

cases. Five of these cases have been closed for reasons of victim reluctance to 

pursue prosecution or prosecutive declination from the United States Attorney’s 

Office. Eight investigations are ongoing.’’ 

The cruise industry maintains that the rate of sexual assault at sea is significantly lower than the on shore rate of sexual assault. According to the cruise industry, during the three-year period from 2003 to 2005, when roughly 31 million North 

Americans sailed on cruise ships, there were 178 complaints of sexual assaults. But 

because data on rates of sexual assault during cruise voyages is not easily accessible 

to the public, it is difficult for us to evaluate the accuracy of such statistics. 

We note that the industry’s position is directly contradicted by the 2007 congressional testimony of Dr. Ross Klein, who suggested that the rate of sexual assault 

on board ships could be as much as 50 percent higher than the on shore rate of 

sexual assault. 

I believe that it is certainly possible that the true rate of onboard sexual assault 

might be higher than what is currently being reported to Federal authorities by the 

cruise industry: 

• First, there is no way to reliably assess whether the cruise lines are fully and 

accurately reporting all onboard sexual assaults to Federal authorities. The industry already is expected to report such information, but what’s reported is not 

made public. Thus, it’s hard for passengers (or independent third-parties) to 

confirm whether each incident of sexual assault, including their own, has been 

fully and properly recorded. 

• Second, sexual assault is one of the least reported violent crimes. According to 

the U.S. Department of Justice, as many as 60 percent of onshore sexual assault victims decline to report the crime against them. We believe it is likely 

that many cruise passengers who experience sexual assault on the cruise also 

will not report the crime (and that such crimes thus will not become part of 

industry cruise safety statistics). RAINN last week communicated with over 200 

rape crisis centers in various states to determine whether any of their clients/ 

hotline callers had been sexually assaulted during a cruise. About 9 percent of 

these 200 centers reported being contacted by a cruise victim. 

• Third, in today’s competitive business climate, cruise lines may have an economic incentive to underreport or misclassify sexual assault crimes. Even if we 

assume that they are doing their best and would not consciously underreport, 

cruise personnel may lack the legal knowledge required to properly classify and 

report sexual crimes to Federal authorities. (U.S. college administrators—who 

also often lack law enforcement experience—sometimes encounter similar difficulties in interpreting the Federal Clery Act’s requirements for reporting oncampus crimes at the Nation’s college and universities.) 

In summary, for those on a cruise, it is easy to forget that the risk of being assaulted onboard a cruise ship is real. It is easy, too, for the vacationing public to 

forget that, while a cruise ship may resemble a small city in population size, the 

public on the cruise ship has no law enforcement officials to keep would-be criminals 

in check or to immediately secure a crime scene and investigate a crime once it occurs. 

18 

Recommendations for the 110th Congress 

Impose stricter requirements for reporting onboard incidents of sexual assault (and 

authorize Federal officials to impose penalties for noncompliance with this requirement). 

The FBI and the U.S. Coast Guard in 2007 entered into an agreement with the 

cruise industry, which calls for the industry to voluntarily report certain crimes. 

This agreement seems to mainly deal with crimes that are voluntarily reported by 

the industry and might not address crimes that should be, but are not, reported to 

the FBI. Congress should review this agreement carefully to ensure that the FBI 

can and will exercise meaningful oversight of cruise industry reporting methods, 

and to ensure that someone other than the cruise officials has a say in whether or 

not an incident reported by a passenger meets the threshold for disclosure. If this 

agreement does not give the FBI the ability to take action against cruise ships (most 

of which are foreign-flagged vessels) for underreporting or misclassifying sexual 

crimes, Congress should tighten requirements for the cruise lines. Enhancing the reliability of data on the frequency and nature of crimes on cruises should be the goal. 

Provide victims who report sexual assaults during cruises with immediate access 

(via a telephone or the Web) to rape crisis personnel who are trained to meet the 

unique needs of Americans traveling overseas, so that cruise victims know they are 

not alone. 

RAINN, the Nation’s largest anti-sexual assault organization, created and operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline, 800–656–HOPE (in partnership with 

1,105 affiliated rape crisis centers, located in every state and the District of Columbia). The Telephone Hotline has helped 1.2 million callers since its inception in 

1994. RAINN also recently launched the National Sexual Assault Online Hotline 

(the nation’s first secure, Web-based hotline for rape victims), at www.rainn.org). Finally, RAINN also conducts education and outreach programs to help prevent sexual 

assault and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice. 

Close to a year ago, RAINN approached one of the largest cruise line companies, 

Royal Caribbean, to suggest that they establish access from their ships to our Online Hotline and to our 24-hour Telephone Hotline for those instances where a guest 

or crewmember becomes the victim of a sexual assault while traveling onboard a 

ship. Our goal is to facilitate both immediate and continuing professional counseling 

services should a cruise passenger desire and need such services. We are currently 

engaged in discussions with Royal Caribbean about our proposal to link cruise ship 

victims with rape crisis hotline personnel while the victims are at sea. We believe 

that it would be appropriate for the entire industry to provide access to these (or 

similar hotline) services to any cruise passengers or crew members who are victimized while traveling in international waters. 

RAINN also believes that it will be important to equip those hotline personnel 

who assist cruise victims at sea with certain resources that are uniquely tailored 

to meet the unique needs of such victims. For example, while the typical (on shore) 

caller to our Telephone Hotline is seeking information about victim resources in 

their local community, a caller from a cruise ship at sea typically would need contact information for the consulate or U.S. embassy at the nearest port of call, contact information for the FBI, and information about how to report a sexual assault 

to cruise line personnel, plus advice on how to seek medical attention and related 

support services. Cruise victims also may get help from rape crisis centers in their 

local communities upon their return home. 

Of the roughly 200 rape crisis centers, located in various states around the nation, 

from whom we heard last week, 90 percent said they do not currently train their 

personnel to meet the unique needs of victims of cruise ships. Although over half 

said that they feel fully prepared, and an additional one-third reported that they 

feel somewhat prepared, to assist cruise victims, 60 percent said they would find 

it helpful to receive materials to assist in counseling clients or responding to hotline 

calls. At least 40 percent said they would find it helpful to receive contact information for Federal agencies that deal with cruise victims; about one-quarter said that 

they would find it useful to receive a list of international resources that provide assistance to cruise victims; and about one-quarter also said they would appreciate receiving specialized training to help them better meet the unique needs of rape victims on cruises. 

Ensure greater oversight of training and conduct of crew members on ships. 

The cruise industry needs to take additional steps to ensure that their crewmembers are adequately supervised and that better protocols are instituted and followed to protect victims (crewmembers and passengers alike) in the event that sexual assaults occur on cruises in the future. Royal Caribbean advised us that they 

recently hired a sexual assault forensic nurse to assist the company in the development of improved evidence collection procedures on their cruises; we encourage the 

19 

rest of the industry to take similar steps, where appropriate, to ensure that their 

onboard medical personnel are adequately trained in proper forensic evidence collection methods. 

Ensure that cruise lines are accountable to the public to fully report all incidents 

of sexual assault. 

We applaud U.S. Reps. Matsui, Shays, Poe, and Maloney for recently introducing 

an amendment that would require certain cruise crimes to be publicly disclosed online by the U.S. Coast Guard as well as the cruise industry. This measure recently 

passed the U.S. House of Representatives as an amendment to a U.S. Coast Guard 

bill, and we encourage the Senate to pass a similar measure. 

Improve the screening and training of crew members who work with passengers. 

Many cruise lines serving U.S. passengers employ citizens of a variety of other 

countries as crewmembers. The screening of crewmembers who work with passengers may not be adequate to fully protect those on cruises against the risks 

posed by sexual predators. Because crewmembers have been involved in some recent 

reported sexual assaults, finding a solution to this issue should be a priority for 

Congress and the industry. 

Encourage cruise lines to educate their passengers, before the ship departs, about 

the onboard risk of sexual assault and what to do if they, or a friend or relative, 

is assaulted during the voyage. 

The cruise industry’s advertising materials foster an image of cruise ships as safe 

and fun havens for vacationing Americans to relax. Parents of children who were 

assaulted on a cruise occasionally tell us that they let their guard down more while 

onboard than they would have at home (e.g., by allowing their child to move freely 

about the ship without adult supervision). Ideally, the entire cruise industry should 

provide passengers, at the outset of a voyage, with safety information that notes the 

specific risks to children and youths while traveling on the cruise, gives safety tips 

for crewmembers and passengers, and explains what to do if you or a friend or family member is assaulted while on a cruise. 

Conclusion 

In closing, thank you for your time and for inviting me to testify. I look forward 

to continuing to work with you, Mr. Chairman, the Ranking Member, and the other 

Members of this Subcommittee on solutions to the important issues discussed at today’s hearing. 

Senator KERRY. We appreciate it. Thank you very much for doing 

so. 

Mr. Dale? 

STATEMENT OF TERRY DALE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CRUISE 

LINES INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION (CLIA); ACCOMPANIED 

BY JAMES ALAN FOX, PH.D. 

Mr. DALE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

Subcommittee. My name is Terry Dale, and I’m the President and 

Chief Executive Officer of Cruise Lines International Association, 

headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. I greatly appreciate the 

opportunity to testify before you today. 

I have submitted a formal statement for inclusion in the record 

of this hearing, which, in the interest of time, I will briefly summarize. 

CLIA represents 24 cruise lines, whose vessels range in size from 

50 passengers to 4,000 passengers, and 16,500 travel agencies. In 

the audience today is Mr. Bill Walsh, President of Cruise Travel 

Outlet, and one of the top producing travel agents for MASSPORT. 

Agents like Bill are our industry’s front-line partners. In fact, in 

the past 20 years, he has sold thousands of cruises, yet he has 

never had a single call from a passenger claiming to be a victim 

of a crime. 

This hearing will examine cruise ship safety, which is the cruise 

industry’s number-one priority for its passengers and crew. Quite 

simply, Americans are extremely safe at sea today. According to 

20 

Coast Guard Admiral Wayne Justice, and I quote, ‘‘There is no serious evidence to suggest that there is significantly more, or more 

serious, crimes affecting U.S. nationals onboard cruise ships than 

indicated by the reporting data,’’ end of quote. 

Why, then, have these questions about safety been raised? I believe there are three reasons: 

First, our care and compassion in the past toward these individuals who have suffered has not always been satisfactory. However, 

we have made great strides to improve our services. 

Second, we are the only vacation industry required by law to immediately report any serious incident and every allegation to Federal authorities. In this case, the FBI and U.S. Coast Guard. This 

reporting is mandatory, not voluntary. 

Third, when incidents have occurred, they typically receive far 

more attention than comparable incidents in land-based settings. 

As you know, Mr. Chairman, there have been four House hearings on this issue, the most recent in September 2007. Since that 

hearing, we have held several all-day meetings with our working 

group of family members and their representatives to share and exchange ideas and recommendations. Our cruise lines now use an 

FBI DVD for enhanced security training, and offers instruction on 

an initial response and crime-scene management. CLIA’s two largest cruise lines have their security training programs certified by 

internationally recognized security organizations. Finally, our 

member lines guest-care programs have trained more than 3500 

employees, to date. 

Mr. Chairman, these are just some of the actions we have taken 

since the September hearing. Also at that hearing last fall, Coast 

Guard Admiral Justice testified, and I quote, ‘‘We see no emerging 

requirement for legislative change regarding the incident reporting 

requirements,’’ end of quote. He added that there were no known 

incidences of shipboard crimes being unreported. Clearly, the authorities would know if they were not receiving accurate reports; 

and I would add that, in this day and age of cell phones, camera 

phones, and Internet access, the likelihood that a serious incident 

would go unnoticed, let alone unreported, is highly unrealistic. 

The House hearings also demonstrated that crime on cruise ships 

is extremely rare. The FBI statistic—or, they stated that 207 incidents had been reported by CLIA member cruise lines to the Bureau for the 6-month period prior to the hearing, and, according to 

the subcommittee hearing memo, that translates into fewer than 

.01 percent of passengers on cruise ships during that period. 

In March of last year, we worked with the FBI and Coast Guard 

to develop a standardized crime reporting protocol and continue to 

work closely with the FBI, Coast Guard, and all Federal authorities, as well as the International Maritime Organization. 

Based on Federal and international regulations, the following is 

strictly adhered to. Anyone boarding one of our ships, and every 

piece of their luggage, is subject to rigorous screening. Each cruise 

ship has embarkation and debarkation controls, including biometric 

verification of all passengers and crew. All passengers and crew 

lists are electronically submitted to U.S. authorities prior to departure from or arrival to the United States, and screened against law 

enforcement data bases. Each cruise ship has a highly trained chief 

21 

security officer and trained security staff to provide safety onboard. 

Each cruise line also has security officers at the corporate level, 

usually ex-law enforcement, Coast Guard, or military, in charge of 

fleet-wide security and training. 

Based on these facts, it is clear that we provide a safe and secure 

passenger environment. This is part of the reason why independent 

surveys show that 95 percent of cruise passengers are satisfied 

with their cruising experience, and more than half of our passengers today are repeat customers who are cruising for the second, third, fourth, and, many times, even a dozen times. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, as an industry, we deeply regret any 

incident that occurs on our ships. We have worked closely with 

families and their representatives to provide compassionate care. 

Our goal remains zero incidents. This industry works diligently 

every day to achieve this goal. We have a very good record when 

it comes to passenger safety, and we want to keep it that way. Passenger safety is, and always will be, our number-one priority. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dale follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TERRY DALE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CRUISE LINES

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION (CLIA); ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES ALAN FOX, PH.D. 

Introduction 

My name is Terry Dale. I am President and Chief Executive Officer of the Cruise 

Lines International Association (CLIA), which has its headquarters in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. 

My association represents 24 cruise lines, whose vessels range in size from 50 

passengers to 4,000 passengers. Our membership also includes 16,500 travel agencies and more than 100 business partners who provide a vast range of products and 

services to the cruise industry. These businesses are located throughout the U.S. 

and create thousands of jobs. 

We have representatives and letters from the American Society of Travel Agents 

(ASTA), National Business Travel Association (NBTA), National Association of 

Cruise Only Agencies (NACOA) and the National Association of Commissioned 

Travel Agents. Each of these organizations attests to peoples’ personal experiences 

with cruising and their views that it is a very safe experience. 

In the audience today is Bill Walsh, President of Cruise Travel Outlet, who met 

with staff last week and shares a long affiliation with Massachusetts and the cruise 

industry. 

Travel agents like Bill Walsh are our front line partners. Travel agents are among 

the very first to hear if there is a serious incident, or for that matter, almost any 

kind of incident aboard a ship. 

Bill readily acknowledges that the cruise industry has a 95 percent satisfaction 

rating. In fact, in the 20 years he has been selling cruises, he has never received 

a call from a passenger claiming to have experienced a serious crime. 

The purpose of this hearing is to examine cruise ship safety, and specifically ‘‘potential steps for keeping Americans safe at sea.’’ 

This is an excellent subject, and many ‘‘steps’’ have already been taken. I appreciate the opportunity to provide an update and address some of the misunderstandings I believe exist. 

I am pleased to be on a panel with Ken Carver, a member of CLIA’s Survivor 

Working group and a person I have had an ongoing dialogue regarding cruise ship 

security. I am pleased that Evelyn Fortier of RAINN is also on the panel. I have 

great respect for RAINN and the wonderful resource that their association provides 

to victims of sexual assault. I look forward to having a dialogue with RAINN. 

The cruise industry’s number one priority is safety of its passengers and crew. 

Quite simply, Americans are extremely safe at sea today. 

In many ways, well documented by statistics and other evidence, Americans are 

much safer in the well protected environment of a cruise ship than they are on land. 

Our industry has no higher priority—no stronger commitment—than to maintaining our excellent record for the safety and security of all passengers. 

Why, then, have these questions about safety even been raised? 

I believe there are three principal reasons. 

22 

1. Our care and compassion in the past toward those who have suffered injury 

or loss has not always been satisfactory. We have made great strides over the 

past 2 years to improve our procedures, to provide more support to those who 

have been injured or families that have been affected; and we are committed 

to continuing these efforts. 

2. We are the only travel industry required by law to immediately report any 

serious incident or even allegation to Federal authorities; in this case, the FBI 

and the U.S. Coast Guard. 

3. When unfortunate incidents have occurred they typically receive far more 

publicity than comparable incidents in land-based settings. 

There have been four House hearings on this issue, the most recent in September 

2007 and since that hearing: 

• We have held two more two all-day meetings with the working group of family 

members and their representatives to share and exchange ideas and recommendations. These meetings have provided a forum by which the families 

have heard directly from the FBI, the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Attorneys 

Office. Our last meeting in Miami was held over several days and representatives of these agencies gave detailed briefings and answered many questions. 

The FBI also met with our group in November and discussed a new security 

training DVD that they were developing expressly for use by the cruise lines. 

Separately and during the Miami meeting the working group also addressed 

about 50 recommendations that had been put forward by the families.) 

• Our major cruise lines now use the previously mentioned FBI-provided DVD for 

security training. The DVD offers FBI instruction on: initial response to a crime 

scene; securing a crime scene; crime scene photography and evidence collection. 

• Two of CLIA’s largest cruise lines have their security training programs certified by Lloyds Register, an internationally recognized security organization 

and a UK government program through Security Industry Authority. 

• This spring CLIA sponsored the Family Assistance Foundation symposium in 

Atlanta, where a panel of survivors shared ideas and experiences with the audience. 

• Our member lines’ guest care programs have trained more than 1000 employees, bringing the total to date to more than 3000. 

Crime Reporting 

With respect to the reporting of such incidents, both the FBI and the U.S. Coast 

Guard have testified that the system is working efficiently. 

Last September, Rear Admiral Wayne Justice, Assistant Commandant of the U.S. 

Coast Guard, testified to the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime 

Transportation, and said: ‘‘We see no emerging requirement for legislative change 

regarding the incident reporting requirements.’’ 

He added that there were no known incidences of shipboard crimes going unreported. 

Clearly, if the authorities were receiving reports from others that had gone unreported by the industry, the authorities would know this. As an aside, in this day 

and age of cell phones, camera phones and Wi-Fi cafes, the likelihood that a serious 

incident would go unnoticed, let alone unreported, would be very rare. 

The House hearings also demonstrated that crime on cruise ships is extremely 

rare. Based on FBI reports from a 6-month period, the Coast Guard Subcommittee 

in its September 2007 hearing memo noted that there were fewer than point zero 

1 percent (0.01 percent) of passengers had been involved in a reported incident during that time period. 

Safety and Security Measures 

To give a sense of what these requirements mean in practice: 

• Anyone boarding one of our ships is subject to more rigorous screening than is 

required for airline passengers at most of the world’s airports. 

• Every piece of personal luggage is strictly screened. 

• Each cruise ship has embarkation and debarkation controls including biometric 

verification of all passengers and crew. 

• All lists of passengers and crew are electronically submitted to U.S. authorities 

prior to departure from or arrival in the United States and screened against law 

enforcement data bases. 

23 

• Each cruise ship has a qualified security officer and trained security staff whose 

duties are solely to provide onboard security for the passengers and crew, as 

well as for the vessel itself. These security officers are experienced highlytrained professionals. 

• Each cruise line also has supervisory security officers at the corporate level, 

usually ex-law enforcement, Coast Guard or military, in charge of managing 

fleet wide security and training of the vessel security officers. 

• Every crew member is required and trained to look out for the security of all 

passengers. 

• In addition, all major cruise lines now have trained staff to counsel and support 

families and individuals during emergency situations. 

Passenger Satisfaction 

Independent surveys show that the vast majority of cruise passengers, 95 percent, 

say they are very satisfied with their cruising experience. Nearly 50 percent say 

they are extremely satisfied. And more than half of all passengers are repeats— 

cruising for the second or third or fourth time. 

I submit that this would not be the case if safety or security were perceived as 

a serious problem. As the U.S. Coast Guard has testified, crimes onboard cruise 

ships are extremely rare. 

I hope this background is helpful in assessing the level of safety and security for 

cruise ship passengers, despite the reports you may have heard of rare criminal activity, including sexual assaults, that have been widely reported, completely investigated, and yet sometimes exaggerated. 

As an industry and as individuals, we deeply regret any such incident, and that 

in some cases, we have not provided sufficient support to the individuals or families 

affected. We have acknowledged this and over the past 2 years have worked closely 

with those families and their representatives and have welcomed their recommendations for improving our passenger services. Each of our large cruise ships now has 

specialized counselors. 

Again the safety and security of our passengers is, has to be, and always will be 

our highest priority. We are constantly reviewing and improving our procedures. 

Our position is that incident or crime of any kind is one too many. 

Misleading Statistics 

Regrettably, assertions are sometimes made and unofficial statistics are sometimes quoted that bear no relation to any known reality. I would like to try to clarify 

this point. 

For example, at the September 2007 hearing of the House Subcommittee, a witness stated that the rate of ship-board sexual assaults is twice the rate of those occurring on shore. The two figures serving as the basis for that statement, however, 

were shipboard sexual assaults and land-based forcible rapes. The difference between those two categories is significant because the definition of ‘‘sexual assault’’ 

includes behaviors such as the intentional touching of certain body parts through 

clothing. In addition, the FBI has confirmed that it does not even calculate the rate 

of land-based sexual assaults. Despite this key fact, the critics have continued to 

cite the FBI’s statistics for ‘‘forcible rapes’’ that occur on land, mischaracterizing 

them as the (non-existent) land-based sexual assault rate, and misleadingly comparing them to the more broadly-defined ‘‘sexual assault rate’’ on ships. This is the 

basis for the false claim that a person is twice as likely to suffer a sexual assault 

onboard a ship as on land. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify the record on 

this important point. 

Conclusion 

In closing, let me say thank you again for conducting this hearing. We believe the 

record is clear—cruising is a very safe way to vacation, and our customer satisfaction levels, which are among the highest for any industry, would verify this fact— 

especially when placed along side the Federal data. 

Our industry, as verified in previous testimony before the House of Representatives, is reporting all incidents—even allegations—and this reporting system is 

working well. 

Our goal remains zero incidents and this industry works diligently every day to 

reach this goal. We have a very good record when it comes to passenger safety but 

we can always try and do more. 

Passenger Safety is, AND WILL ALWAYS BE, our Number One priority. 

Thank you. 

24 

Additional Cruise Statistics for States Represented by Members of the 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine 

Infrastructure, Safety, and Security 

Alaska 

• Alaska embarked over 178,000 passengers in 2006. 

• Almost 7,000 of Alaska’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Louisiana 

• The Port of New Orleans embarked 72,000 cruise passengers in 2006. 

