I am surprised that they would come up with the beforementioned "negligent homicide and grievous bodily harm by negligence" in respect to this accident an not the one before.
About a year before crossair had the saab 340 crash at Nassenwil, a case where the prosecution would have much stronger case.
Another question that comes up is the nicely worded but very bold statement:
Investigators concluded that over a long period airline officials "did not make correct assessments of the commander's flying performance. Where weaknesses were perceptible, they did not take the appropriate measures."
Shouldn't we interprete that like "We knew he was a flunky but had him pass years and years of LPC/OPC's anyway" ?
Could this be the basis of the prosecutions case?
If this case gets people convicted, I wonder what will happen if the Nassenwil saab 340 crash ever makes it into a swiss courtroom.