Originally Posted by
DaveReidUK
Er no, it was about cognitive impairment because that was the basis of the defence case.
The judge was simply doing his job - explaining to the jury what the law was in relation to that and, consequently, what it was that they had to decide in reaching a verdict.
A more valid criticism of the judge would be if he had failed to allow in his summing up for the possibility that g-induced cognitive impairment was a consequence rather than a cause of the badly-performed loop. You would need to ask someone who was in court whether that was the case.
Dave I agree. When did this cognitive impairment begin? Before he took off? On his way to the show? At the start of the display? At the top of his loop? On the way down?
So when did it happen? Know one knows because no one knows if it happened or not. Theres no evidence it did. But more importantly, no one can prove it didnt either.
A blinder from the defence team.