• More than 85,000 of Louisiana’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Maine 

• Ports in Maine embarked over 130,000 passengers in 2006. 

• Over 16,000 of Maine’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Massachusetts 

• Operating on a seasonal schedule from April to November, Cruiseport Boston 

embarked over 62,000 passengers in 2006. 

• Over 500,000 of Massachusetts’ residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Mississippi 

• More than 30,000 of Mississippi’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 

2006. 

New Jersey 

• Cape Liberty embarked over 160,000 cruise passengers in 2006. 

• Almost 322,000 of New Jersey’s residents went on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Oregon 

• Almost 60,000 of Oregon’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

South Carolina 

• Operating on a seasonal schedule from September–June, the Port of Charleston 

embarked over 105,000 cruise passengers in 2006. 

• Almost 110,000 of South Carolina’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 

2006. 

Texas 

• The Port of Galveston embarked over 617,000 passengers in 2006. 

• Almost 730,000 of Texas’ residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

Washington 

• The Port of Seattle embarked over 370,000 cruise passengers in 2006. 

• Over 180,000 of Washington’s residents traveled on a cruise vacation in 2006. 

25 


619CLIA1.eps
26 

CRUISE LINES INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, INC. 

Executive Partners 

1 Priority Bicidal, LLC 

Aker Yards 

Amadeus North America, Inc. 

American Association of Port Authorities 

(AAPA) 

American Bureau of Shipping 

American Guard Services, Inc. 

Bahamas Maritime Authority 

Bellcomb Technologies 

Bellegrove Medical Supply 

The Berkely Group 

BMT Group 

Board of Commissioners of the Port of 

New Orleans 

Business Research & Economic Advisors 

(BREA) 

Chamber of Commerce and Industry of 

South Corsica (CCIACS) 

Cruise Norfolk 

Cruise Saint Lawrence 

The Coca-Cola Company 

Ege Ports/Kusadasi Cruise Port 

European Cruise Council 

Fidelio Cruise Software, Inc. 

Fincantieri-Cantieri Navali Italiani S.p.A 

Florida-Caribbean Cruise Association 

Flamenco Marina 

Fowler White Burnett, P.A. 

Freeport Harbour Company 

Fujifilm USA, Inc. 

Gard 

Germanischer Lloyd AG 

Hayden, Miliken, Boeringer & Irick PA 

Halifax Port Authority 

Hamilton, Miller & Birthisel, LLP 

Hamworthy Water Systems, LTD 

Hill, Betts & Nash, LLP 

Hydroxyl Systems, Inc. 

The Image Group 

International Paint, LLC 

Jacksonville Port Authority 

Jotun Paint, Inc. 

Kaye, Rose & Partners, LLC 

The Kezia Group 

Lloyd’s Register North America, Inc. 

Maine Port Authority 

Maritime Telecommunications Network/ 

SeaMobile Enterprises 

Marseille-Provence Cruise Club 

Marsh, Ltd. 

Maryland Port Administration 

Mase & Lara. P.A. 

Massachusetts Port Authority 

McAlpin Conroy, P.A. 

McIntosh, Sawran, Peltz & Cartaya, P.A. 

McRoberts Maritime Security, Inc. 

MEIKO Marine 

Metro Cruise Services, LLC 

MEYER WERFT GmbH 

MHG Services, Inc. 

Milliken Carpet 

Montreal Port Authority 

NYCruise 

On-Board Movies 

Passenger Shipping Association (PSA) 

Port Canaveral 

Port Everglades 

Port of Galveston 

Port of Houston Authority 

The Port of Los Angeles 

Port Miami 

Port of Palm Beach 

Port of San Diego 

Port of San Francisco 

Port of Seattle 

Port of Shanghai 

Port of Saint John 

Ports America, Inc. 

Quebec Port Authority 

RINA S.P.A. 

Royal Marine insurance Group/RMIG 

Seatrade Cruise Shipping Convention/ 

CMP Princeton, Inc. 

Steamship Insurance Management 

Services Limited (SIMSL) 

Tampa Port Authority 

The Port of Philadelphia and Camden, a 

Department of DRPA of PA & NJ 

Throdon Bearings, Inc. 

UK P&I Club 

Unisource Worldwide, Inc. 

Universal Marine Medical Supply 

Vickers Oils 

Wartsila 

Wireless Maritime Services, LLP 

World Cruise Industry Review 

27 


619CLIA2.eps
28 


619CLIA3.eps
29 


619CLIA4.eps
30 


619CLIA5.eps
31 


619CLIA6.eps
32 

Senator KERRY. Thank you, Mr. Dale, appreciate it. 

Dr. Klein? 

STATEMENT OF ROSS A. KLEIN, PH.D., PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL 

WORK, MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND, ST. 

JOHN’S COLLEGE 

Dr. KLEIN. Let me first thank the Committee for holding these 

hearings and for giving me the opportunity to speak. 

I sincerely believe that crimes against Americans on cruise ships 

is a problem that needs to be addressed, and encourage the Committee to seriously consider means for protecting Americans choosing cruise vacations on foreign-flagged cruise ships operating out of 

U.S. ports and around the world. 


619CLIA7.eps
33 

There is little question that sexual assaults and other crimes are 

a problem on the cruise ships, as they are elsewhere. However, the 

problem is perhaps more severe on a cruise ship. Given the cruise 

industry’s claim that a cruise is the safest form of commercial 

transportation, passengers go onboard unaware of the risks they 

face. They allow the children to roam without supervision, and 

adults fail to take precautions they take on land. The situation is 

made worse by the relaxed attitude that comes with being on vacation, lowered defenses that come with consumption of alcohol, and 

an unnatural sense of safety, given the uninhibited sociality that 

comes with being on a cruise. 

In 1999, the cruise industry claimed that the number of reported 

shore-side aggravated sexual assaults was at least 20 to 50 times 

greater than the total number of all reported shipboard assaults of 

any type. Carnival Cruise Lines had just admitted in the discovery 

phase of a lawsuit involving an alleged rape that it had received 

108 complaints of sexual assaults involving crew members in 5 

years. Royal Caribbean said it had received 58 complaints in the 

same time period. 

In response to these disclosures, four cruise corporations, representing more than 75 percent of the industry, signed a letter of 

commitment in July 1999 pledging a zero-tolerance policy for 

crimes committed onboard cruise ships, and established an industry standard requiring allegations of onboard crime be reported to 

the appropriate law enforcement authorities. For vessels calling on 

U.S. ports or crime involving U.S. citizens, this meant the FBI. 

Interestingly, cruise lines were already expected to report to the 

U.S. Coast Guard all crimes involving U.S. citizens on cruise ships, 

but it isn’t clear that the information was being reported or being 

sought. 

Just 7 years later, based on statistics for 2003 through 2005, the 

cruise line—the cruise industry testified to a Subcommittee of the 

House of Representatives that the rate of sexual assault on cruise 

ships was, at worst, half that found in the United States, generally. 

This suggests that it was either as much as a 25-fold increase in 

sexual assaults between 1999 and 2003 or that the claims made in 

1999 were false and unfounded. 

The industry’s 2006 testimony was questioned, a year later, 

through analysis of data presented in a Los Angeles Times article, 

which showed the rate of sexual assaults was actually almost twice 

that found in the U.S. The industry responded; they said that what 

they meant in their Congressional testimony was forcible rape, not 

sexual assaults. 

One independent set of statistics for rate of sexual assault on 

cruise ships is raw data provided by Royal Caribbean International 

in discovery in a lawsuit in Florida. The data covers all sex-related 

incidents in a 3-year period from 2003 through 2005. It reveals 

that the rate of sexual assault on cruise ships compared to the rate 

of forcible rape in the United States is not half, but almost twice 

the U.S. rate. This rate is validated by data presented by the FBI 

in Congressional hearings in September 2007. It indicates a rate of 

sexual assault of 56.9 per 100,000 population. 

It isn’t only sexual assaults that are a problem. The first hearings in the House of Representatives, in December 2005, were conVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
34 

cerned with a cluster of cases where a passenger disappeared from 

a cruise ship. The issue was raised in June 2005 in a Business 

Journal of Jacksonville article written by Mary Moewe. She had 

found that, since 2000, at least 12 cruise ship passengers had gone 

overboard or disappeared in 11 cases. Two passengers were rescued, two were confirmed dead, and eight passengers are still missing. These eight remain a mystery. 

Unbeknownst to Moewe, the numbers were actually much higher. Because no cruise line kept track of persons going overboard, 

and no Federal agency had responsibility for monitoring these 

events, she was left to rely on information that was readily available. The most comprehensive list of persons going overboard from 

cruise ships at the time was online at CruiseJunkie.com. The site 

reports 47 incidents during the same time period covered by 

Moewe’s article. 

Another issue raised in the March 2006 hearing was robbery and 

theft. The industry claimed that, then, there was only four known 

robberies industrywide in the 3-year period 2003–2005. That meant 

an annual rate of 1.33. However, the FBI reported, in 2007, an 

annualized rate of 135. That yields a rate of 44.7 per 100,000. This 

is 90 times greater than what the industry admitted to in its 

March 2006 testimony. 

With this said, and in this context, I suggest three things: 

There needs to be a clear definition of crimes reportable by cruise 

ships, and there should be mandatory reporting, as there is in 

every jurisdiction in the U.S., with regard to child sexual abuse. 

This also means there should be clear and meaningful penalties for 

not reporting. 

A second set of recommendations emerges from 1999 reports by 

consultants hired by Royal Caribbean Cruises, Limited. Many of 

the recommendations are spot on, but have not been implemented, 

or have been implemented in a haphazard and inconsistent manner. Some that still need better implementation include standardizing the response to incidents of crime across all ships and across 

all brands; advocates and counselors onboard who are available to 

support and care for victims; a hotline reporting system off-ship 

that may be used by those who, not surprisingly, feel unsafe about 

reporting an incident onboard; better surveillance and greater use 

of CCTV cameras, in key areas of the ship, which are regularly 

monitored, and tapes stored for a reasonable period, at least as 

long as the period stipulated in the passenger contract in which a 

passenger may launch a lawsuit; there should also be better education of crew and passengers about safety, security, and about the 

limited nature of permitted interactions between passengers and 

crew; and, of key importance, effecting a meaningful and significant change in shipboard culture and tolerance of misdeeds. Many 

crimes occur because perpetrators know they will not be caught; 

and, if caught, they will not be punished. 

The third—my third point is that many recommendations are 

contained in the ICV’s ten-point program. Given that their insights 

are based on direct experience, and their recommendations are informed by the pain and suffering they have endured, they can better express than I many of the things the industry could and 

should be doing. 

35 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Klein follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROSS A. KLEIN, PH.D., PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL WORK, 

MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND, ST. JOHN’S COLLEGE

A not uncommon problem is the allegation of sexual assault on passengers by 

crewmembers, particularly cabin, table or bar stewards. Members must have rigorous policies prohibiting socializing between crew and passengers. Any crewmember, found in a passenger area where he should not be, should be subject to 

dismissal for the first offense. A cruise operator must take reasonable care to investigate a crewmember’s background before hiring him. There is at present a split of 

authority between U.S. courts as to whether cruise operators are strictly liable for 

assaults by crew or whether operators are only liable if they are negligent in hiring 

or supervising crew members. The majority of the circuits have decided that operators are only liable for negligence. (A Guide to P&I Cover, The Standard, 2007) 

The contrast is stark. The cruise industry’s insurance carrier states that sexual 

assault is a not uncommon problem, but the industry itself claims a cruise to be 

the safest form of commercial transportation. The industry’s claim is grand—one 

which most passengers take at face value. 

The Morgans (a pseudonym) took a cruise in 2005, never thinking twice about it 

being unsafe for their 8 year old middle daughter to go back to the family’s cabin 

on her own. Along the way the youngster became confused and asked a crewmember 

in uniform for assistance. Instead of helping, the male (wearing a cruise line name 

plate) allegedly took the girl to a dark end of a corridor where there were no surveillance cameras and he masturbated in front of her. It was subsequently learned that 

the crewmember had previously worked for a different cruise line that had ‘‘do not 

rehire’’ marked on his personnel file. But he passed background checks and was 

hired by the current cruise line. It seems the cruise line also failed to notice that 

the name under which the man had applied for employment was different than the 

name on his passport. 

Laurie Dishman also believed cruises were safe. She and her best friend in February 2006 chose a cruise to the Mexican Riviera to celebrate thirty years of friendship and to celebrate Laurie’s birthday. But things quickly turned from good to bad 

when a security guard raped Laurie on day two of the cruise. The security guard, 

she learned later, was actually a janitor ‘‘filling in’’ for security in lounges to check 

IDs because there were not enough security personnel on board. 

The cruise industry would prefer these experiences not be broadcast: when they 

are made public they are characterized as isolated exceptions or as statistically insignificant. But the fact is that sexual assaults have been recognized as an ongoing 

problem on cruise ships for decades. 

Scope of the Problem 

‘‘Cruise ships are as safe an environment as you can find,’’ was what a Carnival 

Cruise Lines spokesperson said during a court case involving a fourteen year old 

child who was raped in 1989 on Carnival’s Carnivale. Rape, he said, ‘‘happens in 

houses, offices, hotels, and parking lots’’ (Adams 1990:1). 

In this child’s case, the rape occurred onboard in a cleaning closet. As the ship 

was returning to Miami from the Bahamas she went to the family’s cabin (while 

other family members remained on deck) at 5:30 A.M. to check on a suitcase. While 

in the elevator, a male crewmember—a cleaner onboard the ship—kissed and 

fondled her. He then dragged her from the elevator to a cleaning closet and raped 

her on the floor. The girl picked the thirty-two year old crewman, a Colombian national and father of two, out of a line up. In February 1990, he was found guilty 

of the charges and sentenced to thirty years in prison. The case received considerable attention because it was the first time a crewmember on a foreign-flagged 

cruise ship had been successfully prosecuted. The assault had occurred while the 

ship was within U.S. territorial waters (Adams 1990: 1). 

Sexual assaults on cruise ships first gained the national media’s interest in 1999. 

One peak was in July 1999 when Carnival Cruise Lines disclosed in the discovery 

phase of a lawsuit involving an alleged rape that it had received 108 complaints of 

sexual assaults involving crewmembers in the 5-year period ending August 1998. 

Royal Caribbean said it had had fifty-eight reported sexual assaults on its ships 

during the same 5-year period. 

Several months earlier an investigative journalist with the New York Times, 

Douglas Frantz, published an article entitled ‘‘On Cruise Ships, Silence Shrouds 

Crimes’’ where he describes an alarming range of passenger claims of sexual assault 

36 

and discusses how they were handled by the cruise lines. Based on examination of 

court records and on interviews with cruise line employees, law enforcement officials, and passengers and their lawyers, Frantz describes 

. . . 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. Accused crewmembers are sometimes put ashore at the next port, with airfare to their home country. Industry lawyers are flown to the ship to question 

the accusers; and aboard ships flowing with liquor, counterclaims of consensual 

sex are common. The cruise lines aggressively contest lawsuits and insist on secrecy as a condition of settling. (Frantz 1998) 

He cites a former chief of security for Carnival Cruise Lines as saying: 

You don’t notify the FBI. You don’t notify anybody. You start giving the victims 

bribes, upgrading their cabins, giving them champagne and trying to ease them 

off the ship until the legal department can take over. Even when I knew there 

was a crime, I was supposed to go in there and do everything in the world to 

get Carnival to look innocent. (Frantz 1998) 

Once a crime is reported, there are problems with preserving evidence. Passenger 

cabins are routinely cleaned twice a day, so much evidence is destroyed very quickly 

and there is often a delay between an attack and landing at a U.S. port. Rape experts suggest that cases reported within seventy-two hours provide the best forensic 

evidence but this time-frame is difficult for attacks on a cruise ship. In addition, 

many victims are likely to delay making a report as long as they are aboard a ship 

because of fear of reprisal and because there is no independent investigator or rapetreatment centre. Sadly, rapes on cruise ships may often not be reported until it is 

too late for criminal investigation. 

In those cases where a sexual assault is reported in a timely manner, victims and 

prosecutors were traditionally faced with a common practice among cruise lines to 

immediately send the accused back home, purportedly because they have violated 

company policies that prohibit fraternizing between passengers and crew. Reporters 

for the Miami New Times found that in each of five lawsuits against Carnival 

Cruise Line they reviewed, the employee was swept out of the country immediately 

after the ship arrived in port. In one case the employee was later rehired by the 

company and was subsequently served with a summons while at the dock in Los 

Angeles. Carnival’s lawyers successfully argued the Indian citizen couldn’t be sued 

in U.S. courts because American laws did not apply to him: not only is he a foreigner, but the alleged crime took place in Barbados on a ship registered in Panama. 

The passenger’s suit against Carnival Cruise Lines was settled out of court (Korten 

2000). 

Early Attempts to Address the Problem 

Some cruise lines (if not all) undertook initiatives to address the problem of sexual assaults and other crimes, though this was mostly done out of the public’s sight. 

Royal Caribbean, for one, received reports in May/June 1999 from two consultants 

charged with making recommendations for preventing sexual harassment and assault. The problem was obvious. As one report states, ‘‘. . . improper activity occurs 

frequently aboard cruise ships, but goes unreported and/or unpunished’’ (Krohne 

1999: 2). The other report acknowledged that ‘‘crew members generally understand 

that if they commit an offence and are caught they are most likely going to lose 

their job and be returned home, but not spend time in jail’’ (Greenwood, 1999: 4). 

The reports make a range of recommendations, including: increased video surveillance of high risk areas (including the disco bar and dance area, main service corridors on crew decks and key intersections on passenger decks, and youth activity 

areas); cameras already in place be monitored periodically, at least on a random 

basis, and be recorded at all times; an increase in the number of security staff by 

two per ship; and increased training and education of staff and crew members. In 

addition they recommended that responses to sexual harassment and assault be 

standardized across brands and ships, that training for medical personnel include 

an interview protocol for sexual assault incidents, that a staff member be identified 

and assigned responsibility to serve as an advocate for the target of sexual harassment or assault, that a shore side hotline be established to receive telephone reports 

of wrongdoing and that investigations be consistent and evenly handled. Given their 

assumption that cruise passengers were unaware of the prohibition between crew 

and guest social interactions (and that passengers often, unintentionally, put a crew 

member in an uncomfortable position by engaging him or her socially), they also recommended better educating passengers and better signage onboard demarcating 

areas that are ‘‘off limits’’ to passengers. The recommendations are great, but the 

37 

degree to which they were embraced and implemented is questionable. Many are 

still being debated and discussed; they are not found in general practice. 

The consultants also identified cultural challenges to reducing sexual harassment 

and assault. For example, senior officers and management need to break from the 

traditionally hierarchical and militaristic structure of a ship and instead treat their 

crew and staff members fairly and respectfully. They need to reinforce the need for 

staff and crew members to treat each other and passengers respectfully. If they wish 

to prevent sexual harassment and abuse then they must have zero tolerance for 

both, no matter the rank or position of the offender. 

Diverse cultural perceptions of sexual harassment and conduct among a ship’s 

crew present another challenge. There is a diverse population drawn from around 

the world, and in many of these cultures women, women’s rights and sexuality are 

seen quite differently than they are by most North Americans. These differences 

need to be addressed through better training and more effective oversight and supervision. 

Managing Perceptions 

Rather than address the problem head-on, the cruise industry appears to be focused on managing public perceptions. In the midst of the heightened media coverage and interest, four cruise corporations (Carnival Corporation, Royal Caribbean 

Cruises Limited, Crystal Cruises, and Princess Cruises) representing more than 75 

percent of the industry signed a letter of commitment in July 1999. Issued under 

the auspices of the International Council of Cruise Lines, they pledged a ‘‘zero tolerance policy’’ for crimes committed onboard ships and established an industry standard requiring allegations of onboard crime be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. For vessels calling on U.S. ports, or crime involving U.S. citizens, this meant the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). 

Interestingly, cruise lines were already expected to report to the U.S. Coast Guard 

all crimes involving U.S. citizens on cruise ships but it isn’t clear that the information was being reported or sought. U.S. authority in these cases extends from the 

special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States (U.S.C. 18 CFR). 

Under U.S. Code, the government can exert authority over U.S. territorial seas, any 

place outside the jurisdiction of a nation with respect to an offence against a U.S. 

national, and a foreign-flag vessel during a voyage to or from the U.S. where an offence is committed against a U.S. national. 

The cruise industry announced its zero tolerance for crime policy with a press release. It reassured passengers of background checks on prospective employees, that 

crew members violating rules against fraternization with guests would be dismissed, 

that there were highly trained security personnel on every vessel, and that there 

were established procedures to investigate, report and refer incidents of onboard 

crime to appropriate law enforcement authorities. The press release told American 

passengers that they were protected by U.S. laws, that cruise lines were subject to 

civil liabilities in U.S. courts, and that they were safer on a cruise ship than in 

urban or rural America. But it didn’t appear to result in greater reporting of crimes. 

Minimizing the Problem 

The cruise industry has become adept at minimizing the problem. In 1999 it 

claimed that the number of reported shore side aggravated sexual assaults was at 

least twenty to fifty times greater than the total number of all reported shipboard 

assaults of any type. Just 7 years later, based on statistics for 2003 through 2005, 

they testified to a subcommittee of the House of Representatives that the rate of 

sexual assault on cruise ships was at worst half that found in the U.S. generally 

(see Fox, 2006). This suggests that there was either as much as a twenty-five-fold 

increase in sexual assaults between 1999 and 2003 or that the claims made in 1999 

were false and unfounded. 

The industry’s 2006 testimony was questioned a year later through analysis of 

data presented in a Los Angeles Times article (see Yoshino, 2007) which showed the 

rate of sexual assault was actually almost twice that found in the U.S. (see Klein, 

2007). The industry responded privately—they clarified that what they meant in 

their Congressional testimony was forcible rape, not sexual assaults. They had 

taken the U.S. rate for forcible rape and labeled them sexual assaults. The integrity 

of their own data is unclear (e.g., what definitions were used to include/exclude incidents) given that it has not been available for independent analysis and verification. 

