PP - She is bearing up well, but is feeling isolated. If you PM me I will send you her e-mail address as she would really appreciate the support.
The only other thing we can do to help is to explain what you know to your colleagues on the flight deck. There is a lot of misinformation being put around by people from the other side of the fence and that needs to be countered.
Unfortunately many people seem to hold the view that she is guilty until proved innocent. The thinking there seems to be along the lines of ....an excellent company like ours would never try to engineer a situation where flight deck felt their job could be on the line if they did not go into discretion!
The Captian is being advised by BALPA that she must not bring this into the public domain whilst her case is sub judice. This is also BALPAs reason for not issuing any statement about the case.
4468 - Interesting that you did not take up my invitation to dispute any of the facts.
What I said in my last post was that publically the company are saying it is about "deliberately allowing circumstances to arise" because they cannot say anything else. In private though they let the cat out of the bag that it is actually about not bringing the aircraft back ie not going into discretion.
At the risk of repeating myself the facts are clear that she actually did everything correctly and, in seven separate instances, took action to expedite the flights.
The basis of the company position seems to be two statements given by people trying to persuade her to go into discretion over the telephone (unfortunately the tape is not available)