ap:-
As ever, the punishable offence is not the endangering of the aircraft and people on board, but the lack of integrity (or "telling lies", as it was called when I was serving) that followed.
Can I just remind you and others that he was found not guilty of the three charges relating to perjury and making false record? Now you may well know different, but since when did Military Law become mob law? The discussion since has been about the severity of the sentence passed and to why that should be. Now we find that he has successfully appealed and is no longer dismissed the Service. Let's just accept due process and put the nooses away shall we?
ATG :-
Someone made him bring the camera into the cockpit, and then lie about it?
Why do you ask that? I've taken cameras onto flight decks, both civil and military. Nobody made me, and why should I want to lie about it? He was charged with not having admitted that he had jammed the controls with his camera by motoring his seat forward. He was found not guilty of that because he hadn't known that he had. As far as I know he was not charged with having taken the camera with him to the flight deck, because as far as I know that is not an offence. No doubt you are about to tell us different...
The tragedy in all this is that there would appear to have been a design fault in the pinch point between control stick and arm rest in which anything could have jammed. Has this been mitigated, or is it now simply an offence to allow this known hole to align with all the waiting other holes?