Most recently, the cruise industry has attempted another method for minimization. Rather than use a standardized rate to reflect incidence of sexual assaults, 

they now claim ‘‘. . . there is less than a.01 percent chance that a cruise passenger 

will become the victim of an alleged crime on a cruise vacation’’ (Dale, 2007) They 

shifted from a rate based on the daily population on cruise ships (which is conVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
38 

sistent with the way rates for crime are computed by the FBI) to a probability based 

on the total number of cruise ship passengers in a year. Their new representation 

translates to 10 incidents of crime per 100,000 population. If we use this exact same 

method to compute the incidence of forcible rape in the state of California (i.e., add 

together the number of state residents and the number of tourist visitors in a year) 

it yields a rate of 0.0025 percent, well below the industry’s rate of 0.01 percent. But 

the comparison needs to be treated with caution given that the method by which 

it is computed is not conventionally accepted as a means for reflecting crime rates. 

Shifting definitions is another method used for minimizing the incidence of sexual 

assaults. As already mentioned, the cruise industry meant ‘‘forcible rapes’’ when 

they used the label ‘‘sexual assaults’’ in their 2006 testimony before a House of Representatives Subcommittee. The difference between the two terms is not trivial. The 

rate of forcible rape excludes many crimes that fall under the accepted definition 

for sexual assault, including child sexual abuse and exploitation for sexual purposes, 

unwanted sexual contact, and unwanted sexual acts. The definition of sexual assault, as it well should be, is broad and includes acts against children, men, and 

women and which involve unwanted sexual touch, unwanted sexual activity (including but not limited to forcible rape) and sexual exploitation. 

Getting a Grip on the Size of the Problem 

There is only one independent set of statistics for the rate of sexual assault on 

cruise ships. These are based on raw data provided by Royal Caribbean International in discovery in a lawsuit in Florida. The data covers all sex related incidents in a 3-year period from 2003 through 2005, though based on the wording of 

the discovery request the data likely under-represents incidents involving two crew 

members. Table 1 shows that data broken down by ship. 

As may be seen in Table 1, the rate of sexual assault on cruise ships, compared 

to the rate of forcible rape in the US, is not half but almost twice the U.S. rate. 

This rate is validated by data presented by the FBI in Congressional hearings in 

September 2007 and summarized in Table 2. The table shows an industry-wide (i.e., 

members of CLIA) rate of sexual assault of 56.9 per 100,000. 

Table 1.—RCI ‘‘Reported Sex Related Incidents’’ 2003–2005 

Number of Reported Incidents and Annualized Rate per 100,000 by Ship 

Ship Inappropriate Touch 

Sexual Harassment (SH) Sexual 

Assault 

(SA) 

SH+SA 

(annual per/100,000) 

Crew 

— 

Crew 

Guest 

— 

Guest 

Crew 

— 

Guest 

Adventure (Double occ: 3,114) 0 3 5 57.97 0 3 3 

Onboard pop=4,600 | 

Incidence/100,000 21.74 36.23 

Brilliance (Double occ: 2,110) 2 6 7 139.79 2 2 10 

Onboard pop=3,100 | 

Incidence/100,000 64.52 75.27 

Empress (Double occ: 1,600) 2 7 8 208.33 2 2 10 

Onboard pop=2,400 | 

Incidence/100,000 97.22 111.11 

Enchantment (Double occ: 

1,950) 1 4 4 91.94 1 2 5 

Onboard pop=2,900 | 

Incidence/100,000 45.97 45.97 

Explorer (Double occ: 3,114) 2 13 11 173.91 3 3 16 

Onboard pop=4,600 | 

Incidence/100,000 94.20 79.71 

Grandeur (Double occ: 1,950) 1 2 3 57.47 0 2 3 

Onboard pop=2,900 | 

Incidence/100,000 22.99 34.48 

Jewel (Double occ: 2,112) 1 1 0 10.75 0 0 2 

Onboard pop=3,100 | 

Incidence/100,000 10.75 0.0 

Legend (Double occ: 1,804) 2 2 4 74.07 3 2 3 

Onboard pop=2,700 | 

Incidence/100,000 24.69 49.38 

39 

Table 1.—RCI ‘‘Reported Sex Related Incidents’’ 2003–2005—Continued 

Number of Reported Incidents and Annualized Rate per 100,000 by Ship 

Ship Inappropriate 

Touch 

Sexual 

Harassment 

(SH) 

Sexual 

Assault 

(SA) 

SH+SA 

(annual 

per/100,000) 

Crew 

— 

Crew 

Guest 

— 

Guest 

Crew 

— 

Guest 

Majesty (Double occ: 2,354) 1 10 7 161.91 0 2 13 

Onboard pop=3,500 | 

Incidence/100,000 95.24 66.67 

Mariner (Double occ: 3,114) 0 6 4 72.47 0 2 6 

Onboard pop=4,600 | 

Incidence/100,000 43.48 28.99 

Monarch (Double occ: 2,354) 6 5 15 190.48 2 8 13 

Onboard pop=3,500 | 

Incidence/100,000 47.62 142.86 

Navigator (Double occ: 3,114) 3 6 8 101.45 0 1 13 

Onboard pop=4,600 | 

Incidence/100,000 43.48 57.97 

Radiance (Double occ: 2,110) 4 7 3 107.53 1 2 10 

Onboard pop=3,100 | 

Incidence/100,000 75.27 32.26 

Rhapsody (Double occ: 2,000) 0 3 7 111.10 0 2 5 

Onboard pop=3,000 | 

Incidence/100,000 33.33 77.77 

Serenade (Double occ: 2,112) 0 5 2 75.27 1 3 3 

Onboard pop=3,100 | 

Incidence/100,000 53.76 21.51 

Sovereign (Double occ: 2,276) 1 5 7 114.65 2 1 9 

Onboard pop=3,400 | 

Incidence/100,000 49.02 65.63 

Splendour (Double occ: 1,804) 1 2 0 24.69 0 0 3 

Onboard pop=2,700 | 

Incidence/100,000 24.69 0.0 

Vision (Double occ: 2,000) 7 4 4 88.88 3 2 10 

Onboard pop=3,000 | 

Incidence/100,000 44.44 44.44 

Voyager (Double occ: 3,114) 2 11 14 181.16 3 7 17 

Onboard pop=4,600 | 

Incidence/100,000 79.71 101.45 

Totals 36 102 113 24 50 151 

Onboard pop=64,000 | 

Incidence/100,000 53.12 58.85 111.97 10.7% 22.2% 67.1% 

U.S. Rate for sexual assaults 32.20 

Place of Incident: Unknown (26.6%), Pax Cabin (20.1%), Bar/Disco (10.8%), Other (6.0%), Dining Area (5.4%), 

Spa/Salon (5.4%), Public area (4.8%), Cabin—Officer/Crew (3.6%), Corridor (3.0%), Deck area (2.7%), Ashore 

(2.7%), Child/teen area (2.4%), Elevator (1.8%), Swimming Pool (1.5%), Crew area (1.5%), Public restroom 

(1.5%) 

Explanatory Notes for Table 1 

Data in this table was provided as part of discovery in a lawsuit involving the sexual assault 

of a passenger by a crew member. As such, the data only includes incidents reported to the 

cruise line and in turn reported in discovery. Given the limited purpose of the discovery request, 

it is suspected that incidents involving two crew members are under-reported. 

The table shows reported incidents that have been labeled by the victim and/or cruise line 

as inappropriate touch, sexual harassment, sexual assault, or sexual battery. Cases of sexual 

battery have been included under the label ‘‘sexual assault.’’ 

40 

The raw data included 41 incidents labeled inappropriate touching, 92 incidents labeled sexual harassment, 114 incidents labeled sexual assault, and 12 incidents labeled sexual battery. 

After cleaning for accurate labeling, eight incidents were dropped because they were wholly mislabeled; they are not included in the table. 

The table shows both the ship’s passenger numbers (assuming double occupancy) and an estimate of total ship population that includes crew members and additional passengers given that 

many ships sail with more passengers than the double occupancy figure. 

The comparison of reported incidents of sexual assault with the U.S. rate of sexual assault 

(as defined by the cruise industry as only forcible rapes) must be interpreted with caution. Technically, such a comparison can be misleading, however the cruise industry chose to make this 

comparison in testimony provided to Congress by James Fox in March 2006 and on that basis 

to claim that one is safer on a cruise ship than on land. Perhaps more informative is a comparison of Dr. Fox’s assertion that there are 17.6 reported incidents of sexual assault per 100,000 

with the data in this chart. This chart shows a rate of sexual assault that is 3.33 times greater 

than that presented by Dr. Fox to Congress; if we look at sexual assault plus sexual harassment 

the rate of incidence is 6.36 times greater than reported. 

Table 2.—Comparison of Crime Rate Aboard Cruise Ships: 2003–2005 vs 2007 

2003–2005 1 2007 2

Sexual 

Assault Robbery Sexual Assault 3 Robbery 4

Offences reported 149 4 Offences reported 

(146 days) 

69 54 

Annual average 49.67 1.33 Annualized rate 172 135 

Passenger count, 2003–05 31,068,000 31,068,000 Pax count, April 1– 

Aug. 24, 2007 

4,379,808 4,379,808 

Annual average 10,365,000 10,356,000 

Average pax cruise length 

(days) 

6.9 6.9 Average pax cruise 

length 5

7.0 7.0 

Annualized pax exposure Daily pax exposure 209,991 209,991 

Annual average pax 

count x (6.9/365) 

195,771 195,771 Passenger count x 

(7.0/146) 

Daily crew size 86,035 86,035 Daily crew size 6 92,284 92,284 

Total annualized person 

exposure 

281,806 281,806 Total daily (annualized) 

person exposure 

302,275 302,275 

Rate of crime per 100,000 17.6 0.5 Rate of crime per 100,000 56.9 44.7 

1Source: Statement on Crime aboard Cruise Ships, James Allan Fox, March 7, 2006, in Congressional hearings. Data was for a 

period of three full years. 2Source: Summary of Subject Matter, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Staff, September 17, 2007, 

Hearing on Cruise Ship Security Practices and Procedures. Data was for a period of 146 days (April 1–August 24, 2007): equivalent 

to 0.4 year. 3Sexual Assault includes the categories of ‘‘sexual assault’’ (N=41) and ‘‘sexual contact’’ (N=28). This is consistent with what is 

understood to have been done for the 2003–2005 data where it is understood that the categories of ‘‘sexual act’’ and ‘‘sexual contact’’ 

were both viewed as ‘‘sexual assaults.’’ 4 Robbery includes ‘‘theft of items valued over $10,000’’ (N=13) and ‘‘theft of items valued at less than $10,000 (N=41). 

5Source: CLIA Cruise Industry Overview, Marketing Edition 2006 (latest data available). 

6The same ratio of passenger-to-crew used in 2003–2005 (0.4349675411) is used here. 

The analysis by ship (Table 1) gives some additional insight into the problem. As 

can be seen there is a wide variation between ships. Some, such as Jewel of the 

Seas, have relatively few incidents. Others, such as Monarch of the Seas, Empress 

of the Seas and Voyager of the Seas, have many. The obvious question is what can 

be extrapolated from these differences. That question was posed to several Royal 

Caribbean staff members. Their responses touched on several issues. 

One factor is that incidents vary by cruise length and itinerary. Shorter cruises 

(three or 4 days in length) often attract a different type of passenger than cruises 

lasting a week or more. Those on over-weekend mini-cruise may drink more and 

take greater part in the nightlife, sometimes to excess. They risk becoming more 

vulnerable to crewmembers or other passengers. There are also special interest 

cruises (including partial charters or large affinity groups) that attract passengers 

who are different than the norm depicted in advertising (e.g., swingers, bikers, hard 

rockers, etc). While it is difficult to assign the degree of increased risk there is reason to believe that passengers are at greater risk on some cruises than on others 

simply because of the itinerary, the nature of other cruise passengers or cruise 

length. 

A large factor in risk to passengers and to crew is the onboard culture set by management. Some ship captains maintain higher expectations and lower tolerance for 

misbehavior by crewmembers than others. Others, however, may be less respectful 

to their crew (acting authoritarian and being unfair in decisionmaking, such as an 

officer denying promotions to subordinates involved with female crew members he 

liked) and create an environment that is less healthy for staff and potentially higher 

risk for passengers. Some workers cited different management styles as a key factor 

in the rate of incidence of sexual assault and harassment. Some officers provide better role models than others through their own behavior, both in terms of alcohol 

41 

consumption and treatment of women crew and passengers. A womanizing Captain, 

or a Captain who allows senior staff to sexually exploit staff/crew and passengers, 

sets a tone and gives permission to others to behave the same. 

Shipboard culture overlaps with the culture from which crewmembers come. Many 

locations in the world have different attitudes than those commonly held in North 

America about women’s rights and about the nature of relationships between men 

and women. Specific cultural views of what constitutes sexual harassment and unwanted attention are a possible risk factor. As Greenwood states, ‘‘. . . it was the 

subjective opinion stated by many officers and crew members that the cultural inclination toward aggressive sexual behavior, general low regard for the status of 

women, and the attractiveness and charming personalities of these nationals [(referring to one cultural/ethnic group)] is a risk factor to be considered’’ (1999: 3–4). The 

problem is that a crewmember may behave in ways that are acceptable in his or 

her home culture, but that are inappropriate or abusive in North American culture. 

There is no simple solution to the problem, but the by-ship comparison suggests 

that some ships and ship management are doing things right. There are likely 

things to be learned by focusing on those ships where sex-related incidents are relatively few and comparing them to those where incidents are many. The differences 

may provide insight and direction for positive change. But this type of analysis is 

not being done. While the goal of each cruise line should be consistency across the 

ships in its brand, it is something that is not being achieved (Krohne 1999). 

Michael Eriksen, a lawyer who represents victims of crime on cruise ships has another perspective. He says some forms of crew misconduct derive from the cruise 

industry’s business models and hiring practices. 

‘‘Crew members live and work in confined quarters, are away from home for extended periods, and work long hours with little downtime, even during port 

calls. The crew’s alienation from normal home and family activities leaves many 

vulnerable to social entanglements with passengers.’’ (Eriksen 2006: 48) 

Eriksen posits that many if not most crewmembers alleged to have committed sexual offences against passengers aboard cruise ships have been cabin stewards, bartenders, dinner waiters, or others whose jobs involve daily passenger contact. He 

suggests: 

‘‘To deter such misbehavior, a cruise line must do more than write up a ‘zero 

tolerance’ policy and pay lip-service to it. Criminals aboard cruise ships, like 

those elsewhere, commit crimes because they perceive a minimal risk of detection and prosecution. Some cruise lines fail to install sufficient surveillance 

cameras in public areas to identify and deter potential perpetrators. Other carriers fail to hire enough supervisors and security guards to adequately keep 

tabs on the rest of the crew. Some carriers fail to make it clear to crewmembers 

that zero tolerance also applies to crew-passenger contact ashore. Carriers also 

generally do not warn passengers to be wary of crew member misconduct.’’ 

(Eriksen 2006: 49) 

It Isn’t Just Sexual Assaults 

The first hearings in the House of Representatives in December 2005 were not 

concerned with sexual assaults. Their initial focus was on a cluster of cases where 

a passenger disappeared from a cruise ship. The issue was raised in June 2005 in 

a Business Journal of Jacksonville article written by Mary Moewe. She had found 

that since 2000 at least twelve cruise ship passengers had gone overboard or disappeared in eleven incidents involving cruise ships that frequent U.S. ports. Two 

passengers were rescued, two were confirmed dead and eight are still missing. 

These eight remain a mystery (Moewe 2005). 

Unbeknownst to Moewe, the numbers were actually much higher. Because no 

cruise line or corporation kept track of persons going overboard and no Federal 

agency had responsibility for monitoring these events, she was left to rely on information that was readily available. The most comprehensive list of persons going 

overboard from cruise ships at the time was online at Cruise Junkie dot Com (see 

<www.cruisejunkie.com/Overboard.html>). The site reports forty-seven incidents 

during the same time period covered by Moewe’s article; in nine cases the person 

was rescued alive. Some cases were clearly suicide, some were accidents and many 

remained mysterious. Alcohol was a factor in a fair number of suicides and accidents; large gambling losses were a factor in at least three cases and an argument 

with a spouse or traveling companion preceded four incidents (three men, one 

woman—in two of these cases the passenger was rescued alive). There was a single 

case where one passenger was observed throwing another overboard. In September 

2001 Myrtha Vogt, a sixty-nine year old woman from New Mexico, was pushed overVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
42 

board, as her husband watched, by a fellow passenger who was a former mental patient. They were on the third day of an eleven-day cruise of Norway’s fjords. 

Some of the unexplained disappearances include: Cris Allen Swartzbaugh, a thirty-nine-year-old man who disappeared between Tahiti and Raiatea in the South Pacific the first night of a cruise aboard the Paul Gauguin in April 2000; Manuelita 

Pierce, a thirty-nine-year-old woman who disappeared without a trace at the end 

of her week-long Caribbean cruise aboard Royal Caribbean’s Enchantment of the 

Seas in October 2000; Randall Gary, a fifty-year-old psychotherapist who in May 

2003 disappeared from Holland America Line’s Veendam somewhere between Vancouver and Alaska; Merrian Carver, a forty-year-old woman who in May 2004 disappeared from an Alaska cruise aboard Celebrity Cruises’ Mercury; Annette 

Mizener, a thirty-seven-year-old woman who disappeared from a 9-day Mexican Riviera cruise aboard Carnival Pride in December 2004—in her case the surveillance 

camera viewing the deck area from where she disappeared, apparently following a 

struggle, was covered by a map of the ship; and in May 2005 Hue Pham (age 

seventy- one) and his wife of forty-nine years, Hue Tran (age sixty-seven), disappeared in the Caribbean between the islands of Barbados and Aruba from Carnival Destiny. What started out as a Mother’s Day gift—a seven night Caribbean 

cruise with their daughter and granddaughter—turned into a tragic and mysterious 

disappearance. There were common patterns in these cases: search for the missing 

passenger was either not undertaken or was inordinately delayed, there appeared 

to be an absence of investigation, and in some cases law enforcement authorities 

were not initially notified. 

While these cases suggest a problem, the disappearance of George Allen Smith IV, 

a twenty-six- year-old on his honeymoon aboard the Brilliance of the Seas in the 

Mediterranean in July 2005, immediately captured the world’s attention and interest and catapulted passenger disappearances into the public eye. The newlyweds 

had been drinking heavily and gambling at the ship’s casino before his disappearance. The story that emerged was that while George’s wife, Jennifer Hegel-Smith, 

lay passed out on a floor far from the couple’s cabin (and with no recollection of 

events), George was taken back to his cabin by some drinking buddies who claim 

they put him to bed. The next morning a youngster in a nearby cabin reported seeing blood on a canopy above a life boat under the Smith cabin and an investigation 

determined that at least one of the Smiths was missing. Jennifer was located that 

morning in the gym, unaware that anything had happened. 

George’s disappearance was reported to local Turkish authorities that came 

aboard to investigate. To this day, it appears the investigation remains open and 

conclusions have yet to be drawn. There is some indication that foul play was involved, and some believe they know who was involved, but no one has been formally 

identified or charged. 

In late-June 2006, Jennifer reached a settlement with the cruise line over her 

husband’s disappearance. George’s parents the same day filed suit against the 

cruise line claiming the cruise line deliberately and intentionally portrayed the incident as an accident, and hampered a full-blown, appropriate investigation into the 

facts and circumstances of George’s death. Specifically, they claim the cruise line delayed reporting the incident to the FBI, deciding instead to report the case to Turkish authorities. When Royal Caribbean did contact the FBI, the suit claims the 

cruise line failed to tell authorities about loud noises and arguing in Smith’s cabin 

and the discovery of blood inside and outside the cabin. As well, the family accuses 

Royal Caribbean of contaminating a potential crime scene by sending crew members 

into the cabin to investigate and take photographs and by cleaning blood from the 

canopy above a lifeboat. 

The Smith case dominated news media in the United States for months and was 

the focus of stories in both print and television magazines. It particularly caught 

the attention of Smith’s Member of Congress, Christopher Shays, who was aware 

of some of the other cases involving disappearances from cruise ships (including the 

case of Merrian Carver) and who pushed for and who chaired the first two Congressional hearings (December 2005 and March 2006). The latter shifted the spotlight 

to sexual assaults. 

The other issue raised in the March 2006 hearing was robbery and theft. The industry claimed then that there was only four known robberies industry-wide in the 

3-year period, 2003–2005. That meant an annual rate of 1.33. As seen in Table 2, 

the FBI reported in 2007 an annualized rate of 135. That yields a rate of 44.7 per 

100,000. This is 100 times greater than what the industry admitted to in its March 

2006 testimony. 

43 

Getting a Handle on Crime 

It is not surprising to most that crimes would occur on cruise ships, much the 

same as they do on land. However there are features of a cruise vacation—excessive 

drinking, uninhibited sociality, shipboard culture, and not trivially the industry’s 

mantra that cruise vacations are virtually safe—that raise the risk higher than 

what would be expected on land and certainly higher than most passengers expect. 

Like dealing with an alcoholic, the first thing the cruise industry needs to do is to 

admit that there is a problem. Only then can they begin to address the problem and 

seek advice from critics and independent and external analysts. Their current method of obfuscation and excluding from discussion those who disagree with them may 

have worked in past, but the problem has reached proportions that demand meaningful and significant measures. 

The industry will argue that the reporting agreement between CLIA and the 

Coast Guard/FBI is enough for dealing with the problem. However it is not. The industry has been required to report all crimes against Americans for more than a 

decade (first under U.S.C. 18 CFR and later by their zero tolerance pledge in 1999), 

but they obviously weren’t if we compare the incidence before and after April 2007 

when the industry’s voluntary agreement with the FBI and Coast Guard took effect. 

The agreement is a positive step, but it has little value when data is collected and 

then kept secret. There is no regular public reporting of crime on cruise ships. An 

amendment to H.R. 2830 offered by Representative Doris Matsui of California (and 

co-sponsored by Representatives Poe, Maloney and Shays) and passed earlier this 

year as part of the Coast Guard Reauthorization Bill will change that. 

It requires that data collected by the FBI be made available via the Internet, broken down by cruise line, and that the link to the data be clearly displayed on each 

cruise line’s website. 

The only apparent weakness of this approach is that it does not define what constitutes a crime. This is important given the industry’s propensity for manipulating 

definitions. It would be helpful to clearly state what actions or behavior is reportable without leaving wiggle room for misinterpretation or under-reporting. Some 

might argue this approach is based in basic distrust of the cruise industry. The distrust is based in experience. The industry consistently misrepresented and lied 

about its environmental practices during the 1990s and early 2000s. It has also, intentionally or unintentionally, under-represented the incidence of crimes to Congress and to its customers. It is not necessarily the safest mode of commercial transportation and should not purport to be. 

