Originally Posted by
tucumseh
The High Court ruled that the AAIB report could not be used in a criminal trial. ... Here, the Coroner has used it to make what is effectively a criminal judgment. I wonder if that is why the pilot is thinking about a judicial review?
A finding of unlawful killing is not effectively a criminal judgment. On this occasion,
Wiki explains perfectly well enough why:
"In R (on the application of Maughan) v Her Majesty's Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire[3] the Supreme Court clarified that the standard of proof for suicide and unlawful killing in an inquest is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities and not the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt."
Hill's defence managed to introduce reasonable doubt, but IMHO not balance of probabilities doubt. He will just have to get used to life in the legal no-man's land in between. Next question: civil action by the families, and against whom...