Peter
It was a loop and my comments in a previous post related to a different case. The defence never suggested that it was possible incapacitation from high G. Very few people who are commenting on this case heard any of the evidence that was given at trial. Many have been selective in picking bits read in newspapers and newspapers are themselves selective in what they report "always worth sacrificing the truth for a good headline"
Can I make it quite plain this case was never about high G, it was never about G-LOC it was never about A-LOC please read my post at #132 above where I sought to give an explanation as to what the issue actually was.
Thank you for making the point about the expressions A-LOC and G-LOC were not really used in the 80's. That was what AH said in evidence and has been leapt on by people suggesting he lied when he said he hadn't heard certain expressions because he said he didn't know about the effect of G. He didn't lie, he talked about the limitations of training and imparted knowledge at the time compared with knowledge/training today. Other witnesses, prosecution witneses, confirmed what he said.