The above are US FARs: Gaunty - thanks!
I agree with your comments re "innocent until proven guilty" Raw Data, but I could still imagine an insurer or a regulatory authority (esp. our CASA!) wanting to prove the pilot acted negligently in order to obivate itself of responsibilities associated with the incident.
In the absence of proof from the investigators of any other reason that the aircraft would not climb, the shoulder of blame could, unfairly, be put on the pilot.
I know that this has diverted the thread from the facts about the inital tragedy, but it is a related and important issue, possibly deserving of a thread of its own?
[ 15 August 2001: Message edited by: compressor stall ]