RedactedNarrative:      On June 16, 2018, I, Deputy, while assigned to the Douglas County Sheriff''s Office Maritime Unit was contacted by Nevada Division of Wildlife (NDOW) Game Warden regarding a boating collision that occurred on Lake Tahoe in the area of Glenbrook Bay.  Warden informed me he and his partner, Game Warden, were investigating a collision involving V-1 and V-3 in the area of Glenbrook Bay mooring ball number 42 (Refer to NDOW report number NDW18-0073 for details regarding the events surrounding the collision between V-1 and V-3).
       Warden1 told me, while rendering assistance and investigating the collision between V-1 and V-3 he elected to take V-3 under tow behind his vessel (V-5) to remove it from the area of the collision in an attempt to free V-1 from the mooring line, which was attached to V-3.  Warden1 estimated the winds were blowing at approximately 20 miles per hour and the waves in the area of the collision were 2 to 3 feet.  Warden1 said when he took V-3 under tow and was maneuvering V-3 away from the collision scene. V-3 was not completely behind his vessel while under tow and was struck by V-4, which was unoccupied and moored nearby on Glenbrook Bay mooring ball 51 (Refer to the NDOW report number NDW18-0073 for information and statements by Game Warden1 and 2 regarding the collision of V-3 with V-4).
       Warden1 told me an employee of Glenbrook Homeowners Association, was operating V-2 and was also rendering assistance at the scene of the collision between V-1 and V-3.  I contacted Operator2 and through conversation and questioning learned the following:  Operator2 said he boarded V-3 and was on that vessel when it was under tow by V-5.  Operator2 said V-1 appeared to maneuver astern (backing up) striking V-2, which he had made fast to V-3.  When V-1 struck V-2 it in turn struck V-3, causing V-3 to come in contact with V-4 (Refer to Operator2'' statement for additional information).
       I contacted Operator1, the operator of V-1 and his passenger.  Operator1 and V1 occupant denied that V-1 maneuvered astern as described by Operator2.  
       Operator1 said Warden1 made a statement to him and V1 occupant that he had lost control of V2 and the accident was his fault (Refer to the statements of Operator1 and V1 occupant for additional details on their account of this matter).
       I conducted no on scene investigation related to this matter due to the fact that I was contacted after all vessels had been removed from the area.  Operator2 provided me with 30 digital photographs he took while at the scene of the collision.  Game Warden provided me with 21 digital photographs taken while he was at the scene of the collision.  All the digital photographs I received were booked onto the “R” drive at DCSO for retention as evidence.
       Due to the conflicting statements between Operator1, V1 occupant and Operator2 coupled with the lack of physical evidence I am unable to determine the primary collision factor resulting in V-3 colliding with V-4 while under tow behin...
  