I would highly recommend that anyone interested in the Race case check this out. It is the full text of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court of Minnesota to uphold Larry Race's first degree murder conviction after Race filed yet another appeal in 1985. There is a very lengthy explanation of the entire case including Race's story given to the police on the night Deborah Race died, as well as explanations about the two life rafts and the importance thereof. I didn't appreciate just how many inconsistencies existed in Larry Race's account until I read this. It is a sobering read after watching the UM segment which is heavily biased in Race's favor.

http://mn.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19860321_0003.MN.htm/qx

Thanks for posting the link! Just got done reading it, and as far as I can tell, the only inconsistency UM left out in Race's story was the fact that at first he said he threw the first raft (the one that wouldn't inflate) aside but then later recanted and said he threw it overboard. It definitely seemed like they weighed a lot of their decision on the fact that the alleged 2nd raft was never found, which I think is absurd.

interesting article, thanks Justin.

The UM segment implied that nobody saw Larry and Debby out on the lake, but never came right out and said it. The article backs up that assertion, saying no witnesses came forward, and furthermore, gives a window of time, which makes it sound like quite a few hours. I can't imagine Larry would risk murdering his wife out in the open lake, where anyone can come by at any time. Additionally, the murder of his wife would have taken time, since her death was caused by eventual hypothermia.

The article goes into greater depth about the Jenny Lee. The UM segment said "the boat nearly sank the year before.", but the article said that it fully sank. Additionally, the motor had problems as near as a few days prior. Therefore, it's not hard to believe Larry's version of events regarding the motor.

Additionally, being that Larry had made extensive repairs on it, and had been out with friends a few days prior with no problems, it's easy to see how Larry thought the boat would be fine the night of their anniversary.

But the absolute most important thing in that article was that Larry asked for his boat to be inspected for safety just prior to the ill-fated night, by someone who was qualified to make such an inspection. It's difficult to imagine Larry being guilty if he asked for his boat to be inspected. The person declined to inspect the boat, which is tragic, because he would have been able to verify the existence of the much talked-about second raft.

If Larry Race was SO concerned about safety as to seek out an inspection, why was he lacking the most basic safety equipment besides lift jackets... a VHF. Obviously, it was not a matter of money, scuba equipment and dry suits are NOT cheap. I can't believe ANYONE would go out in a boat that he had previously had to rescue his CHILDREN from without investing in a VHF, the boater's lifeline. This is how the scenario would have played out if he had one:

Turns on radio to 16.
"Mayday, mayday, mayday... This is the Jenny Lee, we are taking on water."
"Jenny Lee, Jenny Lee, Jenny Lee, this is Coast Guard Station <yada yada>, what is your location?"

The Coasties would have come out and any nearby vessels would have gone to help. They were the boater's equivalent of a cellphone in those days and not having one, particularly with children and an unreliable boat is negligent and just play stupid."


Also, he'd have gotten much further if he had towed the boat instead of pushing it (unless that's a mistake in the reenactment.) I've been in that situation, adrift in a raft, a bigger, heavier raft, when I was a teenager. Swimming while holding on to a rope is a much more efficient and quick way to get to safety. It's the equivalent of swimming freestyle vs. using a kick board. There's a reason there is no kick board event in the Olympics. As a diver and seasoned boat owner, he'd have known these things.

Well, since I think Race is guilty, I see his request for a safety inspection negatively.

IMO, he was trying to get the deputy sheriff to look over the boat and declare, on paper, that it met all the required safety standards. Probably the usual stuff like flotation devices, fire extinguisher, etc. Members of my family and I have been stopped by cops a few times while on the water for unexpected safety inspections. If you pass, they sometimes give you a sticker to put on the boat so you don't get stopped again. I'm actually kind of surprised that the deputy declined to do the inspection. If this happened near the docks or on the waters of Lake Superior or wherever, seems like he'd want to go ahead and help the boater out.

So, if Race had obtained that inspection, when his wife turns up dead, he's got no less than a law enforcement officer on the record stating that the boat was safe and Debbie's death wasn't due to any negligence on Larry's part.