Recommendations 

In addition to the need for standardized definitions for reportable crimes, it would 

also make sense to extend mandatory reporting laws found in virtually every U.S. 

jurisdiction with regard to child sexual abuse so that they also apply to cruise ships. 

Why should cruise ships operating out of U.S. ports and carrying American citizens 

be treated differently than other jurisdictions, especially when it comes to victimization of our youngest citizens? It may also be prudent to have mandatory reporting 

for all sexual assaults (i.e., sexual contact, sexual acts, forcible rape, and any other 

incident involving unwanted sexual activity). However, as already stated, clear definitions need to provided so that all crimes be reportable and reported. As well, this 

data should be public and available to persons thinking about or planning to take 

a cruise. They need to have information that counterbalances the cruise industry’s 

grand claims about passenger safety. 

A second set of recommendations emerges from the 1999 reports by consultants 

hired by Royal Caribbean Cruises Limited. Many of the recommendations are spot 

on but have not been implemented or have been implemented in a haphazard and 

inconsistent manner. Some that still need better implementation include: standardizing the response to incidents of crime across all ships and across brands; independent advocates/counselors onboard who are available to support and care for victims; a hotline reporting system off ship that may be used by those who not surprisingly will feel unsafe about reporting an incident onboard; better surveillance and 

greater use of CCTV cameras in key areas of the ship, which are regularly monitored and tapes stored for a reasonable period of time (at least as long as the time 

allotted by the cruise passenger contract for bringing legal action against a carrier)—videos that are not regularly screened give crew members confidence that 

they are likely to get away with illegal activity; better education of crew and passengers about safety, security, and about the limited nature of permitted interactions between passengers and crew/service staff; and, of key importance, effecting 

a meaningful and significant change in shipboard culture and tolerance for misdeeds. Many crimes occur because perpetrators know they will not be caught, and 

if caught they will not be punished. 

44 

There is also great room for improvement on a very concrete level. Many recommendations are contained in the International Cruise Victims Association’s (ICV) 

10-point program. Given that ICV is a grassroots organization comprised largely of 

people who have experienced crime onboard a cruise ship (or whose family member(s) has/have), and that they speak loudly for themselves, I won’t attempt to summarize what they have to say. Their insights are based on direct experience and 

their recommendations are informed by the pain and suffering they have endured. 

They can express better than I many of the things the industry could and should 

be doing that it isn’t. 

References 

Adams, Margaret. 1990. ‘‘Rape Case Threatens Cruise Industry Image: Girl, 14, Says Crewman Assaulted Her,’’ Miami Herald (Broward Edition), February 5. 

Dale, Terry. 2007. Letter from CLIA to the Chair of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard 

and Marine Transportation, December 19, 2007. 

Eriksen, Michael. 2006. ‘‘Love Boats on Troubled Waters,’’ Trial 43, 3 (March). 

Fox, James Alan. ‘‘Statement on Crime Aboard Cruise Ships,’’ Testimony Before the Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, March 7, 2006. 

Frantz, Douglas. 1998. ‘‘On Cruise Ships, Silence Shrouds Crimes,’’ New York Times, November 16. Available at <www.nytimes.com/library/national/111698cruise-ship-crime.html> 

(Accessed July 14, 1999) 

Greenwood, Don. ‘‘Reducing Sexual Assaults on Cruise Ships: Risk Assessment and Recommendations,’’ Unpublished consultant’s report. June 7, 1999. 

Klein, Ross A. 2007. ‘‘Crime Against Americans on Cruise Ships,’’ Testimony Before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on 

Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, March 27. Available at <transportation.house.gov/ 

Media/File/Coast%20Guard/20070327/Klein.pdf> 

Korten, Tristram. 2000. ‘‘Carnival? Try Criminal: What happens when a female passenger is 

assaulted on a cruise ship? Not much.’’ Miami New Times, February 3–9. Available at 

<www.miaminewtimes.com/2000-02-03/news/carnival-try-criminal> (Accessed February 5, 

2000) 

Krohne, Kay. Unpublished consultant’s report examining current efforts of Royal Caribbean 

Cruises Ltd. in the area of preventing sexual harassment and assault. May 26, 1999. 

Moewe, M.C. 2005. ‘‘Disappearances Leave Mystery,’’ Business Journal of Jacksonville, June 

3. Available at <www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2005/06/06/story1.html> (Accessed 

July 4, 2005) 

Yoshino, Kimi. 2007. ‘‘Cruise Industry’s Dark Waters: What Happens at Sea Stays There as 

Crimes on Lineres Go Unresolved,’’ Los Angeles Times, January 20. Available at 

<www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cruise20jan20,1,6485727.story?track=crosspromo&coll=la-head 

lines-business&ctrack=1&cset=true> (Accessed January 20, 2007) 

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much, Dr. Klein. I appreciate it. 

Just listening to those statistics, I mean, I’m trying to get a baseline to the Committee here—Mr. Dale, obviously there’s a sort of 

disagreement between the two of you about what’s going on, and 

maybe more than the two of you. But, how do you respond to that, 

to the difference in these baseline understandings of what’s going 

on? 

Mr. DALE. Mr. Chairman, I think it’s important, first, to say, 

when talking about passenger safety, it’s not an issue about statistics. One of the things that I’ve learned from our family members, 

and including learning this from Ken personally, is that regardless 

of how small a percentage may be, if it touches your family, it’s 

devastating and it’s life-changing. 

Senator KERRY. Well, I appreciate your saying that. 

Mr. DALE. So—yes. 

Senator KERRY. But, let’s come back, for a moment, because 

you’re trying to make a claim that it is safer than in other parts 

of our society, and obviously Mr. Klein is saying, ‘‘No, it’s not.’’ 

Which is true? 

Mr. DALE. Well, I would point to this. We have heard Mr. Klein’s 

testimony. I would refer back to previous FBI and Coast Guard testimony. And, unfortunately, his statistics aren’t borne out by what 

we’ve heard in previous hearings. 

45 

I have with me today Dr. Fox, who’s a nationally renowned 

criminologist from Northeastern University, who has done an analysis that comes with a different set of findings than what you have 

had presented to you today. 

Senator KERRY. Well, it shouldn’t—I mean, we get pretty experienced around here at seeing different people coming in with different statistics to try to make their point. 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Senator KERRY. The bottom line is you can count the rate at 

which sex crimes occur, particularly rape, et cetera, breaking them 

down, occur onshore, versus on ship—— 

Mr. DALE. Right. 

Senator KERRY.—relative to population. This isn’t that complicated. 

Dr. Klein, is that the way you did it? 

Dr. KLEIN. Well, I think—the way I did it initially is using what 

is conventionally done, and that is to look at crime statistics with 

regard to rate per 100,000 population. That is also the method that 

James Fox used in his testimony before Congress in March 2006. 

The problem with his testimony—and I wouldn’t blame him, but 

the problem was that there is no U.S. rate for sexual assault, 

there’s only a rate for forcible rape. So, they were comparing sexual 

assaults with—on cruise ships—with on land, but they were using 

the word ‘‘sexual assaults’’ for ‘‘forcible rape.’’ 

More recently, the cruise industry is now claiming that the rate 

of sexual assault, or the probability of sexual assault, is .01 per the 

number of passengers. This is not a conventional way in which 

crime statistics are measured. If we were to use that method, what 

that would mean is, in the State of California—they have a population of 36 million, they have 366 million visitors per year, which 

means that the number of people in the State of California in a 

year is almost 400 million people. If we take the rate of sexual assault in California, that means that the rate of sexual assault is 

.0025, one-quarter of the industry statement of .01. Now, I’m not 

going to stand by those statistics, because it’s not a conventional 

way in which we look at crime statistics. Crime statistics are normally and conventionally looked at as population per 100,000, and 

when we do this on a cruise ship—— 

Senator KERRY. What happens—let’s get away—I don’t want to 

get lost here. 

Dr. KLEIN. Yes, OK. Sorry. 

Senator KERRY. What happens when you just take the population—the numbers of people who get on a ship, and you have X 

number of people on the ship, plus crew, measured against a State 

with X number of citizens plus law enforcement? What happens 

then? 

Dr. KLEIN. Well, I think the issue is that we want to look at the 

daily population on a ship, not the number of passengers. Because 

the rate of sexual assault in the U.S. is based on the daily population—— 

Senator KERRY. That’s what I’m talking about. 

Dr. KLEIN.—in the—— 

Senator KERRY. Crew and passengers. 

Dr. KLEIN. Exactly. And so—— 

46 

Senator KERRY. Total numbers of people on the ship. 

Dr. KLEIN. Right. So, the rate is—56.9 per 100,000 is based on 

the daily population on CLIA-member cruise ships. 

Senator KERRY. Yes, Mr. Dale? 

Mr. DALE. Mr. Chairman, may I ask Dr. Fox to help clarify this 

situation? 

Senator KERRY. Sure. If he can, he would be a genius. 

Mr. DALE. Before he says his comments, I would like to state—— 

Senator KERRY. Just pull a chair up. Why don’t we get him a 

chair there. 

Mr. DALE.—that we also need to keep into perspective here, 

which is very important, that we report all allegations unvetted. 

So, that, in and of itself, is a very important point of clarification. 

Dr. Fox? 

STATEMENT OF JAMES ALAN FOX, PH.D., LIPMAN FAMILY 

PROFESSOR OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AT NORTHEASTERN 

UNIVERSITY; VISITING FELLOW, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE, BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS 

Dr. FOX. Yes, thank you. 

Dr. Klein and I attempt to use the rate per 100,000, and I think 

we agree on that method. The issue is the definition of ‘‘sexual assault.’’ And he is right that on the cruise ships, sexual assault, 

which is the only definition—category we have—includes rape plus 

other offenses that are quite not—not quite as serious as rape. On 

land, it’s just ‘‘forcible rape.’’ The rate per 100,000 on the cruise 

lines right now is 10 percent lower than land, and that’s a broader 

definition—— 

Senator KERRY. For what? 

Dr. FOX.—on cruise lines. 

Senator KERRY. Ten percent lower for what? 

Dr. FOX. I’m sorry? 

Senator KERRY. Ten percent lower for which? 

Dr. FOX. Than the rape. The rate per 100,000 of rape and other 

offenses on cruise ships is 27.2 per 100,000; on land, it’s 30.9 per 

100,000. And the on-ship—— 

Senator KERRY. So, it’s a very—— 

Dr. FOX.—number—— 

Senator KERRY. It’s not that—— 

Dr. FOX.—is that broader definition. If you were able to compare 

rape with—— 

Senator KERRY. There’s too many on land. There are too many 

at sea. 

Dr. FOX. Yes. They’re both high. 

Senator KERRY. Would you agree? 

Dr. FOX. It’s 10 percent lower on—at sea, but the rate at sea is 

a broader category, it’s rape plus other crimes. If you—— 

Senator KERRY. Well, but—you know, let’s say it is 10-percent 

lower, and we’re getting on a ship, they’re going on vacation, 

they’ve invested a lot of money, this is their time to be away and 

be safe. They are going someplace to get away from what happens 

on land, and they don’t expect to find the same thing happening 

to them on their vacation. Is that a fair statement? 

Dr. KLEIN. Absolutely. 

47 

Senator KERRY. OK. Do you accept that? 

Mr. DALE. Yes, I, again, would just go back to the point I made 

earlier, that we are reporting all allegations, and, as you know, as 

a—— 

Senator KERRY. OK. 

Mr. DALE.—former—— 

Senator KERRY. Well, let’s get to the heart now. You say, Mr. 

Dale, that you’re the only travel industry required by law to immediately report a serious incident or activity to Federal authorities, 

correct? 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Senator KERRY. Why do you make a big deal out of that, since 

everybody else is required under the law to report to local and 

State authorities, and you clearly aren’t and can’t? 

Mr. DALE. Well, I’m not trying to make a big deal of it. I’m just 

stating that—— 

Senator KERRY. But, I mean, and the only reason you do that is 

because of this voluntary agreement with the FBI and the Coast 

Guard. 

Mr. DALE. No, it is mandatory for us to report these allegations, 

and this is according to Title 33, Part 120 of the Federal Code. 

Senator KERRY. OK. 

Mr. DALE. So, it is mandatory for us to report this. The—what 

is voluntary is the form and the standardization of how we report 

it to the FBI. That’s just a protocol that has become standardized. 

But, the reporting itself is, in fact, mandatory. 

Senator KERRY. But, the reason that that exists is because, absent that, there would be no reporting—you wouldn’t report to anybody, that there is no local jurisdiction. 

Mr. DALE. Well, there’s always reporting, Senator, to the flag 

state and port state control, as well. So, you know, what we 

would—— 

Senator KERRY. Well, what if you’re on the high seas? 

Mr. DALE. Well, you—— 

Senator KERRY. When you’re on the high seas, is there a port 

state? 

Mr. DALE. We report it, as well, to the Federal authorities, the 

FBI, the Coast Guard, on the high seas. 

Senator KERRY. Right. But, those would be the only place, would 

they not? 

Mr. CARVER. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator KERRY. Yes? 

Mr. CARVER. May I make a comment? 

Senator KERRY. Sure. 

Mr. CARVER. In this report, which CLIA presented to the House 

of Representatives—three times in this report, they indicate—the 

FBI, right on the first page, says their analysis—the FBI’s analysis 

of crimes occurring on the ship says they’re .01 percent. That’s 

what they say. They go on to say, in bold letters on page 3, ‘‘Based 

on the FBI’s own analysis, there’s less than a .01-percent chance 

of a cruise ship that’ll become a victim of a crime.’’ And they repeat 

that a third time. Well, that statement was not true. 

So, I went to the FBI, because when they went to California they 

said exactly the same thing and publicized that to all the CongresVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
48 

sional people. So, I have here a letter, which is in your documents, 

from the FBI, which, in effect, says, ‘‘Please be advised that the 

FBI did not submit, nor testify before the Subcommittee, in regards 

to the statistical data reported by CLIA. Thank you for bringing 

this matter to our attention. And please be aware that the FBI will 

also provide a clarification of this data.’’ Plus, the FBI says that 

data is reported on a voluntary basis, it’s not mandatory. So, the 

claim that they kept making in this report, saying, ‘‘We do not need 

legislation’’ keeps referring to the FBI, and the FBI made no such 

claim. They’re the only ones that could really come up with a crime 

rate, so I found it rather—in New York City there’s a term for it, 

‘‘chutzpah,’’ that they would keep referring to FBI crime data that, 

in effect, the FBI said they did not submit. 

Senator KERRY. Now, I’m going to turn to Senator Lautenberg in 

a moment here—Mr. Fox, if I could ask you—if you could return 

to your seat—what we’re going to do is follow up with you. We’ve 

got a lot of territory to cover on what the remedies are and how 

we proceed. But, we are going to submit some questions in writing, 

and we’d like you to be able to answer those to establish a baseline. 

Dr. FOX. May I take 30 seconds to clarify something? 

Senator KERRY. Sure, 10 seconds. 

Dr. FOX. Thank you. 

Mr. Klein talked about the robbery and theft. The earlier number 

was robbery, the later number was the theft count, not the same, 

and the 100-fold increase was—he switched from one crime to the 

other. 

As far as this .01, that is the probability of a rape occurring in 

a 1-week period of time on a cruise ship. It is not meant, never has 

meant—and I’m not sure who decided to put it in there—it’s not 

meant to compare to an annual rate on a—on land. 

Senator KERRY. Fair enough. 

Dr. FOX. But whatever—— 

Senator KERRY. We’re going to get that baseline thoroughly vetted with respect to the record, and we’ll do it in writing so that we 

can get it pinned down. And I’ll look forward to getting that done 

here. So, Senator Lautenberg? 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thanks very much. 

The focus seems to narrow down to the process for reporting the 

type of incidents. I didn’t hear a discussion, let’s say, of burglaries 

or theft. How is that, Mr. Klein? Do we know about that on cruise 

ships? 

Dr. KLEIN. OK. Well, according to the FBI report to the hearings 

in September 2007, they reported that there had been 13 thefts of 

items valued over 10,000, and thefts of items valued at less than 

10,000 were 41. So, when I give my rate of 44.7 per 100,000, I’m 

combining both the theft of items over 10,000 and the theft of items 

less than 10,000. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Yes. But—how does that compare with the 

general statistics—on land? 

Dr. KLEIN. That, I don’t believe, has been—I don’t have that 

readily at hand, I’m sorry. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. OK. How are these things dealt with? Do 

we find that there’s the same lackadaisical—or attempt to hide the 

information that comes about, or is it reported in any central place? 

49 

Dr. KLEIN. Well, I think the key difference is, when it happens 

on land, it would be reported to a local police authority. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Right. And then the—— 

Dr. KLEIN. When it’s reported at—— 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Senator Kerry said that. 

Dr. KLEIN.—it happens on a ship to an American citizen—not a 

foreign national, to an American citizen—it’s reported to the FBI. 

The FBI has stated very clearly that it will not investigate or prosecute any robbery valued at less than $10,000. 

Mr. DALE. And could I just add to that—— 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Yes. 

Mr. DALE.—Senator? I do have here, from Dr. Fox, the comparison to land, and it’s 2200 landside, and compared to 41 on the 

cruise ships. We do report thefts, as required by the FBI. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. The thing that I’m concerned—or interested in is—you talk about counseling on ships—are people led to 

believe that they have to exercise any care with valuables, with 

family members? Is that included in any kind of a introductory program to passengers that are boarding a ship for the first time? 

Mr. DALE. Senator, we always encourage our passengers to exercise the same judgment on our ships that they would landside. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. How do you encourage them? 

Mr. DALE. And that’s part of the muster drill that is mandatory 

for all passengers who are taking a cruise. That is also printed—— 

Senator LAUTENBERG. That is for safety—in the event of an accident that requires—— 

Mr. DALE. Evacuation. 

Senator LAUTENBERG.—a lifeboat process. 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Senator LAUTENBERG.But, in those introductions, do they also include comments about what one ought to do? I mean, do they say, 

‘‘Look, here we are, we want you to have a good time, et cetera, 

but it is a busy place, lots of people, and therefore you have to 

watch out for your youngsters, or you have to know where your 

mate or your friends are when they’re not with you, your companion’’? 

Mr. DALE. That type of information is included in the staterooms. 

And it also will run on the TVs in the staterooms, as well. Again, 

you know, ‘‘Please exercise the same judgment that you would 

landside as you enjoy your cruise vacation.’’ So, we try and provide 

that in multiple different ways to our customers. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Yes, Mr. Klein? 

Dr. KLEIN. May I make a comment? I guess we’re talking in the 

abstract. Let me bring this down to the very concrete. 

I was involved in a—as an expert witness in a case, about a year 

ago, of a 8-year-old girl who was on a cruise ship who was led 

down—who—her parents believed that a cruise ship was a safe 

choice of a vacation, and they allowed her to go back to the family 

cabin on her own. She became lost and went up to a janitor and 

asked for directions. He led her down a hallway to a dark spot, 

where there were no surveillance cameras, masturbated in front of 

her, OK? The child was traumatized. She reported this to her parents. The parents reported it onboard. The people onboard didn’t 

believe her. They revictimized her by doubting her testimony and 

50 

calling her a liar. You know, the worker knew where the cameras 

were, he knew that he wouldn’t be seen, and he also likely knew 

that he wouldn’t be caught. 

When the case was being examined, this worker was onboard 

under a different name than his passport. And this worker had, 

with the previous cruise line he worked with, ‘‘Do not rehire’’ on 

his personnel file. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Do we know the percentage of attacks that 

are committed by fellow passengers or crew members? 

Dr. KLEIN. According to data provided by Royal Caribbean and 

discovery in a court case, 67.1 percent of those were crew-on-passenger, roughly 22 percent were passenger-on-passenger, and just 

over 10 percent were crew-on-crew. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. So, is the vetting process adequate to deal 

in advance with a pending problem like this? 

Mr. DALE. Yes, let me share with you, Senator, what the vetting 

process is when we hire our crew. Basically, there are three layers. 

When using licensed manning agencies in the crew member’s home 

country, they are required to get statements from local law enforcement entities regarding any criminal background. Second, the U.S. 

State Department, in issuing a U.S. working visa, also does a background check. And finally, as I mentioned in my oral testimony, a 

complete crew and passenger manifest is electronically submitted 

96 hours prior to that ship departing to the Federal authorities. 

And so, it is run through several different data bases and checked 

and rechecked. So, there are several different layers in which we 

are constantly looking and monitoring who we employ on our ships. 

And I would go back to the fact that an independent survey conducted by TNS found that our cruisers gave us 95-percent satisfaction ratings. So, we have good, quality, caring individuals who 

work on our ships today. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Yes. The search for crew, do you find that, 

in different places, you get less reliable data? 

Mr. DALE. I’m not able to respond to that, Senator. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Yes. Well, I just wonder whether, if the 

vetting process is done by local authorities, is it as efficient—is it 

as reliable as we’d like it to be? And to not be certain about who 

is in that crew, of course, is a high risk, and I assume that the 

company, the cruise company, has a responsibility, in the event of 

an incident, to make sure that they’re responsible for anything that 

happens. 

Mr. DALE. Absolutely we have a responsibility, and we take it 

very seriously. And with this layered vetting process that I just described, we’ve got the appropriate checks and balances to make 

sure that we’re hiring the right people. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Mr. Klein? 

Dr. KLEIN. Yes, in the case I—I can’t speak globally for the industry. What I can say is, in the case I referred to with the young 

girl—in that case, what came out through depositions was that this 

worker—I believe he was from Honduras—was hired through a recruiting agent who had a quota to meet. That recruiting agent is 

the one who certified and arranged for the letters saying that he 

was a safe employee. If these—our understanding was that if the 

recruiting agent didn’t meet their quota, they would lose the conVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
51 

tract. So, there was pressure to certify people to fill the numbers. 

And again, the police report that was given was given under a different name than the name on the passport that he was working 

under on the ship. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thank you very much. 

Senator KERRY. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Carper? 

Senator CARPER. Thank you all. 

Sometimes when I ponder how to resolve or address particular 

problems or issues or concerns, I try to think of how we can harness market forces to change behavior so that, in this case, people 

would be safer on these ships. One of the ways to make sure that 

people are safer would be for the folks who provide the services— 

the cruises, if you will—know that there is a financial reward, an 

economic reward for them for providing very safe vacations, and 

that there’s a financial or an economic penalty if they do not. 

Let me just ask our witnesses to tell me how we are doing—how 

we are using—how we are harnessing market forces to better protect the safety of customers—consumers on these cruises. What is 

being done that actually harnesses those market forces? And what 

more could be done? 

