And - The Bookie wins - again.
The odds on the 'Wrangler' board of my Tote were set the day of the fatal event. There is a fairly wide spread of punter options, a total of 18 'options' are there; a spread of very short 'odds on' to some seriously long odds to tempt the imagination.
The RSPCA is already fairly well ahead; the odds on the following items were set at a good (tempting) 'each-way' punt.
"The cross-claim was filed by CASA after Federal Court judge Elizabeth Raper rejected the regulator’s application to be dropped from the case."
Never going to happen; the shocking lack of attention paid during approval and absence of surveillance afterwards; particularly toward the (cue Alarm bell) Broome connection and those events; the common knowledge of a light approach toward 'compliance' and the lack of CASA interest after certification should never have attracted a single bet. The thing that will remain in the industry mind is the visit made by the CASA board to the operation. There are several valid theories regarding this event; they are the subject of much 'discussion'. Suffice to say there will (definitely) be more on this later; real motive, fascinating.
"Ms Wilson’s case against CASA argues the regulator should not have allowed “human slinging without proper surveillance or oversight of Helibrook”.
The CASA legal whizzes will knock that into a cocked hat - 10 minutes max. There are (IMO) 'better' avenues to prosecute; outside the scope of the current ballet of legal nicety at present. Much will depend on how 'deep' the prosecution is prepared to delve and how much wriggle room the 'agency' has. But I would probably start with the Operations Manual, the approval and the 'ability' and experience of those approving it had with 'Air-work' operations in remote areas; and the number of subsequent visits to check it was all going according to Hoyle. Or, even visited a local pub - and connect Broome with Darwin. Who knows?? Just a simple count of 'machinery' and paper work lost due 'circumstances' should raise some interest. Mark you; the pair of 'inspectors' tasked with this where probably the two least qualified to oversight and monitor this operation. Lack of interest and zero Kudos potential motivation for MIF.
Aye, all speculation, useless in the real world of courts, Barristers, insurance companies, CASA and the ATSB. Just my two bob each way bets, sealed and pinned on the dartboard cupboard door.
Toot - toot..
The odds on the 'Wrangler' board of my Tote were set the day of the fatal event. There is a fairly wide spread of punter options, a total of 18 'options' are there; a spread of very short 'odds on' to some seriously long odds to tempt the imagination.
The RSPCA is already fairly well ahead; the odds on the following items were set at a good (tempting) 'each-way' punt.
"The cross-claim was filed by CASA after Federal Court judge Elizabeth Raper rejected the regulator’s application to be dropped from the case."
Never going to happen; the shocking lack of attention paid during approval and absence of surveillance afterwards; particularly toward the (cue Alarm bell) Broome connection and those events; the common knowledge of a light approach toward 'compliance' and the lack of CASA interest after certification should never have attracted a single bet. The thing that will remain in the industry mind is the visit made by the CASA board to the operation. There are several valid theories regarding this event; they are the subject of much 'discussion'. Suffice to say there will (definitely) be more on this later; real motive, fascinating.
"Ms Wilson’s case against CASA argues the regulator should not have allowed “human slinging without proper surveillance or oversight of Helibrook”.
The CASA legal whizzes will knock that into a cocked hat - 10 minutes max. There are (IMO) 'better' avenues to prosecute; outside the scope of the current ballet of legal nicety at present. Much will depend on how 'deep' the prosecution is prepared to delve and how much wriggle room the 'agency' has. But I would probably start with the Operations Manual, the approval and the 'ability' and experience of those approving it had with 'Air-work' operations in remote areas; and the number of subsequent visits to check it was all going according to Hoyle. Or, even visited a local pub - and connect Broome with Darwin. Who knows?? Just a simple count of 'machinery' and paper work lost due 'circumstances' should raise some interest. Mark you; the pair of 'inspectors' tasked with this where probably the two least qualified to oversight and monitor this operation. Lack of interest and zero Kudos potential motivation for MIF.
Aye, all speculation, useless in the real world of courts, Barristers, insurance companies, CASA and the ATSB. Just my two bob each way bets, sealed and pinned on the dartboard cupboard door.
Toot - toot..