I have from time to time poked my head around the door to put a point of view when I think the moment is right. This is one of those moments.
Mr Purdey
I believe I can claim that you have consistently, over many months, not accepted any aspect of this incident that raises one or more of the potently serious questions as to actual negligence by these two fine officers. Indeed, I seem to re-call that you refute so much and try to justify your views when you ignore the most important, the most significant and the most pointed of all matters, 'certified' by honurable gentlemen which cannot include the Air Marshalls, for they might just as well be you.
This is it, and..........I might just add that it is virtually unanswerable and not capable of being mis-understood. Why then Mr Purdey do you always seemingly IGNORE it. I quote it from Tandem Rotors post because he has made it so clear for anyone and everyone to understand as no other.
Which is effectively what the PAC said, and why no extensive aviation knowledge is required to see that, a miscarriage of natural justice occured when the 2 Air Marshalls ignored the direction that the President of the BOI wrestled with.
That is:
"Only in cases in which there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever, should deceased aircrew be found negligent"
A standard that I, and many others, find absolutely in keeping with the very highest traditions of the Royal Air Force.
Please answer it Mr Purdey for it is a written regulation that no-one can alter, manipulate or simply change to suit.
PPP