Mr. CARVER. Well, let me respond to that. Clearly—— 

Senator CARPER. If I’m a cruiseliner and I know I’m going to 

make more money because I provide excellent safety for my passengers, that’s a great incentive for you to make sure that we get 

it. 

Mr. CARVER. Well—— 

Senator CARPER. If I know I’m going to be penalized, that’s a 

great incentive for me, as well. 

Mr. CARVER. I was with Terry, about 5 or 6 weeks ago in Miami, 

and I made a statement at that meeting, which I don’t think was 

accepted, but I said, ‘‘You know, you would be smart, from a business standpoint, if you accepted the proposals that international 

cruise victims have made.’’ In other words, independent security on 

the cruise ships—there’s a whole list of things that are shown on 

the documents. It would be good for business. Then people know 

that, you know, they’re going to be safer on a cruise ship. 

Now, why would a cruise line industry propose not to go to certain California ports, if their crime rates are so low, if one security 

person is put on that ship? Now, I just find that a little hard to 

understand how that could be a reaction. To me, the reaction is, 

that would be good for business. People in California would say, 

‘‘Gee, I know there’s independent security on that ship. I feel 

safer.’’ And yet, they have threatened certain California ports—San 

Francisco, San Diego—with going on a ship, that they won’t stop 

at their ports if they do that. And I think that’s a—to me, accepting 

our proposals would be a tremendous plus for their business. I’ve 

said that from the beginning. 

In 2006, when we introduced our ten-point program, I went up 

to Michael Crye, who then ran the trade association, and I said, 

‘‘Michael, if you were smart, you’d work with us.’’ And that’s—— 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. Thank you, sir. 

Ms. Fortier? 

52 

Ms. FORTIER. Well, I think the negative attention to the industry 

in recent articles have really focused the spotlight on them and 

what are they doing to ensure passenger safety. So, we approached 

Royal Caribbean, which is one of the largest cruise companies, and 

suggested to them that they work with us to find a way for us to 

link passengers who are onboard to our hotlines. And initially they 

were very receptive, and we’re continuing to talk to them about 

ways to do that. And I don’t think that would have happened unless people like Ken had brought attention to the problem of sexual-assault and missing-person cases. So, that is an example of 

them responding in a way that’s in their self-interest, I think. And 

we’re hopeful that—we’ll continue to work with them on that proposal, in which we would establish a dedicated hotline number, accessible by those traveling on ships, through which our trained 

staff would be available 24/7 to aid victims of sexual violence and 

so that people could also log on to our online hotline from the ship. 

We would need, in order to implement this, to train personnel to 

respond to the unique needs of cruise victims, because the typical 

victim who contacts us is—in, you know, say, Wilmington, Delaware, and we will find a way for a rape crisis center in Wilmington 

to respond to that person and help them. Someone who’s on a 

cruise ship is going to need information about how to get in touch 

with the FBI, the State Department, and so forth. So, they’ll have 

different needs. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Ms. Fortier. 

I’m going to jump to Dr. Klein and, if we have time, back to Mr. 

Dale, please. 

Dr. KLEIN. OK. I think the issue of market forces is a very important issue, and I think that the amendment to the Coast Guard 

reauthorization bill introduced by Matsui, Shays, Poe, and Maloney 

really gets at that point, in terms of not just the requirement to 

report, but that that reporting be displayed publicly, quarterly, by 

each cruise line. 

Now, I personally would take that a step further. If you look at 

pages 5 and 6 of my written testimony, what you’ll see is a table 

that breaks down, for Royal Caribbean, the incidence of sex-related 

incidents by ship, and you’ll see on there that one ship, at the bottom, has 10.75 incidents per 100,000, the worst ship in the fleet is 

208 per 100,000. As a passenger, I’d want to know, by ship, which 

ships were relatively safer and relatively less safe than others. And 

I believe that’s how we get market forces to work, that when a passenger knows that, ‘‘I can go on a ship that has a 20-fold greater 

chance of being sexually assaulted, I’m not going to choose that 

ship, I’m going to choose another.’’ 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Mr. Dale, not long ago, my family—in fact, over spring break, my 

two sons, whom the Chairman has met—one was out of college for 

spring break, and the other was out of high school—we were talking about where we were going to go for that week. And we’d 

talked about going on a cruise, but it didn’t work out, and we 

ended up looking for a hotel. And our boys said, ‘‘We’d like to go 

to a beach hotel so we could walk right out the front door of the 

hotel and be right on the beach in someplace that was warm.’’ One 

of them goes to a school up in, as the Chairman knows, in Boston. 

53 

And my wife and I got on the Internet, and we looked at the member services, where they provide information about hotels, and one 

of the interesting things we found was on the hotels, you could find 

out favorable comments about the hotel and unfavorable comments 

about the hotel. As it turns out, that was one of the most helpful 

things for us to read about, like about their food and about the fitness facilities and everything, the proximity to the beach. 

I would imagine, if I were looking for cruise ships, and I’m looking at comments by folks, and they say, ‘‘Well, you know, my 

daughter was raped on’’—that would be a pretty big signal to a lot 

of people that I don’t want to be on that ship, or I don’t want someone in my family to be on that ship. Do we ever have that kind 

of disclosure or the opportunity for customers to say what they 

liked about their cruise or what they found a shortcoming? 

Mr. Dale, I don’t know if you want to respond to that, or anybody 

else. 

Mr. DALE. Sure. Sure. I would like to clarify something that—— 

Senator CARPER. Just do so quickly, I’m almost out of time. Do 

that quickly. 

Mr. CARVER. Yes. 

Senator CARPER.Very quickly. 

Mr. DALE. Ken indicated that the cruise industry had threatened 

ports in California by potentially withdrawing our business. In no 

way, shape, or form have we made those types of statements. 

Senator CARPER. OK, thank you. 

Mr. DALE. Yes. And I would like to say that 90 percent of all 

cruise vacations today are sold by travel agents, and consumers go 

to travel agents because this is not a commodity, it’s a very unique 

purchase—the demographics on the ships, the destinations that 

they visit, the amenities on the ship. So, that travel agent, of which 

we’ve got over 16,000, is the connection between the industry and 

the consumer in providing them with guidance on what the ships 

are like and the kind of vacation experience. So, we work with the 

travel agents and they are our connection with the customers. 

Senator CARPER. Anyone else on that one? 

Dr. KLEIN. Could I say something? 

Senator CARPER. Yes, Dr. Klein? 

Dr. KLEIN. Yes. I think the—I’m not sure it’s the board you were 

looking at, but I think a board like Trip Advisor gives you the information about individual properties. While there are discussion 

boards about the cruise industry and about individual ships, none 

of them are as comprehensive and as insightful as the kind of data 

that Trip Advisor makes available with regard to hotels and resorts. 

Senator CARPER. All right. All right. I have a number of other 

questions, Mr. Chairman. You’ve been very generous with the time. 

And my other questions, I’ll just file for the record, if I could but 

a lot of them relate to expectations, the expectations that people 

have as they consider a cruise, particularly expectations that they 

should have, paying that kind of money, for their personal safety. 

And I would appreciate—most of the questions are directed to you, 

Mr. Dale, and I would appreciate your responding to those, as appropriate. And in one instance, they’re to the whole panel. 

Thank you, again, very much for being with us today. 

54 

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much, Senator Carper. I appreciate it. 

Mr. Dale, let me just ask you, Why not just implement Mr. 

Carver’s and Ms. Fortier’s and CLIA’s and other people’s suggestions? What’s the resistance to it? 

Mr. DALE. Well, there’s no resistance. We’ve—— 

Senator KERRY. Why not just—— 

Mr. DALE. We’ve had an—— 

Senator KERRY. Why not just accept them? 

Mr. DALE.—opportunity—— 

Senator KERRY. But, I mean, here we are, several years later. 

There must be some resistance. 

Mr. DALE. Yes, the—— 

Senator KERRY. I mean, do you have peepholes in the doors? Do 

you have a trained person onboard who is fully forensically qualified? 

Mr. DALE. And the answer is yes. And—— 

Senator KERRY. Fully forensically qualified on every ship? 

Mr. DALE. We have complete training that we do with the FBI 

and the Coast Guard. As I referenced, the training DVD that has 

been put in place by the FBI, they actively participate in the training of our—— 

Senator KERRY. When was that—— 

Mr. DALE.—security officers—— 

Senator KERRY.—put into place? 

Mr. DALE. Well, that training has been in place for over a decade—— 

Senator KERRY. Well, then what happened to—— 

Mr. DALE.—and we continue enhance—— 

Senator KERRY.—what happened in the situation Ms. Fortier described, when everybody comes in and sits down on the bed, barely 

knows what to ask? I mean, that doesn’t describe to me anybody 

following any correct procedure. 

Was there a forensic officer, Ms. Fortier? 

Ms. FORTIER. I believe medical personnel were used to—were 

consulted. Ms. Dishman is here and could respond directly to that. 

But, my understanding is that she was asked to pay for her own 

rape kit on the ship, which wouldn’t happen at any U.S. hospital 

if you were a rape victim and you had agreed to report and cooperate with law enforcement. 

Senator KERRY. Do you know what the sequence was, in terms 

of timeliness and—— 

Ms. FORTIER. My understanding is that after the incident, she 

contacted her friend, and then the two of them reached out to ship 

personnel, and she was interviewed first, before she received medical care. That’s my understanding. 

Senator KERRY. Did she identify the person who raped her to 

them? 

Ms. FORTIER. Yes. 

Senator KERRY. What happened to that person? 

Ms. FORTIER. She indicated that time passed and he—I believe 

he continued to work on the ship. 

Senator KERRY. Was that person arrested? Was he put in solitary 

confinement? 

55 

Ms. FORTIER. No. He wasn’t. 

Senator KERRY. Did anything occur? 

Ms. FORTIER. Um—— 

Senator KERRY. I mean, normally, in a local jurisdiction, if a 

woman was raped, and she said, ‘‘This is the guy who did it,’’ the 

guy gets arrested. 

Ms. FORTIER. Correct. 

Senator KERRY. So, what are we talking about here, Mr. Dale? 

Mr. DALE. Yes, let me just share with you what I can. Ten FBI 

agents boarded the ship, conducted a thorough interview process. 

They polygraphed the perpetrator. And, at the end of the day, they 

presented the information from those ten FBI investigators. Over 

20 interviews were conducted. And the United States Attorneys Office determined that it was consensual and did not decide to proceed with the case. 

Ms. FORTIER. May I just respond? Often in these incidents, some 

time elapses between when the victim reports and the FBI boards 

the ship, because the FBI can’t immediately come on the ship and 

act like an onboard police force. So, in that time, the industry may 

have their own lawyer come onboard and talk to the person who’s 

accused who works for them, before any FBI personnel can conduct 

any sort of interview. So, this—the FBI isn’t immediately responding, you know, within an hour after the rape. They’re—days could 

pass before it actually—— 

Dr. KLEIN. Also, I don’t think that the FBI said ‘‘consensual.’’ 

What they said was that it was a ‘‘he-said/she-said’’ situation. 

Mr. CARVER. May I make a—— 

Senator KERRY. Yes, Mr. Carver—— 

Mr. CARVER.—comment? 

Senator KERRY.—I was about to ask you, How do you respond to 

what Mr. Dale is saying with respect to the procedures put in 

place? 

Mr. CARVER. OK. Let’s look at current procedures if a woman is 

raped on a ship. In my documents, we say—the cruise lines say, 

‘‘We do not investigate crimes. We’re not equipped to do so.’’ 

They’ve put that in writing. ‘‘We call the FBI.’’ Well, there’s a television show that was done, broadcast last December—or last November, by Canadian network W5. It’s their equivalent of ‘‘60 Minutes.’’ It’s on our website. And Mr. Gary Bald, who is former FBI, 

was interviewed in that particular show. 

So, a woman comes to him—and they say, ‘‘What happens if a 

woman comes to you and is—says she’s been raped?’’ Well, to me, 

the proper answer would be, ‘‘We seal the room, we give the woman 

comfort, and we call the FBI.’’ That’s what our statement is. But, 

in fact, I’m going to read to you from the testimony, which you can 

see on live television. He says, ‘‘The first thing we do is determine, 

Was it a valid claim? Some women claim they were sexually assaulted and they were not. Others claim they were sexually assaulted and there’s a confusion of whether or not it was consented 

or a different consent. And then, there’s a third category, potentially, when someone was sexually assaulted, where there’s dispute 

as to whether or not they even had sexual relations.’’ In other 

words, he is asking these questions of a woman that came in that 

was raped. He shouldn’t be asking those questions. He should seal 

56 

the room, give comfort to the individual, call the FBI in. Because 

the most important interrogation is the first one. 

Senator KERRY. Who was asking those questions? 

Mr. CARVER. Gary Bald, chief of security for Royal Caribbean. 

And this was—this is on television. It’s on our website. So, in effect, he’s working for risk management. He’s going in there, trying 

to figure out, ‘‘Well, is this really a claim?’’ instead of turning it 

over to the FBI; so that by the time the FBI gets there, several 

days later, this woman has been worked over by—— 

Senator KERRY. What would his qualifications be? What 

would—— 

Mr. DALE. Actually, that’s a very good question. Mr. Bald is the 

former number-three-ranking FBI official, and is, today, head of 

corporate security, global security for Royal Caribbean. 

Senator KERRY. As the head of corporate security with respect to 

ships, what sort of powers does he have at sea under—in that authority, in that position? 

Mr. DALE. Under his staff, he has the corporate security officer 

on that ship, as well as the security staff supporting the chief security officer on that ship. 

Senator KERRY. But, he’s—— 

Mr. DALE. And he’s—— 

Senator KERRY.—he’s a corporate security officer, correct? 

Mr. DALE. Mr. Bald, yes. 

Senator KERRY. Right. 

Mr. DALE. But, he’s—— 

Senator KERRY. I’m just trying to understand the legalities here, 

and how one might set up a structure where the law, as it will be 

applied in a court, is, sort of, fully sequential, appropriately. 

Mr. DALE. Right. 

Senator KERRY. I’m not doubting his experience or doubting his 

qualifications, but if you don’t have a codification, if you will, of a 

process, then he winds up—inadvertently, perhaps—but, he winds 

up being, really, the corporate representative, not the representative, neutrally, of the law as it would be applied, were that a police 

officer appropriately investigating in a local jurisdiction. So, I’m 

trying to understand exactly what his jurisdiction is. 

Mr. DALE. Right. The first responsibility—— 

Senator KERRY. Can he arrest? 

Mr. DALE.—is to make sure that we immediately—— 

Senator KERRY. Does he have—— 

Mr. DALE.—contact—— 

Senator KERRY.—the power of arrest? 

Mr. DALE. I am not a maritime attorney and can’t answer that. 

We contact, immediately, the FBI and the appropriate law enforcement agencies, and take their direction. And if they direct us to 

take an—a perpetrator, or potential, and have that person, you 

know—— 

Senator KERRY. But, you see the—— 

Mr. DALE.—quarantined—— 

Senator KERRY.—you see the confusion here, don’t you, Mr. Dale? 

I mean, it seems to me that we’re sort of in a limbo, in a kind of 

murky area here. And the question that I would ask, which I think 

a lot of people are asking—Mr. Carver and others—and I think it’s 

57 

sort of leaping out at me—Why not work with us and try to codify 

something that works for you, works for people, so there’s a real 

process and procedure in place? Because right now there isn’t. 

There is really an absence of a clarity to the jurisdictional question. 

Mr. DALE. Well, we do have a process in place, and we’ve worked 

with the FBI in creating, ‘‘What do initial responders do?’’ making 

sure that have a female assistant immediately brought to that individual who is in need, so that her needs are emotionally and physically being taken care of. So, there is a process and a structure—— 

Senator KERRY. That person was—— 

Mr. DALE.—at the—— 

Senator KERRY.—trained where and how? 

Mr. DALE. Many of our cruise-line members have developed a 

partnership with the Family Assistance Foundation, Dr. Carolyn 

Coarsey—— 

Senator KERRY. Are they—— 

Mr. DALE.—is the head of that. 

Senator KERRY.—in the guest care services department? 

Mr. DALE. Yes, they are. And—— 

Senator KERRY. But, guest-care services is quite different from 

law enforcement process, you know, a victim witness assistance. I 

started—— 

Mr. DALE. Right. 

Senator KERRY.—one of the first victim witness programs in the 

country when I was managing one of our ten largest DA’s offices, 

and we—we were breaking new ground on how you do this. And 

it’s enormously complicated, and it’s not a guest-care service, it’s a 

law enforcement role. 

Mr. DALE. Well—— 

Senator KERRY. I mean, the question is whether or not we would 

be better off having a very specific set of requirements about jurisdiction and enforcement which would act as a deterrent. It seems 

to me it would only help the cruise industry for people to know that 

this is not an invitation place to come and commit a crime because 

there’s an absence of protocol and procedure, this is a place where 

there’s a very clear and strict standard of expectations of what happens if a crime is committed. 

Mr. DALE. Mr. Chairman, I’d be happy to have our maritime 

counsel and others follow up on this dialogue that you’d like to 

have. 

Senator KERRY. Well, I think it would be worthwhile. I don’t 

think this should be adversarial. 

Mr. DALE. Right. 

Senator KERRY. I think this ought to be positive and helpful. I 

mean, I think the cruise industry is a great industry, and I think 

that, you know, lots and lots of people go out and have an absolutely wonderful time. And it would be odd if there wasn’t some 

crime occasionally. I mean, this is the nature of the world. People 

go on vacations in plenty of places, and terrible things happen. 

I think that the key here is, we’re not trying to single you out 

as somehow, an aberration, in terms of what happens, it’s just that 

there is an oddity with respect to the flagging and legal standards 

with respect to the high seas. There always has been. And I think 

58 

we’re trying to bring it in to some kind of a place where people will 

not have the kinds of experiences that Mr. Carver had. 

I assume you’d have to admit that it’s a pretty jarring and tough 

kind of process to go through. 

Mr. DALE. Absolutely. And I’ve said to Ken, many times, and our 

family members who work with us on our working group, that, you 

know, we deeply regret when an incident takes place on our ship. 

And have we been perfect as an industry? We have not. But, we 

are taking everything we can to make sure that we manage this 

situation with compassionate care. And—— 

Senator KERRY. But, wouldn’t it make sense, do you think, Mr. 

Dale, I mean, what is the law enforcement structure that currently 

exists now on a cruise ship? 

Mr. DALE. Well, again, I’d go back that there is a chief security 

officer for each ship, and then, they have appropriate security staff 

that work with them, and at—and that varies, because—— 

Senator KERRY. Would it be helpful if you had a specific legal authority, and you had people who met a specific standard? Since 

you’re hiring them anyway, and you’re paying a certain amount of 

money to have what you consider to be a law enforcement staff onboard, wouldn’t it be better off if there was a specific authority 

under which they operate and a specific set of procedures worked 

on, let’s say, between the FBI and maritime folks, so that we are 

in keeping with maritime law, we don’t—— 

Mr. DALE. Right. 

Senator KERRY.—but, on the other hand, there are absolute expectations of how the protocol is going to be carried out in the 

event of some kind of crime? 

Mr. DALE. And we do have those guidelines in place. And, again, 

this relationship—— 

Senator KERRY. Right, but they’re—— 

Mr. DALE.—that we have—— 

Senator KERRY.—guidelines, they’re not—— 

Mr. DALE. Well—— 

Senator KERRY.—a sort of standardized guideline. 

Mr. DALE. If I might point out, Mr. Senator, for over a decade 

we have had a security committee, and that committee meets every 

60 days, and, as part of that meeting, we have the FBI, the Coast 

Guard, Homeland Security, the Navy, CBP, all the Federal agencies that we work closely with, because we all share the same goal. 

Senator KERRY. Absolutely. 

Mr. DALE. We want to provide the safest vacation—— 

Senator KERRY. I don’t question that, which is why I think this 

shouldn’t be as complicated as it is appearing to be. It seems to me 

it ought to be pretty easy to get everybody around the table and 

say, ‘‘Look, we all serve the public.’’ 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Senator KERRY. ‘‘How do we give the public an assurance, here, 

that this is working for them?’’ That’s all it is. It seems to me, rather than be hauled up here to sit in front of a Committee and asked 

why this has happened X number of times, we’d all be better off 

if we did that. 

Mr. DALE. We’re very willing to have that discussion. Absolutely. 

Senator KERRY. Yes, Mr. Carver? We’ve got to wrap this—— 

59 

Mr. CARVER. Yes. 

Senator KERRY.—up in a moment, because—— 

Mr. CARVER. Well, I just want to go to the Mindy Jordan case, 

which happened a month ago. And Emily Ball is here, representing 

the family. Here, a woman went missing off a cruise ship at 8 

o’clock at night under mysterious circumstances. She was in an 

abusive relationship with her friend. It wasn’t for 15 hours, until 

11 o’clock the next morning, before the boyfriend finally called the 

mother. Now, the mother was listed as the number-one contact, 

and the cruise line chose not to contact the mother for 15 hours. 

Only the boyfriend. And, as I understand it—I’ve talked to the 

mother several times—she’s gotten three different stories. Then the 

FBI enters the scene—— 

Senator KERRY. Isn’t there photograph evidence with respect to 

what happened in that case? 

Mr. CARVER. Well, the answer is, there was videotape that came 

out. 

Senator KERRY. That she was climbing from one balcony to another. 

Mr. CARVER. The cruise line’s—well, we don’t—know what happened. And—but, the cruise line quickly got that out. There’s a 

video her going overboard. But, the FBI has come in and clearly 

said the case is not closed, that that is an open case. But, what 

they’d like to do is get something out that there was a video. But, 

the FBI is under—investigating the case very carefully. 

But, the issue I’m getting at was, the FBI didn’t show up until 

3 days later. Any evidence on that porch where she was, the balcony, would have been washed away. They were in a storm. There 

was no security on that board to step in and immediately take action. And—— 

Senator KERRY. Well, I think that underscores the point that I’m 

making. 

Mr. CARVER. No, that’s exactly right. 

Senator KERRY. But, I also sense that Mr. Dale is prepared—and 

I know some of the people in the industry; I think they’re interested in making the industry successful and in—— 

Mr. CARVER. You know something? I agree with that 100 percent, 

except we have met with them time after time after time to discuss 

these proposals, and we’ve gotten zero response out of them. 

Senator KERRY. Let me see what we can do as we consider some 

kind of sensible legislation, and maybe there’s a—— 

Mr. CARVER. Yes. 

Senator KERRY.—you know, competently—— 

Mr. CARVER. I accept—I’ll meet forever. 

Senator KERRY. Yes. 

Mr. CARVER. But, our meetings, so far, have not produced results. 

