Middle Island event.
Well, it has taken a while, but Hell; after John Quadrio and a couple of other unmentionable 'cases', we have learned to wait and see; then read the transcripts. This of course leads into all kinds of dark, murky corners. For instance:-
LB - “What caused the engine failure?”
Bloody good question – as yet unresolved by the ATSB. However, an independent 'report' on the serviceability of the engine tells a tale worthy of some consideration. In short, the engine had not been 'legal' since 2013; many short falls noted; any one of which could (I did say could) have caused the engine failure. The 'report' on the status of that engine and the 'knock-on' effects have not been mentioned. It begs the question, how 'deep' did the ATSB delve into the 'why' of the engine failure. Seems to me a forensic examination of its maintenance history could have been useful – to the defence.
Item two: - from Pprune - “And the result? Guilty. After being charged with "dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death", and "grievous bodily harm". After less than half-a-day of deliberations, too; the jury must've been pretty adamant there were better options than those he took.”
Yes, 'tis so – however, the closing remarks of the Judge reflect a different, unbiased, experienced appraisal. The 'sentencing' closing remarks opened the door wide for a righteous appeal. In fact, reading through some of the 'prosecution' evidence, as presented, should galvanise the entire pilot population into outrage; and self preservation. The CASA dudes; posing as genuine 'posters' of Pprune stand out like the proverbial dog's balls; misleading and distracting.
Capt Bloggs sent the message in a nicely drafted post on the UP:-
"This should have been an inquisitorial investigation, not Adversarial. I still maintain that, in these highly technical cases which are totally unfamiliar to the jury, they (the jurors) haven't got a hope of, effectively, being taught to fly in the number of days of the trial, let alone being bombarded with the counter arguments being pushed by both sides. For the vast majority of court cases, theft, fraud, aggression (rape, murder) drunken car accident, speeding at 200kph in a 60 zone, the jurors are well aware and understand the scenario. They don't have to learn about it. They only have to shift through the evidence to decide and most probably can spot BS artists a mile away."
"In this situation, they have none of that. Most people wouldn't have a clue about aviation, much less the finer points of doing a turn when confronted with a water landing.I hope none of you end up in court facing Harvey Spectre after an aviation accident."
The accused fellah needs to raise some money for the appeal – AOPA are running a 'Go-Fundme' drive; if you have a few bucks to spare (difficult these days I know) kick the tin and help. IMO, the results of the appeal will send shivers through the opposition. Don't be too swayed by the skewed arguments and pontification of the CASA ring ins on the UP.
My two Bob, spent as pleased me best, to back my opinion. FWIW........
Toot – toot.....
Well, it has taken a while, but Hell; after John Quadrio and a couple of other unmentionable 'cases', we have learned to wait and see; then read the transcripts. This of course leads into all kinds of dark, murky corners. For instance:-
LB - “What caused the engine failure?”
Bloody good question – as yet unresolved by the ATSB. However, an independent 'report' on the serviceability of the engine tells a tale worthy of some consideration. In short, the engine had not been 'legal' since 2013; many short falls noted; any one of which could (I did say could) have caused the engine failure. The 'report' on the status of that engine and the 'knock-on' effects have not been mentioned. It begs the question, how 'deep' did the ATSB delve into the 'why' of the engine failure. Seems to me a forensic examination of its maintenance history could have been useful – to the defence.
Item two: - from Pprune - “And the result? Guilty. After being charged with "dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death", and "grievous bodily harm". After less than half-a-day of deliberations, too; the jury must've been pretty adamant there were better options than those he took.”
Yes, 'tis so – however, the closing remarks of the Judge reflect a different, unbiased, experienced appraisal. The 'sentencing' closing remarks opened the door wide for a righteous appeal. In fact, reading through some of the 'prosecution' evidence, as presented, should galvanise the entire pilot population into outrage; and self preservation. The CASA dudes; posing as genuine 'posters' of Pprune stand out like the proverbial dog's balls; misleading and distracting.
Capt Bloggs sent the message in a nicely drafted post on the UP:-
"This should have been an inquisitorial investigation, not Adversarial. I still maintain that, in these highly technical cases which are totally unfamiliar to the jury, they (the jurors) haven't got a hope of, effectively, being taught to fly in the number of days of the trial, let alone being bombarded with the counter arguments being pushed by both sides. For the vast majority of court cases, theft, fraud, aggression (rape, murder) drunken car accident, speeding at 200kph in a 60 zone, the jurors are well aware and understand the scenario. They don't have to learn about it. They only have to shift through the evidence to decide and most probably can spot BS artists a mile away."
"In this situation, they have none of that. Most people wouldn't have a clue about aviation, much less the finer points of doing a turn when confronted with a water landing.I hope none of you end up in court facing Harvey Spectre after an aviation accident."
The accused fellah needs to raise some money for the appeal – AOPA are running a 'Go-Fundme' drive; if you have a few bucks to spare (difficult these days I know) kick the tin and help. IMO, the results of the appeal will send shivers through the opposition. Don't be too swayed by the skewed arguments and pontification of the CASA ring ins on the UP.
My two Bob, spent as pleased me best, to back my opinion. FWIW........
Toot – toot.....