Well, now wait a minute here...

Exxon's argument is not that the ship was understaffed but that the captain, having fallen off the wagon and back to drinkin', acted improperly because of it and...

...therefore they (Exxon) should not be help accountable.

Facts of the case, as I understand them, is that Exxon execs knew the captain had fallen off the wagon after being treated for alcoholism... I heard on NPR that one of these execs actaully had been with the captain when both that exec amd the captain were drinking...

The under-regulated aspect, however, is very much part of the story, as well but it isn't part of Exxon's arguments to the Supreme Crooks...

What they seem to be arguing is that the captain, not them, had acted irresponsibly because of the drinking...

B~