BTW, the deputy declined to do the inspection, and Larry went ahead and volunteered the information that he had not just one, but TWO life rafts on board. He was the epitome of a responsible skipper. :rolleyes:

If Larry Race was SO concerned about safety as to seek out an inspection, why was he lacking the most basic safety equipment besides lift jackets... a VHF. Obviously, it was not a matter of money, scuba equipment and dry suits are NOT cheap. I can't believe ANYONE would go out in a boat that he had previously had to rescue his CHILDREN from without investing in a VHF, the boater's lifeline. This is how the scenario would have played out if he had one:

Turns on radio to 16.
"Mayday, mayday, mayday... This is the Jenny Lee, we are taking on water."
"Jenny Lee, Jenny Lee, Jenny Lee, this is Coast Guard Station <yada yada>, what is your location?"

The Coasties would have come out and any nearby vessels would have gone to help. They were the boater's equivalent of a cellphone in those days and not having one, particularly with children and an unreliable boat is negligent and just play stupid."


Also, he'd have gotten much further if he had towed the boat instead of pushing it (unless that's a mistake in the reenactment.) I've been in that situation, adrift in a raft, a bigger, heavier raft, when I was a teenager. Swimming while holding on to a rope is a much more efficient and quick way to get to safety. It's the equivalent of swimming freestyle vs. using a kick board. There's a reason there is no kick board event in the Olympics. As a diver and seasoned boat owner, he'd have known these things.

The guy had life jackets, 2 life rafts, flares, scuba equipment, a dry suit, and extensive repairs done to the boat. But all of that isn't good enough for you?
You know, if he were really careless, he could have taken the boat out way further than he did, making swimming to shore virtually impossible.

Nearby vessels could have helped? But there were no nearby vessels around, that's just the thing. Not until it was too late anyways.

The guy had life jackets, 2 life rafts, flares, scuba equipment, a dry suit, and extensive repairs done to the boat. But all of that isn't good enough for you?
You know, if he were really careless, he could have taken the boat out way further than he did, making swimming to shore virtually impossible.

Nearby vessels could have helped? But there were no nearby vessels around, that's just the thing. Not until it was too late anyways.

Frankly, no, it's not good enough for me. A VHF was a boater's lifeline back then (and still is to some extent) and a source of weather updates and small craft advisories and the like. Squalls can appear on the water is a heartbeat. And by "nearby" vessels, I meant anyone who could hear him hailing, someone out of visual distance could easily have heard a mayday, as well as people sitting on their boats in marinas or staff at marinas or yacht clubs who often monitor 16.

Scuba equipment and a dry suit are of no use to someone who isn't a trained diver, not to mention there was ONE dry suit and he frequently took the boat out with more than himself on it. I don't count this as safety equipment for anyone but Larry.

This man was no weekend newbie to boating, he knew how to drop the alternator. He was trained in cold water diving and immersion hypothermia. He tried to get into the 2 man raft (that he himself said really only held one person) while it was in the water. Any kid who has ever played around in one of those rafts knows that you can't get in one from the water without letting water into the boat. A fair amount of water, in fact, enough to saturate his wife's clothing that was in contact with the bottom of the raft and begin the hypothermia process.

In my opinion, he was either pathologically irresponsible or guilty as a kid caught in the cookie jar.

Well, since I think Race is guilty, I see his request for a safety inspection negatively.

IMO, he was trying to get the deputy sheriff to look over the boat and declare, on paper, that it met all the required safety standards. Probably the usual stuff like flotation devices, fire extinguisher, etc. Members of my family and I have been stopped by cops a few times while on the water for unexpected safety inspections. If you pass, they sometimes give you a sticker to put on the boat so you don't get stopped again. I'm actually kind of surprised that the deputy declined to do the inspection. If this happened near the docks or on the waters of Lake Superior or wherever, seems like he'd want to go ahead and help the boater out.

So, if Race had obtained that inspection, when his wife turns up dead, he's got no less than a law enforcement officer on the record stating that the boat was safe and Debbie's death wasn't due to any negligence on Larry's part.

BTW, the deputy declined to do the inspection, and Larry went ahead and volunteered the information that he had not just one, but TWO life rafts on board. He was the epitome of a responsible skipper. :rolleyes:

I've always thought Race was attempting to goad the deputy into inspecting the boat so he could later say, "see I did indeed have two rafts" if any suspicion fell on him. Seems like ol' Larry had this thing planned for quite some time.

Yeah. I'm not sure I know a single boater who would ASK for a safety inspection.

Yeah. I'm not sure I know a single boater who would ASK for a safety inspection.

Exactly, because the odds are fairly high that the inspection will find some "violation" or something you don't have on board, etc. It's almost like he was trying to have a "witness" validate the fact that he owned two rafts and had them on board.