"The subsequent Court of Appeal after Mahon’s report came out successfully quashed Mahon’s attributing blame to the company, although his findings on the cause of the disaster were never challenged. The minority report of CA totally exonerated the company of any blame.
This kinda pissed off Justice Mahon, so he took his marbles and left the game"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Because the findings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the cause of the disaster were limited in scope, being legally an opinion and not a statement of fact, they could not be appealed in legal terms, unlike the Office of Air Accident investigation report, which remains the sole official account---and has never been officially challenged."
It would appear "facts" depend upon where you find them.
"Successfully quashed Mahon's attributing blame to the company, although his findings on the cause of the disaster were never challenged".
Seeing as that he put all the blame of the company, and the Appeal Court said he was wrong, how do you reconcile that with the statement that
"His findings on the cause of the disaster were not challenged"
Last edited by prospector; 1st Feb 2008 at 01:38.