The L.A. Times is the latest major newspaper to discuss the behind-the-scenes alteration of the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act.
In Drop in Cruise Ships’ Reported Crimes Raises Questions written by Dan Weikel and an accompanying editorial Cruise ship crimes: Why so hush-hush? by Paul Morrison, the L.A. Times takes a look at the reporting of cruise ship crimes after the new cruise safety law came into effect.
Designed to require greater transparency from the cruise lines in reporting shipboard crimes, the new cruise safety law was watered down to require the disclosure of only those alleged crimes which the cruise lines reported to the FBI and the FBI then closed.
This altered language was designed to cover up the majority of crimes on cruise ships. Before the new cruise safety law came into effect, the FBI was known for its disinterest in investigating crimes on cruise ships. For those few crimes it investigated, the FBI solved few of them. It also seemed to never close their files even when in truth it was not doing anything to investigate the crimes. By altering the language of the law, the cruise lines knew that it would keep the actual number of crimes under wraps.
The cruise lines deny that they were involved in the cover-up. And so far Congressman Kerry’s office (who was instrumental in passing the new law) is pointing to the FBI and Coast Guard as requesting the change. Here’s what the L.A. Times is saying:
"The FBI and the Coast Guard had asked Congress for wording that means, under the law, that the public only is allowed to be told about the number of closed cases that are no longer being investigated.
That’s just about 180 degrees opposite what law enforcement agencies do on land: All reported crimes are public record, not just those under investigation or resolved.
See how insidious such a policy can be?
If we heard only about the LAPD’s closed cases, nobody would have heard of the Black Dahlia, and the recent murders of two USC graduate students from China might not be public knowledge. Women in South L.A. wouldn’t have been told to be on alert for the "Teardrop Rapist," who has raped nearly three dozen women in the course of about 15 years, one as recently as last month.
This kind of result is hardly what a law called the "Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act" sounds like it was meant to achieve. Turns out, the security and safety being protected here are the economic security and fiscal safety of cruise lines."
The question at this point is not whether there was a behind-the-scenes cover-up, but who in addition to the FBI and Coast Guard were engaged in the cover-up. Were the cruise lines and their trade organization, Cruise Line International Association ("CLIA"), involved? Of course, but they would never admit it. But why would the FBI alone take such steps, which as the L.A. Times concludes, were designed to protect the "economic security and fiscal safety of cruise lines" and not the passengers victimized on cruise ships?
With an industry known for its secrecy, it will take some time before the ugly truth comes out. But it eventually will. The public will then see that the cruise lines and their CLIA representatives worked overtime with federal agencies against transparency. For the time being, they were successful in thwarting the democratic process and turning the cruise safety law into a joke.