Brian,
Wondered where you were, welcome back.
Where to start?
Right: the BOI is an administrative tool acting on behalf of the relevant C in C to collect and analyse all possible data regarding an accident or, if deemed necessary, an incident. In cases involving death then it is mandatory that the President of the BOI is at least of Wg Cdr rank. The composition and administration of the BOI is delegated to the relevant AOC.
The 'findings' of the President and the Board members are not writ in stone nor brought down from on high. The BOI passes through the relevant Group HQ where it is analysed and commented on by the relevant Group Staff (ie Air/Admin/Engineering etc).
Specialist comment, such as Medical opinion, would come from outside agencies. At the end of this process the AOC will append his comments and the BOI will be delivered to the CinC.
The same procedure will be followed at Command level and the CinC
will then append his narrative and decisions which may be at variance with those of the AOC.
The decision to apportion negligence in the final analysis is solely the prerogative of the CinC. It is he, and he alone, as the responsible Commander who makes the final decision.
The question of whether you, I or the "man in the Saloon Bar" believe the crew were negligent does not arise as far as these administrative procedures are concerned .
If, following a BOI, it is decided that Court Martial proceedings are justified then a Summary of Evidence will have to be taken. It is not permissable to utilise the evidence given on oath to a BOI as part of the Summary of Evidence.