Senator KERRY. Well, Mr. Dale, what do you think? Do you think 

we can get some results? 

Mr. DALE. Well, absolutely. And we have made results. 

And, of course, I’m disappointed when I hear Ken characterize 

the work that we’ve done—I take it very personally. I chair those 

meetings. Every one of our family members who serve has my personal cell phone number. I received a call on Thanksgiving night 

60 

from one of our family members who needed assistance, and I got 

it for them immediately. 

I am committed to this. Our industry is committed to this. And 

I would just like to go on record as saying I thank you for holding 

this hearing today and working with us. 

Senator KERRY. Well, I think there’s a much better way to actually serve everybody here, frankly. I don’t think this is as complicated as somehow it’s being made out to be. 

I’m not sure what your security budget is right now, but I imagine it’s pretty hefty. And I can’t imagine that you don’t have a lot 

of pretty-trained personnel. But, I think they’re operating within a 

framework that has a lack of clarity, to be honest with you, I think 

if we were to all agree on how you establish that, I think you guys 

would come out of this much better. I am absolutely certain that 

citizens would be the—you know, public interest would be far more 

effectively served. 

So, why don’t we agree to try to work on that and I think everybody would be better served. And I’ll try to make sure we convene 

something and try to move down that road so we don’t let a lot of— 

I was going to say moss grow under our feet, but I probably ought 

to say seaweed. 

Mr. DALE. Yes. 

Senator KERRY. But, we’ll get at this and see what we can do. 

I’m going to leave the record open in case colleagues on the Committee have some additional questions they want to submit in writing, and we will submit a few on the statistical piece. 

But, I don’t think this is, frankly, an issue of the statistics, to 

be honest with you. I think the statistics are whatever the variance 

is in them, I think everybody accepts we want to try to minimize— 

the incidents and maximize the response capacity. So, if we all 

meet in good faith in an effort to do that, I would hope we ought 

to be able to come up with something sensible. 

Mr. DALE. Thank you. 

Senator KERRY. So, let’s try to do that. 

And we’ll stand adjourned. I thank you all for coming today. 

Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(61) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DANIEL D. ROBERTS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Good morning Chairman Lautenberg, Ranking Member Smith and Members of 

the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to provide an update on the FBI’s 

work with the U.S. Coast Guard, the cruise line industry and the victims of cruise 

line crime regarding crime aboard cruise ships. 

Reporting Agreement 

In March 2007, the FBI, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Cruise Lines International 

Association (CLIA) reached an agreement on voluntary, standardized protocols for 

CLIA member lines to report allegations of serious violations of U.S. law committed 

aboard cruise ships. These reporting procedures are in addition to, but not in lieu 

of, mandatory, codified reporting requirements (e.g., the requirements of 46 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 4, and the requirements of 33 CFR Part 120). Further, this reporting does not replace or override any agency responsibilities and coordination mandated by the Maritime Operational Threat Response Plan. 

Incident Statistics 

Pursuant to the agreement, on April 1, 2007, the FBI began collecting and tracking the incident reports submitted by CLIA member lines. I would like to take a 

few minutes to report on the results of this effort. Through May 31, 2008, the FBI 

received 522 reports from CLIA members. Many of these matters did not require 

criminal investigation and as such, should be viewed as ‘‘incident reports’’ not 

‘‘crime reports.’’ For example, there were reports received of civil matters and incidents in which individuals did not re-board the ship for various reasons, which were 

not criminal in nature. 

Incidents on board ships when investigated by the FBI are documented through 

investigative files under the ‘‘Crimes on the High Seas’’ classification. Of the 522 

incident reports, the FBI opened 53 investigative files. This number is consistent 

with the number of ‘‘Crimes on the High Seas’’ cases opened annually for the past 

5 years. 

The agreement with CLIA and the U.S. Coast Guard lists eight categories of incidents which are to be telephonically reported by CLIA members to the nearest FBI 

field office or Legal Attache ́ office. These matters—homicide, suspicious death, missing U.S. national, kidnapping, assault with serious bodily injury, sexual assault, firing or tampering with vessels, and theft greater than $10,000—involve potentially 

serious violations of U.S. law and are to be called in to the FBI as soon as possible 

following the incident. After telephonic contact, CLIA members are instructed to follow-up with a standardized written report. All other, less serious matters are reported under a general ‘‘other’’ category and are brought to the FBI’s attention by 

submission of a written report. 

From April 1, 2007, through May 31, 2008, there have been no reports of homicide 

aboard CLIA member ships. There was one report of suspicious death and nine reports of missing U.S. nationals. Four of the missing U.S. nationals reports concerned 

individuals who voluntarily disembarked without notifying the ship and were located at a later date. Five missing U.S. nationals reports involved passengers whose 

histories of depression and behavior while on board the ship strongly indicate the 

passenger may have committed suicide. 

There have been 27 reports of assaults with serious bodily injury. The FBI 

619opened 16 investigative cases on physical assault with serious bodily injury matters, 11 of which are currently ongoing. 

The FBI investigates sexual assaults as defined in Title 18 of the United States 

Code (U.S.C.), Sections 2241 through 2243 and 2244(a) and (c). Since April 1, 2007, 

CLIA has reported 90 instances of sexual assault. Of these 90 incidents, 49 represented allegations of sexual activity generally categorized as rape, one of which 

occurred on shore and, thus, outside the jurisdiction of the FBI. Based on the 90 

62 

reports, the FBI opened 34 investigative cases. Fourteen of these cases were closed 

due to either the victim not wanting to pursue charges, lack of evidence to support 

the allegations or declinations from the United States Attorney’s Office. Twenty investigations are currently ongoing. During this period, there were 25 reported incidents of theft of more than $10,000. 

Of these 25 incidents, 15 involved jewelry, five involved cash, two involved miscellaneous equipment, two involved theft from onboard shops and one involved food products. 

There was one report of firing or tampering with vessels. 

369 incident reports involved less serious matters which are reported under the 

category entitled ‘‘Other.’’ This category includes simple assault, low-dollar loss 

theft, fraud, suspicious activity, bomb threats, sexual contact, or activity that was 

not criminal in nature. There were 99 reports of sexual contact, as defined in Title 

18 U.S.C., Section 2244(b), essentially uninvited touching of a sexual nature. There 

were 93 reports of simple assault to include punching, slapping or pushing actions. 

There were 111 reports involving theft of less than $10,000. 

FBI analysis of cruise ship crime reporting over the past year reflects the fact that 

many reports we have received during the first year of reporting fall outside of FBI 

jurisdiction, do not constitute crimes under U.S. law, or are less serious than characterized by the cruise lines. Therefore, it is my belief that CLIA member cruise 

lines are generally making a good faith effort to report all crimes, or allegations of 

crime, set out under the agreement. 

Coordination with CLL4 and the International Cruise Victims’ Association 

I would like to briefly update the Subcommittee on other efforts which the FBI 

has undertaken in support of its role in investigating crimes aboard cruise ships. 

Kendall Carver, President of the International Cruise Victims Association, came to 

FBI Headquarters in July 2007, accompanied by two members of his group. My 

predecessor, former Deputy Assistant Director Salvatore Hernandez, met personally 

with Mr. Carver and his associates to hear their concerns and to explain the work 

being done by the Coast Guard, CLIA, and the FBI regarding cruise ship crime reporting. Over the past year, my associates at the FBI have met or spoken with CLIA 

and the Coast Guard regularly to check progress on our reporting protocols and to 

refine those protocols where necessary. FBI representatives regularly attend the 

Joint Agency/Industry Working Group on Cruise Ship Security and, in April 2008, 

the FBI provided a briefing on investigative protocol to the CLIA Survivor Working 

Group Meeting in Miami, Florida, which includes representatives of the International Cruise Victims Association. 

Training 

Finally, I would like to address proactive steps being taken by the FBI and CLIA. 

When former Deputy Assistant Director Hernandez last testified on this issue before 

a House Subcommittee, he described the training provided by the FBI’s Regional 

Evidence Response Teams (ERT) to cruise line staff captains and security managers 

over the last 3 years. The FBI’s Violent Crime Section, in conjunction with the ERT 

Unit in Quantico, Virginia, completed a universal PowerPoint presentation entitled 

‘‘Cruise Line Crime Scene Preservation,’’ which was disseminated to the cruise line 

industry in January 2008. 

In closing, the FBI is committed to continuing its work with the cruise line industry, the U.S. Coast Guard, and victims’ groups to ensure full reporting of crimes 

aboard cruise ships and to facilitate more effective first response to such crimes. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROLYN V. COARSEY, PH.D., CO-FOUNDER, 

FAMILY ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION, ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Senator Kerry and Distinguished Members of the Committee, my name is Carolyn 

Coarsey and I am co-founder of the Family Assistance Foundation. My doctoral degree is interdisciplinary, combining psychology and education, with a specialty in 

training employees on how to manage trauma in the workplace. 

I have come before you today to tell you about my work with the cruise industry. 

In 1985, my fiance ́, a former airline executive died on board Delta Air Lines 

Flight 191, a crash in which 137 people perished. As an employee working in the 

aviation industry at the time, I knew that there were people inside of the company 

who wanted to help, but they simply did not know how. 

At that time, I decided to enter graduate school in order to study the problem of 

how a company could prepare employees to respond to the public at the time of a 

disaster. I now understood the problem not only from the employee’s perspective, 

but from the family’s perspective as well. The Civil Aeromedical Research Division 

63 

of the FAA (CAMI) sponsored my studies at the University of New Mexico. My doctoral dissertation, published in 1992, showed a clear difference in passengers responses to trauma when they were met by employees who handled them with concern, empathy, and the offer of support. Survivors who felt that the company had 

done everything possible to help them following a traumatic event had significantly 

fewer symptoms of five psychological disorders that are most often associated with 

trauma. That information formed the basis of the work that I do today. 

In 2000, a former airline executive and I co-founded the Family Assistance Foundation for the purpose of helping organizations provide a higher level of response 

to survivors during tragedies. Our mission is to support and improve business and 

industry responses to emergencies and disasters. The Foundation takes a unique, 

research-based approach to helping organizations successfully meet survivor’s (customers, affected families, employees, any member of the public impacted) needs by 

coordinating and mobilizing resources during the acute phase of a crisis and beyond. 

The Foundation’s annual symposium provides member organizations, as well as survivors, the opportunity to share lessons learned and information about how to continually improve response efforts and business practices. Foundation education and 

training programs support members by monitoring the long-term outcomes of those 

impacted by tragedy. Promoting awareness and building skills and knowledge for 

those who are charged with responding are crucial elements of the Foundation’s 

fully integrated training and support programs for business and industry. 

The Foundation provides education, training, and organized mutual aid at the 

time of a tragedy. The cornerstone of the Foundation is to promote open dialogue 

between survivors and employee helpers. We encourage family and passenger survivors to tell their stories in an educational format so that they can train employees 

on what is needed by survivors during these vulnerable times. Since its inception 

the FAF has trained thousands of employees from various industries including airlines, business aviation, rail, industrial and the cruise lines. We now employ seven 

full time folks at our headquarters in Atlanta and have other facilitators in the UK 

and hundreds of other care volunteers around the world. 

In 2005, I began interviewing survivors of cruise line tragedies. Shortly thereafter, 

I became involved in developing training materials for the cruise industry. I also 

began hosting training programs based on interviews that I was conducting with 

survivors. 

These interviews included family members of persons who had gone missing overboard, family members of deceased passengers, and guests who had become involved 

in a tragedy while on a cruise ship. 

I have seen a very aggressive response by the cruise line industry to the problem 

of empowering employees to assist survivors in a time of crisis. The cruise lines 

have offered many different training programs including the use of videotapes and 

written testimony. I have personally provided awareness education to more than 

5,000 employees in the cruise line industry. I have trained cruise line executives, 

Care Teams, telephone responders, employees who will notify the next-of-kin for 

guests who experience tragedy while on a ship, security personnel, safety officers, 

deck officers and other on-board staff. The goal is to provide a substantial level of 

awareness to every employee who might interface with a survivor during a crisis. 

In addition to the cruise industry’s commitment to crew training, which includes 

on-board and shore side guest support, they have also entered into an agreement 

with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Coast Guard that clarifies reporting procedures for all serious violations of U.S. law that occur aboard 

cruise ships. Heightened security measures are standard for the maritime industry 

today, and cruise line passengers go through screening procedures similar to those 

found at U.S. airports, which include the use of metal detectors, baggage scanning 

devices, and biometric verification machines. 

Currently, I am developing a training program for all shipboard employees to be 

presented on ships that includes a twenty-minute video of survivors speaking directly to every employee who may encounter them during, and following, a crisis. 

The program also features a 90-minute discussion guide that can be presented by 

shipboard trainers and supervisors. In addition, I have already developed a 4-hour 

module for leaders on ships (captains, physicians, nurses, hotel directors, and others 

who are in charge of crew and passengers), designed to help them understand mistakes that have been made in the past and how to prevent similar problems in the 

future. The video-based program features survivors whose loved ones have gone 

missing as well as many other types of traumatic situations, where the trainees 

hear directly from those involved. I personally presented the pilot of this program 

on 14 ships in summer of 2007 and can speak to the effectiveness of this training. 

In addition to the training, in May 2007 at the Foundation’s annual Symposium, 

we featured two panels on the subject of handling victims of trauma on cruise ships. 

64 

The first panel involved family members and guests who had survived cruise line 

tragedies prior to this robust training being offered by the industry. The second 

panel involved survivors of tragedies following the new programs. We saw a significant difference. Survivors from the second panel who were empowered by trained 

employees and offered every form of assistance possible were still healing from the 

loss of loved-ones, but they did not have to cope with anger and hostility. The second 

group expressed gratitude, as they felt validated and supported by the representatives of the cruise line. They knew that the people who had the most power to help 

them while they were most dependent and vulnerable had done everything possible 

to assist them during the tragedy. 

At this year’s Foundation Symposium, we hosted five more cruise line survivors 

and families. The survivors praised the cruise lines for their heroic efforts and gladly participated in the panel, educating others on the importance of this work. We 

had two women whose loved ones had died while on a ship, a mother whose daughter would have died had not the ship’s crew responded as they did, and the family 

of a baby that was born on a ship weighing less than two pounds. We also had a 

presentation by a man who, along with a party of 12, was accosted at gunpoint 

while on an excursion. He praised the responders and, as an example of how strongly he felt about the way him and his friends were treated following the trauma, has 

already traveled on another cruise vacation. 

I know that the industry is listening and learning from survivors. I personally facilitated a meeting in August 2007, where industry officials met and listened to survivors. Most of what was heard was from survivors who were very upset as their 

experiences occurred before the industry began its educational efforts. Despite the 

unpleasantness of this experience, the cruise line representatives listened and did 

not attempt to defend their actions. They have learned that these expressions are 

part of the healing process, and that providing survivors with the opportunity to 

speak their mind will play a major role in their healing. 

True change begins when companies empower their employees to empower survivors during the tragedy, when they are most helpless. This can only be done 

through the education and training of employees. In this evolution of compassion 

consciousness, which we are experiencing today, I have never seen an industry take 

a more proactive approach to changing how its workforce responds to trauma in the 

workplace. 

I regret that I could not be with you today, but I appreciate your allowing me 

to provide you with this information. 

At the Foundation, our interviews continue to show that when employees are empowered to help survivors, they have a tremendous opportunity to influence how 

survivors heal. These interviews form the basis of all training programs offered by 

the Foundation, as we believe the true experts on the subject of how best to assist 

survivors are the survivors themselves. 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Washington, DC, June 19, 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

I am writing in response to your letter dated June 16, 2008, seeking information 

from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in support of the Subcommittee’s upcoming hearing on cruise ship safety. 

I have attached a compilation of the most recent statistics on cruise ship criminal 

security incidents reported to the FBI since April 1, 2007. In accordance with Federal regulations contained in Part 120 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations, passenger vessels covered by regulation must report certain incidents to the 

FBI. These include each breach of security, unlawful act, or threats 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. I hope you find the information useful. 

Consistent with conversations with Subcommittee staff, I regret that we are unable to provide a witness for the hearing and have offered a briefing at a later time 

should the Subcommittee need more information. Thank you for your interest in 

65 

FBI operations and procedures. Please feel free to contact me if I can provide further assistance. 

RICHARD C. POWERS

Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs 

Enclosure 

The following statistics are based on incidents reported to the FBI. These numbers represent incidents that occurred between April 1, 2007 and April 30, 2008. 

Incident Type Number 

of Reports Percent 

Death—homicide 0 0% 

Death—suspicious 1 0% 

Missing U.S. National 8 2% 

Kidnapping 0 0% 

Assault with Serious Bodily Injury 26 5% 

Sexual Assault 83 17% 

Firing or Tampering with Vessels 1 0% 

Theft >$10,000 24 5% 

Other 346 71% 

Total 489 100% 

The following table provides an additional breakdown of the ‘‘Other’’ category: 

Incident Type Number 

of Reports Percent 

Other—Theft < $10,000 104 30% 

Other—Simple Contact 91 26% 

Other—Sexual Assault 86 25% 

Other—Death* 14 4% 

Other—No Re-board** 7 2% 

Other—Miscellaneous 44 13% 

Total 346 100% 

*Of the fourteen ‘‘Other—Death’’ incidents, eight are natural causes, four are suicides, and two are accidental. **Of the five ‘‘Other—No Re-board’’ incidents, four involve crew member subjects and three involve passenger subjects. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG TO

DANIEL D. ROBERTS

Question 1. In your testimony you state that of the 522 incident reports between 

April 1, 2007 and May 31, 2008, the FBI opened 53 investigative files and that this 

number is consistent with the number of ‘‘Crimes on the High Seas’’ cases opened 

annually for the past 5 years. Please provide the Committee with specific statistics 

of the number of cases reported to the FBI over the past 5 years by calendar year, 

by type, and the number of criminal violations that resulted in investigative files. 

Please also provide, by calendar year, the result of the investigative files that were 

opened and their current status such as: closed due to insufficient evidence, closed 

due to unwillingness of the victim to pursue charges, pending litigation, closed with 

result in criminal prosecution etc. 

Answer. The FBI cannot provide statistics concerning all alleged incidents of 

‘‘crimes on the high seas’’ reported over the past 5 years, as these statistics have 

not been tracked over this period of time. The FBI has tracked the submissions by 

the cruise lines using the form reporting ‘‘Cruise Line Report of Serious Violations 

of U.S. Law’’ since April 2007, and those figures were provided to the Subcommittee 

in June 2008 as noted in the question. 

The FBI’s records management system is generally able to produce statistics concerning the number of cases opened in a given Fiscal Year (FY), as well as the current status of these investigation as ‘‘pending’’ or ‘‘closed.’’ With respect to closed 

cases, the FBI tracks whether the case was closed for administrative reasons, due 

to a prosecutorial declination by the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO), or due 

to final adjudication of all legal proceedings in the matter. In both the ‘‘administrative’’ and ‘‘declination’’ categories, a case may be closed for a number of reasons, including insufficient evidence or the unwillingness of the victim to pursue charges. 

66 

The specific circumstances of ‘‘administrative’’ or ‘‘declination’’ case closures are not 

tracked. 

Following are the available statistics by FY. 

• In FY 2004, the FBI opened 50 investigations of crimes on the high seas. Of 

these cases, 1 is still pending, 34 were closed administratively, 12 were declined 

by the USAO, and 3 were closed following final adjudication. 

• In FY 2005, the FBI opened 41 investigations of crimes on the high seas. Of 

these cases, 3 are still pending, 22 were closed administratively, 12 were declined by the USAO, and 4 were closed following final adjudication. 

• In FY 2006, the FBI opened 53 investigations of crimes on the high seas. Of 

these cases, 10 are still pending, 23 were closed administratively, 11 were declined by the USAO, and 9 were closed following final adjudication. 

• In FY 2007, the FBI opened 55 investigations of crimes on the high seas. Of 

these cases, 14 are still pending, 20 were closed administratively, 18 were declined by the USAO, and 3 were closed following final adjudication. 

• In FY 2008, the FBI opened 49 investigations of crimes on the high seas. Of 

these cases, 30 are still pending, 8 were closed administratively, 6 were declined 

by the USAO, and 5 were closed following final adjudication. 

• Through the end of October 2008, the FBI had opened 1 investigation of a crime 

on the high seas in FY 2009. 

Question 2. In your statement you indicate: ‘‘Since April 1, 2007, CLIA has reported 90 instances of sexual assault. Of these 90 incidents, 49 represented allegations of sexual activity generally categorized as rape, one of which occurred on shore 

and, thus, outside the jurisdiction of the FBI. Based on the 90 reports, the FBI 

opened 34 investigative cases. Fourteen of these cases were closed due to either the 

victim not wanting to pursue charges, lack of evidence to support the allegations 

or declinations from the United States Attorney’s Office. Twenty investigations are 

currently ongoing.’’ Of the 14 cases closed, how many of those were due to lack of 

evidence to support the allegations? 

Answer. Since April 1, 2007, the FBI has opened 34 investigations based on sexual assault reports by the Cruise Lines International Association. Although the FBI 

initially reported that 14 of those cases had been closed, in fact only 12 of the 34 

cases have been closed. Of these 12 closed cases, 9 were closed upon declination by 

the USAO because the evidence was insufficient. Three of the 12 cases were closed 

before submission to the USAO. Two of these cases were closed because the evidence 

was insufficient and one was closed administratively and referred to authorities in 

the Bahamas after investigation determined the alleged offense had occurred in 

Freeport, Bahamas. 

Question 3. According to Terry Dale, the DVD you produced with the Cruise Lines 

International Association provides instruction on initial crime scene response, including securing the scene, taking crime scene photography, and collecting evidence. 

Do you believe that security personnel on board cruise ships should be involved in 

crime scene evidence collection to support the FBI? Do you see this as an appropriate and helpful role for the security personnel on board cruise ships to provide 

to the FBI? If evidence collection is conducted by the cruise ship security personnel 

according to the FBI’s instructional video, do you see any potential issue with the 

admissibility of evidence for legal proceedings? 

Answer. In January 2008, the FBI supplemented existing protocols between the 

FBI and the cruise line industry by providing to that industry a DVD presentation 

entitled, ‘‘Guide to Cruise Line Crime Scene Preservation.’’ The presentation pr 

vided basic instruction on the investigative jurisdiction of the United States, reporting requirements for crimes on the high seas, and basic crime scene management. 

