Originally Posted by
Timelord
I believe there is a record somewhere of Wratten directing, prior to this event, that if an aircraft crashed it was because someone had been negligent, or words to that effect.
The letter was written on 16 February 1995, after the crash but very importantly before the gross negligence decision was made by Day on 20 March 1995.
It is clear from the sequence of events, and the wording of Day's remarks, that Station Commander Odiham (Gp Capt Crawford) amended his remarks after he was criticised in Day's remarks for not finding blame. As published, Crawford's remarks make no sense at all, and as one senior officer said 'the join is very clear'.
CAS, Graydon, was even more critical of the BOI president for not apportioning negligence, calling his investigation 'barely adequate'.
A key player is Malcolm Rifkind. Campaigners were largely ignored and left alone by MoD, but correspondence with Rifkind made them twitch violently, and led to 'visits' and serious pressure to desist. I speak from personal experience, a deputation of four accosting me at a private event and warning me not to speak to Rifkind again. (Which I ignored). He's said it was Day and Graydon who misled him (lied by omission), failing to tell him that it was mandated upon the RAF that the Mk2 must not be flown in service. They also omitted that Textron were being sued over the engine software, and that the Senior Reviewing Officers had disagreed with the Board, and with each other. Whatever you think of politicians in general, Rifkind made a lot of enemies with this breach of parliamentary protocol. As did John Major and Jeremy Hanley. That a former Secy of State and prime minister can come out and publicly say the findings were wrong, and nothing be done, is a clue someone or something else is being protected. MoD later gave a clue, admitting UK/US relations were paramount.