Originally Posted by
43Inches
In any case the Hudson river incident highlights the point. Sully did what he thought was best, the outcome was optimal with no loss of life or even serious injury. He was then put through the ringer in court to prove what he did was justified, even to the point they tried to hang him by saying a split second decision could have been made to fly over built up areas and try to make a runway. ...
Originally Posted by
Clinton McKenzie
I'm glad at least one person gets the actual point of my example, 43. (It was the NTSB, not a court, that put Sully through the ringer. There's no right to silence in front of the NTSB! And no amount of defences to a prosecution protect us from civil liability or administrative action.)
You fellows appear to be relying on the dramatisation of the investigation that appeared in the movie. Perhaps you should read the NTSB report.
When it comes to a shoot-out between Hollywood and a primary source document, I tend to lean towards the latter.