The presentation emphasized that the first priority of the cruise line is to’ secure 

the crime scene and await the arrival of law enforcement officials. The location of 

a crime scene on a cruise ship (for example, on an outside deck or in a common 

area) may make it difficult or impossible for cruise line personnel to isolate and 

maintain the security of the crime scene. In these circumstances, and when law enforcement officials cannot respond immediately, we must rely on cruise line personnel to conduct the initial processing of the crime scene. While the FBI would prefer to process the crime scene, we believe the DVD presentation provides the cruise 

lines with the basic tools they will need when immediate response by law enforcement officials is not possible. 

Question 4. What methodology has the FBI developed to verify to a victim(s) that 

their case has been reported by the cruise lines to the FBI and or the U.S. Coast 

Guard? 

67 

Answer. If an incident or crime reported to the FBI by a cruise line meets minimum Federal investigative and prosecutorial guidelines, the FBI opens an investigation and contacts any victims for interview purposes and to offer victim assistance. The FBI uses Victim Specialists, who are assigned to the Office for Victim Assistance (OVA), as a resource when investigations involve victims of Federal crimes 

investigated by the FBI. The FBI’s responsibility for assisting victims continues 

through adjudication and may involve Victim Specialists from both the FBI and the 

USAO. 

The mission of the OVA is to ensure that victims of crimes investigated by the 

FBI receive the services and notifications required by Federal law and the Attorney 

General’s Guidelines on Victim and Witness Assistance (2000). The FBI recognizes 

not only the necessity of providing for the legal rights of victims but the benefits 

that effective and timely victim assistance bring to investigations. The OVA applies 

three major principles in performing its mission: (1) doing what the law requires; 

(2) doing what will help victims and will enhance their ability to participate in the 

investigative process; and (3) using innovative, flexible, and practical methods to accomplish its goals. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. FRANK. R. LAUTENBERG TO

TERRY DALE

Question 1. The cruise ship industry is required to provide Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) with crew and passenger manifests prior to departure. When is the 

manifest required to be submitted to CBP prior to departure and for what are passengers and crew being screened? For example, are passengers being screened 

against only a terrorist watch list or are they also being screened against the FBI 

database of sexual predators? 

Answer. Cruise ships departing American ports are required to submit their completed manifest, passengers and crew, to CBP (shared with the USCG) 60 minutes 

prior to the ship’s departure. This information is submitted electronically in a format that allows CBP to quickly process the names through the government data 

bases. We defer to CBP and other Federal agencies to describe their screening process of crew and passenger manifests. 

Question 2. What type of background checks do CLIA member companies conduct 

on their potential hires? The crew member who masturbated in front of an 8 year 

old girl had a different name on his passport than on his employment application— 

how do you explain that? What steps are CLIA member companies taking to ensure 

this does not happen again? 

Answer. All CLIA member companies use vetted, reputable manning agencies in 

the countries where they hire their employees. Many source countries for cruise ship 

employees—such as the Philippines, a principle source country—have comprehensive and institutionalized systems to validate the character of their seafarers. 

The cruise lines operating to and from the United States also require all of their 

employees to obtain a work visa from the U.S. Government. Applications are obtained and presented at a U.S. Embassy/Consulate in person, where an interview 

and background check is completed. 

Additionally, when applying for a cruise line job, the crew member is required to 

submit to the U.S. Embassy/Consulate his/her passport, employment application 

and letter-of-intent-to-hire by the cruise line. This same information is required to 

be submitted by the crew member when entering the U.S. by airline to join the ship 

in a U.S. port. If the crew member joins the ship at a foreign port, his/her passport 

and manifest would have to match when submitted by the cruise line prior to entering the first U.S. Port. 

CLIA is aware that one of the hearing’s witnesses provided the account of an alleged sexual incident as set forth in this question. Lacking additional information, 

we have been unable to confirm the details of the alleged incident and are, therefore, unable to provide additional comment. 

Question 3. What are the minimum standards in the industry to be hired as 

cruise ship security personnel? What type of training and experience is required? 

Answer. Each cruise line has its own pre-requisites for hiring security personnel. 

Most of the security personnel have either military or law enforcement backgrounds. 

They receive training and refresher training in topics such as: 

International Ship Security Regulations 

Alcohol awareness and breathalyzer training 

Explosive detection 

68 

Screening equipment and search techniques 

Accident investigation 

Crime scene preservation 

Reporting, securing, entry, photography, logs, evidence protection, chain of custody, guest care issues 

Interview techniques 

Smuggling techniques 

Case studies 

This is a sampling of the training provided and depending on the individual’s 

background, the duties assigned to the security officer, and the number of years 

having worked in that capacity, the training topics may increase or decrease. It 

should also be noted that several aspects of the training are provided by members 

of Federal law enforcement agencies such as FBI, USCG, ATF and CBP. 

Question 4. Could you please explain table 1 of Mr. Klein’s testimony as to how 

Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines defined inappropriate touch, sexual harassment and 

sexual assault metrics? Of the 2.4 percent of incidents that occurred in a child/teen 

area could you please specify what type of incidents occurred, such as inappropriate 

touch, sexual harassment or sexual assault? How is the location of 26 percent of the 

incidents unknown? Were all of the 151 total cases reported to the FBI? Of those 

cases, do you know how many were prosecuted or did not have sufficient evidence 

to pursue prosecution? How do you explain an on board population sexual assault 

incident rate of 58.85 per 100,000, compared to an overall U.S. rate of 32.20 per 

100,000, and still maintain that cruise ship safety is better than land based resort 

vacation destinations? 

Answer. CLIA submitted this question to RCL officials for response given that the 

question is based upon RCL data. RCL’s response is set forth below: 

RCL appreciates the opportunity to clarify the statistical misunderstanding that 

occurred at the hearing. For ease of reference, we have divided the multi-part question into separate sections for response. 

Question 5. Could you please explain table 1 of Mr. Klein’s testimony as to how 

Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines defined inappropriate touch, sexual harassment and 

sexual assault metrics? 

Answer. The Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCL) statistics cited in Mr. Klein’s 

testimony were derived from litigation discovery provided to a plaintiff’s attorney 

and apply to the period from 2003 through 2005. The data in the charts used by 

Mr. Klein depict information gathered by RCL in support of tracking shipboard incident allegations by its former Risk Management Department for the purpose of aiding claims adjusters in locating a record if a claim is filed. The definitions used by 

Risk Management were not consistently applied and due to their purpose, received 

no rigor or oversight to link them to definitions used outside of the company. The 

definitions of the terms, as used by RCL were: Inappropriate touching (kissing, holding hands, rubbing back); Sexual Harassment (verbal only); Sexual Assault (touching of intimate body parts above or under clothing); Sexual Battery (penetration of 

any type). Mr. Klein’s conclusions are based on limited information available on 

these charts and therefore did not lend themselves to reliable analysis. Simply stated, the validity of Mr. Klein’s representations is dependent upon the accuracy of the 

labels RCL assigned to each allegation. Although perhaps sufficient to permit a 

claims adjuster to locate a record, detailed analysis of this labeling reveals it to be 

lacking in both uniformity and accuracy. In short, the data Mr. Klein used in his 

analysis was flawed when used for his purposes. 

Question 6. Of the 2.4 percent of incidents that occurred in child/teen areas, could 

you please specify what type of incidents occurred, such as inappropriate touching, 

sexual harassment or sexual assault? 

Answer. It is unclear how Mr. Klein arrived at his ‘‘2.4 percent’’ figure. We identified the following eight incidents in the referenced data involving child/teen areas 

(see definitions above in response to question #1): 

• 9/13/2003—A guest alleged sexual harassment by crew member; 

• 10/10/2003—A guest alleged sexual harassment by two underage male guests; 

• 4/4/2004—A guest alleged a crew member made inappropriate comments; 

• 5/18/2004—A 6 year old guest exposed his penis while watching a movie; 

• 6/11/2004—A guest alleged sexual assault by another guest (this was labeled as 

a ‘‘sexual assault’’ but, upon review, should have been ‘‘inappropriate touching’’); 

69 

• 6/25/2004—A guest alleged being stalked and sexually harassed by a male 

guest; 

• 6/28/2005—Allegation that a 14 year old girl was grabbed and kissed by another 

guest (age not listed)—(upon, review, actually an inappropriate touching); 

• 7/22/2005—A guest alleged physical assault by a crew member (no sexual aspect) (upon review determined to be an assault, not an inappropriate touching 

as indicated) 

Question 7. How is the location of 26 percent of the incidents unknown? 

Answer. The data that Mr. Klein relied upon did not contain entries in these 

fields because the purpose of the data was to allow claims adjusters to locate the 

files. RCL personnel creating the data set did not focus on completing this field uniformly but that does not mean that the location of the incidents is unknown. 

Question 8. Were all of the 151 cases reported to the FBI? Of those cases, do you 

know how many were prosecuted or did not have sufficient evidence to pursue prosecution? 

Answer. It is and has been RCL policy to report all crimes to law enforcement. 

Since it is not clear which cases the number 151 captures, we are unable to provide 

a reliable response. If the 151 cases are identified, RCL can pull the corresponding 

files and determine which agency we contacted to report the incident. However, RCL 

does not track whether law enforcement pursues prosecution on the allegations we 

report. 

Question 9. How do you explain an on board population sexual assault incident 

rate of 58.85 per 100,000, compared to an overall U.S. rate of 32.20 per 100,000, 

and still maintain that cruise ship safety is better than land based resort vacation 

destinations? 

Answer. See attached letter that was sent by RCL to Mr. Klein in response to 

this erroneous representation in his testimony. 

ATTACHMENT

ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD. 

Miami, FL, July 8, 2008 

ROSS A. KLEIN, 

Professor, School of Social Work, 

St. John’s College, J–2000, 

Memorial University of Newfoundland, 

St. John’s, NL, A1C 5S7 Canada. 

Dear Professor Klein: 

I noted with interest your June 19, 2008, testimony on Cruise Ship Safety, before 

the U.S. Senate Commerce Subcommittee, in which you cited a news report and 

prior testimony and charts, which I believe you know to be erroneous. In addition, 

by testifying that ‘‘the rate of sexual assault on cruise ships, compared to the rate 

of forcible rape in the U.S., is not half but almost twice the U.S. rate’’ you improperly led Congress to believe this was a valid comparison. You appear to have done 

so in a deliberate attempt to mislead Congress into believing that the rate of shipboard rape allegations is twice the rate of those occurring on shore. 

As you know, the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program does not track or 

compute a rate of U.S. land-based sexual assaults. In fact, the term ‘‘sexual assault’’ 

does not even appear to be defined in either the UCR or in any U.S. Federal statute. 

Its cruise industry use was first defined by the FBI in March, 2007, to include each 

of the crimes codified in Title 18, United States Code (USC), Sections 2241, 2242, 

2243, 2244(a) and 2244(c). 

The ‘‘rate of sexual assault’’ you calculated and cited in your testimony before the 

Committee included: (1) Crime allegations of rape; (2) Crime allegations of cruise 

ship sexual assaults that fall within the above FBI definition; and even (3) Crime 

allegations that are outside the FBI’s prescribed cruise industry use of the term 

‘‘sexual assault.’’ There is simply no justifiable basis to equate such a broad, grouping of crimes to the UCR’s narrowly defined rate for land-based forcible rapes, as 

you knowingly did in your testimony. 

In addition, your June 19 testimony, as well as prior testimony before Congress, 

incorporated a chart you prepared which purports to depict a comparison of shipboard sexual assaults and a (non-existent) U.S. shore-side sexual assault rate (actually the UCR’s forcible rape rate, which you mis-titled). You and I have discussed 

this chart you prepared and you agreed its comparison is invalid. In fact, you acknowledged such errors in an e-mail you sent to me on April 21, 2008, wherein you 

70 

stated: ‘‘I have stopped using the numbers given in discovery as comparison to the 

U.S. rate for forcible rape because it is essentially a comparison of apples and oranges. . . . I assure you that I try to avoid a comparison of sexual assault rates 

on cruise ships with the rate of forcible rate [sic] on land.’’ 

You have told me that you believe this faulty comparison has its roots in statistics 

prepared by the cruise industry and I have passed your thoughts on to CLIA for 

their consideration. However, their response not withstanding, you were certainly 

aware at the time of your June 19 testimony that, whatever its origin, the comparison of shipboard ‘‘sexual assaults’’ to land-based ‘‘forcible rape’’ was, to use your 

words, an ‘‘apples-to-oranges’’ comparison to be avoided. Therefore, your testimony 

on June 19 that ‘‘the rate of sexual assault on cruise ships, compared to the rate forcible rape in the U.S., is not half but almost twice the U.S. rate’’ appears to be intentionally disingenuous. 

When you chose to use a self-defined rate of sexual assault on cruise ships instead 

of the available rate of rape on cruise ships (and thereafter to compare this figure 

to the shore-side rate for forcible rape) you again misled Congress. What’s more, the 

implication of your testimony is directly contradicted by statistics the FBI presented 

to the Committee, which, using your method of calculation, reflect a cruise industry 

rape rate of 15.7 per 100,000 guests; versus the UCR’s 2006 land-based forcible rape 

rate of 30.77 per 100,000 residents. 

In conclusion, your testimony presented an invalid comparison between a gratuitously defined category of shipboard sexual assaults and the narrowly defined U.S. 

rate for land-based forcible rapes. It also failed to correct prior Congressional testimony based on a chart of your analysis which mischaracterized the U.S. rate of 

‘‘forcible rape’’ as being a non-existent U.S. rate of ‘‘sexual assault.’’ 

I ask that you take steps to correct and clarify the record of your June 19 testimony before Congress. I also ask that you acknowledge the 2007 rate of shipboard 

rape, based on statistics presented by the FBI to the Committee, is approximately 

half the rate of land-side forcible rape in the U.S. (2006 UCR). This is too important 

a subject to countenance providing Congress with inaccurate or misleading comparisons. 

Sincerely, 

GARY M. BALD, 

Senior Vice President, 

Safety, Security, Environment, and Health, 

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. 

CC: HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG

Chairman 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security 

U.S. Senate 

Washington, D.C. 

Hon. GORDON H. SMITH

Ranking Member 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security 

U.S. Senate 

Washington, D.C. 

Hon. JOHN F. KERRY

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security 

U.S. Senate 

Washington, D.C. 

TERRY DALE

President and CEO 

Cruise Lines International Association 

910 SE 17th Street 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

TERRY DALE

Question 1. Mr. Dale, recognizing the wide variety of cruise types and itineraries 

offered by your members, are certain types of crimes or the frequency of certain 

crimes more prevalent on certain itineraries than others? For example, do short 

weekend cruises catering to young adults have higher overall rates of reported 

crimes and more sexual assaults than longer cruises catering to an older crowd? If 

a higher degree of correlation does exist between certain crimes and itineraries, are 

71 

your members changing security procedures accordingly? If a higher degree of correlation does exist, are your member cruise lines allocating additional security resources to these higher risk itineraries? 

Answer. CLIA does not maintain a database of crimes that occur on our member 

lines. The cruise lines report allegations directly to law enforcement agencies. That 

said, there is a correlation of a higher rate of crimes on short cruises, with a younger demographic, than on the longer itineraries where there are more families and 

older guests. This fact is only one of a number of considerations our cruise lines use 

for setting the security protocols on board the ship. Our member lines continually 

evaluate a multitude of factors to determine the manning needed for security personnel on each cruise. These factors include, but are not limited to: 

• length of cruise 

• passenger demographics 

• season 

• itinerary 

• special charters 

In addition security protocols are dictated by the perceived security risks associated with a number of factors such as the ports of call, and itineraries. 

Question 2. Mr. Dale, when passengers board international cruises, are they typically aware of the various laws governing the reporting of crimes on cruise ships 

and who has jurisdiction for the different segments of the itinerary? Is there any 

sort of pre-boarding orientation or any material distributed before the ship leaves 

U.S. territorial waters? You mentioned that a significant percentage of cruises are 

purchased through travel agents. Should travel agents have an obligation to provide 

information to passengers regarding the various laws impacting their cruise and 

what to do if they believe they are a victim of crime? 

Answer. Information on safety and security is provided to passengers at the beginning of a cruise through several formats. The ship’s TV is preset to the safety channel that provides the number to call if there is any incident, safety or security related. General warnings of a safety/security nature are also mentioned in each day’s 

plan of activities and general safety announcements are made during the safety drill 

at the beginning of the cruise. In general, passengers are advised to report any 

crimes to Ship Security or other Officers. He and the Master are the individuals 

who can best work with and explain to the passenger what the reporting requirements are for the location at that time. Although reporting laws vary depending on 

ship location and victim/suspect nationality, all crime allegations are required to be 

reported to law enforcement. They are always reported to the Flag State. In addition, alleged crimes are generally always reported to either the nation where they 

occur or the nation of the next port of call. Some nations, such as the U. S., require 

reporting of crime allegations that occur outside their territorial waters. For example, crime allegations under the jurisdiction of the FBI and in which cruise lines 

report to the FBI include those that occur when: 

1. The ship, regardless of flag, is a U.S.-owned vessel, either in 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; 

2. The offense by or against a U.S. National was committed outside the jurisdiction of any nation; 

3. The crime occurs in the U.S. territorial sea (within twelve miles of the coast), 

regardless of the nationality of the vessel, the victim or the perpetrator; or 

4. The victim or perpetrator is a U.S. National on any vessel during a voyage 

that departed from or will arrive into a U.S. port. 

While travel agents do not provide specific information, passengers receive a contract of carriage that lays out the terms and conditions associated with that cruise. 

This contract is available for the guest on our member’s website. Additionally, prior 

to the beginning of the voyage each passenger is provided with the contract of carriage. The legal rights and remedies within the contract are dependent upon a number of factors; including where the cruise begins and ends, as well as the flag of 

the vessel, and the nationality of the cruise passenger. 

Question 3. Mr. Dale, among recommendations from the International Cruise Victims Association is a proposal to place some type of law enforcement authority on 

all cruises analogous to a U.S. Air Marshall on a commercial flight. What is CLIA’s 

position on having one such law enforcement personnel on each and every cruise? 

72 

What is CLIA’s position on having one such law enforcement personnel on cruises 

with higher risk itineraries? 

CLIA believes that the function served by Air Marshals is well within the capabilities of cruise ship security personnel. CLIA cruise line security personnel are 

fully trained and qualified as first responders to any security incident on board our 

ships. Most have prior law enforcement experience and receives extensive training 

from U.S. law enforcement maritime experts. Together, the shipboard teams, their 

U.S. based security departments and Law Enforcement Agency personnel work 

quite well in partnership. It is unlikely the addition of a law enforcement person 

would add material value in this important area. Cruise ships sail in an international environment, and as they testified at previous congressional hearings, the 

U.S. Coast Guard and FBI do not believe it is neither necessary nor legally feasible 

to require a U.S. Federal Law Enforcement Official on cruise ships. Many, if not 

most of the countries cruise lines visit have strict policies about weapons and the 

presence of a foreign law enforcement officer conducting activities while within their 

territory. 

CLIA would welcome an opportunity to further discuss the capabilities and requirements of its security personnel with members and staffers. 

Question 4. Mr. Dale, in your testimony you highlighted the use of an FBI-provided DVD for security training by major cruise lines. Is this DVD required viewing 

for all employees or individuals designated as ‘‘security personnel?’’ For example, do 

medical personnel, whom some cruise lines consider as independent contractors, 

view the DVD? Does the video cover the procedures medical personnel must follow 

when there are allegations of a sexual assault or rape? Do your member cruise lines 

consider viewing this DVD to be sufficient training for employees to respond appropriately when an allegation of an onboard crime occurs? Is that CLIA’s position? 

Should those individuals designated as ‘‘security personnel’’ be certified by a third 

party to give the public (and law enforcement) confidence that they have received 

adequate training and achieved as a minimum a basic level of competence in key 

areas such as securing a crime scene, evidence collection, etc.? 

Answer. The FBI-provided DVD is specifically aimed at crime scene management 

and evidence preservation for security trained personnel. The DVD is used in combination with the training provided by the cruise line for its security personnel. 

Most of the security personnel have either military or law enforcement backgrounds. 

They receive training and refresher training in topics such as: 

International Ship Security Regulations 

Alcohol awareness and breathalyzer training 

Explosive detection 

Screening equipment and search techniques 

Accident investigation 

Crime scene preservation 

Reporting, securing, entry, photography, logs, evidence protection, chain of custody, guest care issues 

Interview techniques 

Smuggling techniques 

Case studies 

This is a sampling of the training provided and depending on the background, duties assigned to the security officer, the number of years having worked in that capacity, the training topics may increase or decrease. It should also be noted that 

several portions of the training are provided by members of Federal law enforcement agencies such as FBI, USCG, ATF and CBP. 

In addition, the cruise lines are pursuing, and several already have, their companies’ security programs/training certified by a third party. Several lines have programs for licensing and certification as security professionals for their on board personnel. All the CLIA lines training stresses incident response, evidence and crime 

scene preservation. Both the U.S. Coast Guard and the FBI have testified that they 

receive excellent cooperation and assistance from cruise line security personnel. 

All ships that operate on international itineraries have trained medical personnel 

onboard. Part of the equipment in the medical clinics are pelvic examination kits 

and there is training provided to the medical personnel on the proper administration of these kits. The DVD does not specifically address medical procedures in the 

event of a rape/sexual assault, however, other training provided by cruise lines addresses this important area. 

73 

Question 5. Mr. Dale, how do cruise lines hire their crews? Are the crews considered staff or are they considered independent contractors? If the hiring is done by 

a third party, is the crew member considered an employee of the cruise line, an employee of the hiring firm, or an independent contractor? What obligations does a 

third party staffing firm have to ensure that the individual they are hiring on behalf 

of the cruise line does not have a long history of committing crimes or alleged to 

have committed crimes while working on cruise ships? Is there an industry ‘‘do not 

hire’’ list? 

Answer. All CLIA member companies use vetted, reputable manning agencies in 

the countries where they hire their employees. Most of these countries have institutionalized programs for the recruitment and placement of properly screened employees. Additionally, several of the manning agencies in different countries have been 

vetted by the FBI in their ongoing efforts to stop counterfeit Letters of Employment 

and false documentation submissions for entry to the U.S. The cruise lines operating 

from the United States also require all of their employees to obtain a work visa from 

the U.S. Government. This visa is a C1D category. Applications are obtained and 

presented at a U.S. Embassy/Consulate in person, where an interview and background check is completed. Additionally, when applying for a cruise line job, the 

crew member is required to submit to the U.S. Embassy/Consulate his/her passport, 

employment application and letter-of-intent-to-hire by the cruise line. This same information would have to be submitted by the crew member when entering the U.S. 

by airline to join the ship in a U.S. port. If the crew member joins the ship at a 

foreign port, his/her passport and visa would have to match when submitted by the 

cruise line prior to entering the first U.S. port. If a crew member commits a crime, 

his employment is terminated and his visa is revoked (in coordination with law enforcement authorities). To comply with U.S. and international privacy laws the 

cruise industry does not maintain a ‘‘do not hire’’ list. 

