Maritime fraud: preserve the evidence before the record changes

Public record

Two stages of a documented maritime prosecution

On 24 May 2022, the US Department of Justice announced guilty pleas by Empire Bulkers Limited and Joanna Maritime Limited concerning environmental and safety offences aboard M/V Joanna. The companies admitted knowingly falsifying the Oil Record Book to conceal improper discharges. The announcement also described discharge entries co-signed by an engineer who had not participated in the operations or known whether those entries were accurate. Those admissions concern the companies and the specified conduct. [1]

A later DOJ case overview records that, on 4 September 2024, the court found Empire Bulkers responsible for two probation violations and imposed enhanced supervision. One concerned delayed reporting of allegations aboard another vessel, M/V Panagiotis. The company interviewed crew but waited fourteen days to notify the monitor and DOJ; the engine department crew had been dismissed before notification. According to the overview, the monitor said the delay and dismissals prevented an independent investigation. [2]

The overview also reports that the flag registry subsequently verified the whistleblower's allegations of improper discharges and missing Oil Record Book entries. The lesson is not that those allegations were disproved: it is that preserving an independent opportunity to investigate mattered. [2]

365 ALTERAM analysis

Preservation comes before a persuasive explanation

In a maritime case, evidence is distributed across a moving vessel, shore offices, contractors and people who may soon leave the jurisdiction. An internal narrative can become established before an independent reviewer sees the source material. The first task is therefore to preserve the record and access to relevant witnesses, subject to lawful authority and applicable reporting obligations.

Identify the vessel, voyage, equipment, relevant personnel and alleged events precisely. Preserve original logs and available electronic exports, maintenance records, photographs, communications and inspection material. Record collection dates, custodians and handling history. A later summary should remain traceable to the originals rather than silently replacing them.

365 ALTERAM analysis

Test the relationship between the log and the operation

An entry documents what was recorded. Establish separately what occurred, who observed it, who entered it and who checked it. Compare the relevant record with equipment information, work orders, tank records and inspection findings where available. Do not assume that every discrepancy proves deliberate falsification or that a completed form proves compliant operation.

Digital material requires its own provenance assessment. Establish whether timestamps reflect ship time, shore time or a later export. Identify gaps, retention limits and whether a system records measurements, operator inputs or calculated values. A marine engineer and an appropriately qualified digital specialist may need to work together; neither should assume expertise outside their competence.

Where a sensor reading is relied upon, examine what the instrument actually measured, its documented condition and the relevant operating context. The evidential question is whether that reading supports the proposed conclusion. A technically accurate output can still be misinterpreted when the measurement pathway is not understood.

365 ALTERAM analysis

Preserve independent witness accounts and individual attribution

Record witness accounts through lawful, non-coercive processes with appropriate language support. Preserve the questions asked and distinguish personal observation from information received from others. Identify whether witnesses discussed events together or encountered a prepared explanation before giving their accounts. These issues affect assessment; they do not automatically invalidate testimony.

Then map actual duties, attendance, instructions and reporting lines. A signature, rank or place on a crew list is relevant evidence, but its significance requires context. A reviewer must examine both evidence of participation and evidence limiting knowledge or control. Corporate admissions cannot be transferred wholesale to every officer or employee.

365 ALTERAM analysis

A review that counsel can use and others can test

The useful output is an indexed evidence inventory, a chronology linking operational events to records, and a discrepancy schedule showing supporting material, contrary material and unresolved questions. Explain which conclusions remain possible and what missing evidence prevents a firmer assessment. Independent work may confirm serious wrongdoing as readily as expose an unsupported allegation.

365 ALTERAM supports defence counsel and authorised representatives in reconstructing maritime operational and commercial evidence. The purpose is a defensible assessment of conduct and individual responsibility. When ships move, personnel disperse and records change, early preservation can determine whether meaningful counter-analysis remains possible at all.