A Sunday trifle.
Alors, Monsieur Tom, comme vous voulez. Edit appreciated – I have returned the favour, so we’ll call the bet square then. To business – the text highlighted, for me at least, provides the quintessential example of how CASA view not only the tenets of law, the spirit and the intent of law, but their very own perverted way a ‘using’ the law. It has been endemic since Illich – famous for stating something along the lines of (paraphrased) the law is for the safe conviction of criminals – or words to that effect. He started with the premise that you were guilty – in any event – and must prove your innocence. Achieving this was not considered any form of protection; CASA had you marked a law breaker. We have a unique system where if you escape a court prosecution, there is always the risk of either an appeal; or the AAAT hearing. IMO it is a form of double jeopardy. Even if you do manage to wriggle off both of those hooks, there is still the ‘system’ to worry you. Make no mistake about it – a win in court, a win in the AAT simply means a pyric, temporary stay of execution; the ‘system’ will eventually ‘getcha’.
This, stand alone, is a disgusting fact supported by volumes of evidence; but, it ain’t the ugly end of the plank. The truly ugly part is the way the system can be abused, fully supported by the extremes of law to the detriment or advancement of whatever an individual officer wants to achieve. Countless examples available.
We have seen the syntax in the highlighted passage many times now; from the same individual. The arrogance is breath taking; a court of qualified professional folk who deal with ‘the law’ have decided against the CASA generated opinions – provided as ‘facts and circumstances’. To achieve this ‘not guilty’ call is an expensive, uphill, arduous task, but the verdict stands. Does this worry the ‘conviction at any cost’ crowd; not at all: CASA believe you guilty, despite a favourable verdict. At worst the argument will be re-jigged to suit the appeal; or, the AAT will be used to further the case for an ‘equal’ weight penalty; if this is not wicked enough and that too fails – then the rumour mill and whispering campaign begins. The spite and venom which pours out of CASA, at field office level is the stuff of legend and causes the sensitive to have nightmares. Given a platform, you and I both know that the supporting evidence would shock a nation. Alas. I’ve more chance of winning the Miss Universe competition than getting the truth heard; but, nonetheless, we will keep piling up the real ‘facts and circumstance’ against the off chance that an opportunity to present it may, miraculously, one day appear.
“I consider” despite a court thinking otherwise says it all. But who is this ‘considerer’ this guru of aviation, this doyen of aeronautical judgement, this all seeing master of dodgy doings? We must all hope; nay, fervently pray, to our pagan gods of choice that this immortal is indeed immaculate. There would be hell to pay if it ever turned out that it was just some drunken, degenerate, unqualified incompetent who had slithered into a top job on the coat tales of the celebrated McConvict. Aye, it matters little; no matter who gets the job. Hood became a willing catamite of the McComic Chamber pot society, but they have long since departed the fix, although their great work continues unabated, it follows then, that the next incumbent would tread the same path; or resign in disgust. Which begs the questions; is it the individuals who are corrupted by the system or is it just a corrupt system? A system which attracts a certain type?
(Dusts off own favourite little drum) – first and foremost reform the regulator – all else is doomed to fail; thirty years of solid evidence supports the argument; the last ten prove it, IMO beyond any and all doubt.
Toot toot -
Alors, Monsieur Tom, comme vous voulez. Edit appreciated – I have returned the favour, so we’ll call the bet square then. To business – the text highlighted, for me at least, provides the quintessential example of how CASA view not only the tenets of law, the spirit and the intent of law, but their very own perverted way a ‘using’ the law. It has been endemic since Illich – famous for stating something along the lines of (paraphrased) the law is for the safe conviction of criminals – or words to that effect. He started with the premise that you were guilty – in any event – and must prove your innocence. Achieving this was not considered any form of protection; CASA had you marked a law breaker. We have a unique system where if you escape a court prosecution, there is always the risk of either an appeal; or the AAAT hearing. IMO it is a form of double jeopardy. Even if you do manage to wriggle off both of those hooks, there is still the ‘system’ to worry you. Make no mistake about it – a win in court, a win in the AAT simply means a pyric, temporary stay of execution; the ‘system’ will eventually ‘getcha’.
This, stand alone, is a disgusting fact supported by volumes of evidence; but, it ain’t the ugly end of the plank. The truly ugly part is the way the system can be abused, fully supported by the extremes of law to the detriment or advancement of whatever an individual officer wants to achieve. Countless examples available.
We have seen the syntax in the highlighted passage many times now; from the same individual. The arrogance is breath taking; a court of qualified professional folk who deal with ‘the law’ have decided against the CASA generated opinions – provided as ‘facts and circumstances’. To achieve this ‘not guilty’ call is an expensive, uphill, arduous task, but the verdict stands. Does this worry the ‘conviction at any cost’ crowd; not at all: CASA believe you guilty, despite a favourable verdict. At worst the argument will be re-jigged to suit the appeal; or, the AAT will be used to further the case for an ‘equal’ weight penalty; if this is not wicked enough and that too fails – then the rumour mill and whispering campaign begins. The spite and venom which pours out of CASA, at field office level is the stuff of legend and causes the sensitive to have nightmares. Given a platform, you and I both know that the supporting evidence would shock a nation. Alas. I’ve more chance of winning the Miss Universe competition than getting the truth heard; but, nonetheless, we will keep piling up the real ‘facts and circumstance’ against the off chance that an opportunity to present it may, miraculously, one day appear.
“I consider” despite a court thinking otherwise says it all. But who is this ‘considerer’ this guru of aviation, this doyen of aeronautical judgement, this all seeing master of dodgy doings? We must all hope; nay, fervently pray, to our pagan gods of choice that this immortal is indeed immaculate. There would be hell to pay if it ever turned out that it was just some drunken, degenerate, unqualified incompetent who had slithered into a top job on the coat tales of the celebrated McConvict. Aye, it matters little; no matter who gets the job. Hood became a willing catamite of the McComic Chamber pot society, but they have long since departed the fix, although their great work continues unabated, it follows then, that the next incumbent would tread the same path; or resign in disgust. Which begs the questions; is it the individuals who are corrupted by the system or is it just a corrupt system? A system which attracts a certain type?
(Dusts off own favourite little drum) – first and foremost reform the regulator – all else is doomed to fail; thirty years of solid evidence supports the argument; the last ten prove it, IMO beyond any and all doubt.
Toot toot -