Question 6. Mr. Dale, what type of visa does a foreign cruise line crewmember 

require for itineraries that originate or terminate in the United States? Is a background check required for the visa? If so, who performs the background check? What 

does the background check include? Who is responsible on the cruise line for ensuring that the name employee or contractor has on his or her passport matched that 

with the name on his or her visa? What actions are taken if the names on the passport and the visa do not match? 

Answer. In addition to the information provided for the question above, all cruise 

ship crew members are screened through CBP, USCG and other law enforcement 

data bases on a regular basis. The crew manifest is submitted upon departure and 

arrival to every U.S. port. The crew must also submit to a 90-day crew check where 

they are subject to close CBP scrutiny for any inconsistencies in their documentation. This is all in addition to the obtaining of a visa to work in the United States 

that will validate credentials for consistency as well the first look CBP has as the 

crew travel through the port of entry at the international airport. 

Question 7. Mr. Dale, a significant percentage of reported crimes involve cruise 

line employees. Of the 184 cases reported to the FBI from Fiscal Year 2002 through 

February 2007, 84 involved crew members. In cases where a crew member is the 

alleged perpetrator of a crime which meet the FBI reporting requirements, can you 

walk us through the typical steps taken by a cruise line in dealing with the accused 

crew member, both in cases when the incident occurred in international or foreign 

waters and when the alleged crime occurs in U.S. territorial waters. In any circumstance, is the accused crew member allowed to disembark the ship before someone with legal authority can ascertain whether that individual may have committed 

a crime? 

Answer. All allegations are reported to the proper authorities including the FBI. 

The process followed whether in international or foreign waters is as follows: The 

crime allegation is reported to ship’s security. A security team (accompanied by a 

medical team if warranted) immediately responds to the incident scene and determines what is alleged. The incident scene is sealed and the victim is provided medical care and guest care if needed. The suspect is located and any other places where 

evidence may be found are secured. Written statements are taken from the suspect, 

victim and witnesses. Photographs may be taken, provided doing so will not risk 

preserved evidence. The incident is reported to the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction and the statements are provided once obtained. If the suspect presents a 

continuing risk to others on board, the crew member will be confined either to their 

cabin or the brig, pending arrival of law enforcement (typically at a minimum, the 

suspect’s contact with guests would be curtailed). Ships’ records relevant to the incident are gathered, including CCTV images, A-Pass (door access) records, shipboard 

purchase records if relevant, etc. When law enforcement arrives on the ship, secuVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:32 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\80392.TXT JACKIE
74 

rity meets with them and provides its relevant records and written statements. 

Space is made available for law enforcement use. Their investigative efforts are fully 

supported. Relevant witnesses are presented for interview and evidence sites are 

opened as requested for forensic examination. The crew member is made available 

to law enforcement. A Master’s hearing will be held where the allegation will be 

evaluated and a decision made concerning the crew members continued employment. In all likelihood, the crew member will be terminated and removed from the 

ship, in coordination with law enforcement. If the crew member is not arrested, he 

will be handled according to local immigration laws. If charges are brought, the 

cruise line will provide continuing support to law enforcement and will make available any witnesses needed at trial. Generally, a crew member is not permitted to 

leave the ship until law enforcement responds. This process is generally the same 

when the accused is a passenger. 

The FBI may choose to exercise its investigative authority or it may choose to cooperate with the authorities of another nation in that country exercising its jurisdiction. The crewmember has probably violated the terms of his employment if he has 

even fraternized with a passenger, therefore he is subject to dismissal. Dismissal 

would invalidate the terms of his visa. Therefore, if the U.S. or foreign authorities 

do not choose to investigate or take the crewmember into custody, the cruise line 

must ensure, under relevant immigration laws that the crewmember is deported to 

his home of record. It is incumbent to have timely action by the authorities in exercising their jurisdiction otherwise the cruise line has little choice but to remove that 

crewmember from the United States or other country where the vessel is located. 

While CLIA has outlined our process above, we are concerned about what the 

source document for the statistics used (184 cases, FY 2002–2/07, and 84 cases with 

the crew is the accused) comes from, as we would appreciate the opportunity to ensure the correct numbers are used. 

TRAVEL INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

June 18, 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

Hon. Gordon Smith, 

Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg and Senator Smith: 

I write on behalf of the Travel Industry Association (TIA), the national non-profit 

organization representing 1,700 travel and tourism public and private entities 

across the country. TIA members encompass every sector of the diverse, $740 billion 

travel community and our mission is to promote and facilitate increased travel to 

and within the United States. 

We are aware that this is the fifth Congressional hearing over the last 3 years 

that has examined the subject of personal safety on cruise ships. While we feel compassion for those who have experienced a serious incident, the TIA believes that 

cruising is a very safe vacation option. 

The industry enjoys a customer satisfaction rating of’ more then 95 percent, a remarkably strong level of satisfaction. This information, combined with the fact that 

nearly 55 percent of cruisers are repeat customers, surely indicates that customers 

of cruising believe their environment is safe. 

The cruise line industry is an important economic engine for the United States. 

In 2006, according to analysis conducted by Business Research and Economic Advisors (BREA) the total economic benefit of the cruise industry in this country was 

535.7 billion and direct spending of the cruise lines and passengers on U.S. goods 

and services was $17.6 billion. 

In short, the cruise industry cares about its customers and it is an important. part 

of America’s economy. We ask that this statement be included in the record of the 

hearing that will be held June 19, 2008 by the Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

ROGER DOW, 

President and CEO, 

Travel Industry Association. 

75 

1Founded in 1931, ASTA is the largest association of travel professionals. Our 20,000-plus 

members include travel agents and the companies whose products they sell such as tours, 

cruises, hotels, car rentals, etc. We are the leading advocate for travel agents, the travel industry and the traveling public. 2The complaints included 24 missing person situations which may not have involved criminal 

conduct. 

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRAVEL AGENTS

Alexandria, VA, June 18, 2008 

HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, 

Chair, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. GORDON H. SMITH, 

Ranking Minority Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg and Ranking Member Smith: 

On behalf of the American Society of Travel Agents, Inc., (ASTA),1 I request that 

this statement be included in the record of the Subcommittee’s hearings, June 19, 

2008 with respect to cruise safety issues. 

Travel agents today account for over 90 percent of the sales of cruises to United 

States citizens. Based on cruise industry estimates of North American cruise passengers in 2007, travel agents will sell more than 11.35 million cruise vacations this 

year. 

The cruise industry offers itineraries originating at numerous U.S. ports as well 

as many overseas points of departure. It is usually necessary for the cruise consumer to travel a considerable distance to take a cruise, most often by air, and travel agents typically make arrangements for all aspects of the trip. Today’s cruise passengers include individuals of all ages, many families, and many people of diverse 

ethnic background. 

Taking a cruise is similar in some respects to visiting a new city. The largest 

cruise ships carry more than 3,000 passengers on a single sailing. Most of them will 

be strangers to each other. 

More than 31 million people sailed on cruise ships during the years 2002–2005 

with a little more than 200 complaints of criminal activity associated with the ship 

experience.2 This data indicates in objective terms that the risks of traveling on a 

cruise ship are minuscule. Travel agents continue to sell cruises with the highest 

confidence that the cruise environment is a welcoming and safe one compared to any 

form of travel. It is, of course, always possible to have a problem when away from 

home. The cruise passenger must exercise the same diligence and personal responsibility that would be expected when traveling by any method or when in any place 

where there is close contact with unknown persons. Cruise ships provide extensive 

facilities to facilitate protection of passenger property and to encourage responsible 

behavior by cruise passengers both on and off the ship. ASTA’s members have no 

hesitancy in encouraging their best customers to take a cruise. Cruises typically provide one of the highest customer satisfaction experiences in the entire travel spectrum. 

At ASTA we are aware that the cruise industry works very closely with a number 

of government agencies to facilitate safety, and to be as responsive to consumer 

needs as possible. Because cruise itineraries frequently involve visiting a number 

of countries on a single voyage, there are a myriad of laws that apply. It is our experience that the industry works very hard at ensuring personal safety and security. 

If ASTA can answer any questions the Subcommittee may have on this subject, 

we would be happy to do so. 

Sincerely yours, 

CHERYL COREY HUDAK, CTC, 

President. 

cc: Sen. John Kerry 

76 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRUISE ORIENTED AGENCIES

Margate, FL, June 16, 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

Hon. GORDON SMITH, 

Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Washington, DC. 

Thank you for permitting this testimony regarding cruise ship safety on behalf 

of the members of the National Association of Cruise-Oriented Agencies. 

In our professional assessment, cruise lines offer the safest vacations available to 

the public. A typical cruise ship is a tightly gated facility with security personnel, 

100 percent positive identification for those aboard, screened and trained staff and 

a hierarchy of responsible officers who answer onboard to a single authority, the 

captain. By its nature, no other type of vacation is safer than this! 

Perfect safety is impossible to achieve in any human endeavor. Aware of this, we 

travel agent members of NACOA research vacations for clients, seeking safety excellence, quality product delivery and tailored affordability. Cruise lines consistently 

offer the best balance for our clients as can be attested by the decades of steady 

growth in cruise passenger numbers and the highest client repeat factor of any segment in the travel industry. 

One of our members cruised more than 100 times over the past twenty years on 

multiple cruise lines and dozens of ships. In addition, her agency placed thousands 

of clients on cruise ships annually. She had never witnessed or been informed by 

her agents, clients or acquaintances of crimes on ships committed by cruise staff. 

In all those tens of thousands of opportunities for her to learn of shipboard crime, 

only one incident happened; the theft of a camera by a cruise passenger. This incident was promptly investigated by ship’s officers. 

In this day of cruise passengers sailing with their cell phones and laptops, the 

absence of bad news cannot be due to some collusion to hide. Clients have satellite 

communication access to friends and family throughout their cruises. 

In closing, the members of NACOA have substantial, broad personal knowledge 

of cruise ship safety issues regarding passengers. Because of this firsthand and anecdotal knowledge, we have the great comfort in placing our clients on cruise ships. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

DONNA K. ESPOSITO, MCC, 

President. 

VACATION.COM ® 

Alexandria, VA, June 18, 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

Hon. GORDON SMITH, 

Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg, 

On behalf of Vacation.com, I request that this statement be included in the record 

of the Subcommittee’s hearing on cruise safety. 

Vacation.com serves a network of approximately 5,100 travel agencies focused on 

leisure travel distribution, accounting for approximately 30 percent of all travel 

agencies in North America. With more than $18 billion in annual sales, Vacation.com is North America’s largest vacation selling network. 

Cruise vacations are a major part of our business and we fully expect the business 

to continue its impressive growth rate. According to Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA): nearly 51 million Americans express an interest to cruise within 

the next 3 years; to date, approximately 19.9 percent of the U.S. population has 

cruised; and the median age of those passengers is 46 years old with an average 

annual income of $93,000. 

77 

In 2007, Vacation.com predicted some travel trends that certainly play into this 

baby boomer age group and cruise vacations. With baby boomers becoming more 

anxious to be pampered and entertained in a controlled environment, and cruise 

lines portraying cruises as destinations not just ships, we noticed an increase in 

cruise vacations. 

Also, family vacations will continue to grow at a faster rate than all other forms 

of leisure travel as parents and grandparents look at travel as a way to reunite families in a high-stress world dominated by demanding work responsibilities. 

Based on these predictions, Vacation.com expects cruising to increase in popularity. Approximately half of first-time cruisers become repeat cruisers and cruising 

is consistently rated among the highest satisfaction levels of any vacation option. 

A ship is similar to a 24-hour secured building and provides a safe environment 

for millions of people every year. Our network of travel agencies believes in the 

cruise industry and all that it is doing to provide a safe and enjoyable vacation. 

Sincerely, 

STEVE TRACAS, 

President and CEO. 

Copy: Hon. JOHN KERRY, U.S. Senate 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security 

Washington, D.C. 

NATIONAL BUSINESS TRAVEL ASSOCIATION

Alexandria, VA, June 18, 2008 

HON. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

U.S. Senate, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. GORDON SMITH, 

Ranking Member, 

U.S. Senate, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation 

and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Subcommittee Chairman Lautenberg and Ranking Member Smith: 

The National Business Travel Association (NBTA) represents over 4,000 corporate 

and government travel managers, meeting professionals, and travel service providers, who collectively manage and direct more than $170 billion of expenditures 

within the business travel industry. NBTA members frequently organize and conduct corporate events and conferences onboard cruise ships operating from the 

United States and throughout the world. Events conducted on cruise ships are a 

growing portion of our member’s business and represent excellent venues for networking and educational opportunities in a pleasant and accommodating atmosphere. 

We are aware that this is the fifth Congressional hearing in the past 2 years dealing with the subject of personal security on cruise ships. While instances of crime 

can occur in virtually any aspect of daily life as well as vacation settings, I can tell 

you that our membership has no concerns with booking cruise ships for corporate 

events. 

The best bellwether is the public and travel community’s confidence in cruising. 

Passengers for North American cruises are increasing annually at about 9 percent 

over the prior year’s number. This significant rate of growth is testament to passengers’ satisfaction with the cruise experience. 

We ask that this statement be included in the record of the Subcommittee’s hearings, June 18, 2009 regarding cruise safety issues. 

I am at your disposal for further information on this subject. 

Sincerely yours, 

WILLIAM CONNORS, 

Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer. 

cc: Hon. JOHN KERRY

78 

CRUISE PLANNERS

June 19, 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

Hon. GORDON SMITH, 

Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg, 

I request that this statement, on behalf of Cruise Planners, be included in the 

record of the Subcommittee’s hearing for June 19, 2008 on keeping Americans safe 

at sea. 

Cruise Planners is a consortium of approximately 700 agencies located throughout 

the United States. These agencies are leisure and cruise-oriented, meaning that 

they specialize in providing quality holidays for Americans on vacation. While their 

main focus is on cruising, they do sell a good amount of land-based vacations including packaged tours and resort stays internationally. We negotiate on their behalf 

with major travel suppliers for more advantageous business terms including marketing, technology, training, communication, promotions and commissions. 

I believe I have a unique perspective in order to comment on the safety and security of Americans on cruise ships, and I absolutely believe that Americas are safe 

at sea. Cruising enjoys a 95 percent customer satisfaction rating and more than 50 

percent of cruisers are repeat customers. 

Yes, there have been isolated incidents with crimes against Americans onboard 

cruise ships, more often caused by other Americans, and the cruise industry has not 

been perfect in the past as there have been instances between crew members and 

passengers, but in reality, statistics absolutely reinforce the fact that over 99.9 percent of American cruise travelers return safely. 

I think it is a worthy cause for the Senate to make sure that the cruise industry 

is doing all they can to ensure cruise passenger safety, but I can also say that in 

all my years, I have only seen an industry that has strived to keep their passengers 

safe and sound and have reacted quickly to correct any problems with their crew, 

vessels or policies. Their life blood is the traveling American public, and they’re not 

about to jeopardize it. 

Today, I speak on behalf of my 700 independent travel agencies when I ask you 

to consider that for many years, our member agencies have been enjoying the business they continually receive from satisfied, repeat cruisers. Our future is based on 

this success, and we have never hesitated to promote cruising as anything but a safe 

vacation option. 

Regards, 

MICHELLE FEE, CTC, 

CEO. 

CC: Hon. JOHN KERRY

Washington, D.C. 

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES

Alexandria, VA, June 19, 2008 

Chairman FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg: 

On behalf of the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), I request that 

this statement be included in the record of the Subcommittee’s hearing of June 19, 

2008, on cruise ship safety. AAPA represents the leading port authorities in the 

Western Hemisphere and our comments today reflect the views of our U.S. members 

who manage or lease cruise facilities in the U.S. 

Cruising is a very dynamic and growing sector of the travel and tourism industry. 

It has become a major contributor to economic growth in the United States contributing $ 35.7 billion and creating over 354,000 American jobs in 2006. 

79 

The cruise industry offers itineraries originating at numerous U.S. ports as well 

as many overseas points of departure. It is usually necessary for the cruise consumer to travel a considerable distance to take a cruise, most often by air, and they 

frequently stay at local hotels and frequent local tourist attractions prior to or after 

their cruises. Most consumables are sourced in the U.S. market and U.S. travel 

agents typically make arrangements for all aspects of the trip. Today’s cruise passengers include individuals of all ages, many families, and many people of diverse 

ethnic backgrounds. 

Taking a cruise is similar in some respects to visiting a new city. The largest 

cruise ships carry more than 3,000 passengers on a single sailing. Most of them will 

be strangers to each other. 

The data reported at previous Congressional hearings indicates in objective terms 

that the risks of traveling on a cruise ship are minuscule. Travel agents continue 

to sell cruises with the highest confidence that the cruise environment is a welcoming and safe one. It is, of course, always possible to have a problem when away 

from home. The cruise passenger must exercise the same diligence and personal responsibility that would be expected when traveling by any method or when in any 

place where there is close contact with unknown persons. Cruise ships provide extensive facilities to facilitate protection of passenger property and to encourage responsible behavior by cruise passengers both on and off the ship. 

At AAPA, we are aware that the cruise industry works very closely with a number 

of government agencies to facilitate safety, and be as responsive to consumer needs 

as possible. Because cruise itineraries frequently involve visiting a number of countries on a single voyage, there are a myriad of laws that apply. It is our experience 

that the industry works very hard at ensuring personal safety and security. We are 

also aware of a number of recent efforts to enhance the response to cruise passengers if an unfortunate incident were to happen. 

We appreciate this opportunity to express the views of the public port industry 

related to cruise safety. We are committed to work with industry to ensure a safe 

and fun vacation experience. 

Sincerely yours, 

KURT A. NAGLE, 

President. 

BAHAMAS MARITIME AUTHORITY

London EC2N 7AR, 19 June 2008 

Hon. FRANK LAUTENBERG, 

Chairman, 

Hon. GORDON SMITH, 

Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, 

Safety, and Security, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Chairman Lautenberg: 

In March of this year as Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Bahamas 

Maritime Authority, I had the privilege and pleasure of attending a breakfast meeting with the Congressman Cummings which was arranged by Dick Fredricks and 

Jim Lawrence during the Connecticut Maritime Association Conference. 

The breakfast with the Congressman was most interesting with robust and open 

dialogue amongst all participating. I particularly agreed with his messages about 

measuring and improving ones own performance rather than competing with others 

and also how we should recognize and learn everyone else’s role in the performance 

or as in our industry the ‘‘chain of responsibility’’ as on our own we arc of little 

value but being part of a strong chain have great strengths. 

I recall also listening to Admiral Allen and the Congressman as they informed us 

about the growth of the Coast guard and the investment being allocated. This is all 

good news. 

I was also delighted to participate in a panel discussion with Admiral Watson and 

a ‘‘Galaxy of Captains’’ from the USCG when they represented the U.S. as a ‘‘port 

State’’ and I represented the position of the Bahamas as a ‘‘Flag State.’’ This conference session was well attended and the audience were able to get a greater understanding of where the responsibility lie (our respective roles) in the ‘chain of responsibility’ for safety and security in shipping. 

80 

The Bahamas Maritime Authority is a ‘‘quasi’’ government body which has the 

‘‘Flag State’’ and ship registration responsibilities on behalf of the Government of 

the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. 

Our register is the World’s third largest with some 1700 ships and we currently 

have some 80 large international passenger ships. As an ‘‘open’’ registry we are an 

active delegation at IMO, are elected members of the IMO Council a signatory to 

UNCLOS and many IMO conventions which have the force of law in the Bahamas. 

We are a large international registry, but instead of focusing on number of ships 

registered with the Bahamas, we focus on quality operators. We frequently turn 

down applicants to the Bahamian registry, because they do not meet our quality 

standards. I believe you will find that Bahamian registered vessels have an excellent safety record and our flag is on every port state control MOU white list in the 

world today. 

We are a Nation with a well established legal system that protects the rights of 

people as well as their safety. It is recognized that the Bahamian penal code in 

many ways to be equal to that of the United States albeit based upon the British 

system. The Bahamian law does extend to vessels flying the Bahamian flag. We 

have this year appointed High Commissioner Farquharson the former Commandant, 

of the Royal Bahamas Police Force to be our permanent representative at IMO and 

a Superintendent of Police in Nassau to be our point of contact for Maritime Enforcement. This demonstrates and underscores our commitment to security in the 

maritime field. 

We all know that vessels of various flags ply the four corners of this planet, and 

frequently it would be very difficult for Bahamian law enforcement officials to investigate and apply Bahamian law aboard a vessel sailing thousands of miles away. 

The Bahamas also has extradition treaties with a limited number of countries which 

means even though suspected perpetrators can be identified, bringing them to justice may prove impossible. It is equally difficult for U.S. law enforcement officials 

to do so on U.S. flag vessels operating in remote locations. In such cases, we have 

situations where the law of local countries can be applied or even agreements where 

by agreement U.S. officials may assist Bahamian officials in investigating and applying Bahamian law. Even in the territorial waters of the Bahamas, U.S. law enforcement assets and officials assist Bahamian law enforcement officials in enforcing 

Bahamian or U.S. law pursuant to mutual cooperation agreements, particularly in 

the areas of drug and immigration enforcement. I know of no policy restrictions in 

the Bahamas on extending such mutual cooperating to those instances where U.S. 

citizens are involved in other alleged criminal acts. I would be pleased to work on 

such agreements with the relevant agencies of both governments. 

As a practical matter, today passenger ships that have incidents involving U.S. 

citizens routinely notify both the Bahamian and U.S. governments. I know of no 

case where the Bahamian government has stood in the way of U.S. law enforcement 

officials investigating or prosecution of crimes occurring onboard passenger ships. 

The safety and security record of passenger ships flying the Bahamian flag is excellent. I believe this is in no small part due to the cooperative relationship of the 

major trade association the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) with 

agencies of the U.S. Government and with my agency the Bahamas Maritime Authority. I deeply respect the proactive approach of the passenger vessels on the matters of vessel and personal safety and security. 

I thank you for the opportunity to include these comments in the record of your 

hearing and would be pleased to answer any questions you may have relating to 

this information. 

Respectfully, 

KENNETH MCLEAN, 

Director and CEO, 

Bahamas Maritime Authority. 

CC: Hon. JOHN KERRY

Washington, D.C. 

Æ