And this is the whole point of the Campaign. There is uncertainty. There is an element of doubt. Therefore, the verdict cannot stand.
On the one hand, and writing about the Chinook crash, ACM Wratten states: Without the irrefutable evidence which is provided by an ADR and a CVR,
there is inevitably a degree of speculation as to the precise detail of the sequence of events in the minutes and seconds immediately prior to impact.
Yet, fifteen days later, he writes, on another BoI:
It is therefore because there is no scope for conjecture (and not too much scope, as the Station Commander believes) that I find any consideration of human failings to be academic and fruitless. Despite the wealth of detailed evidence, we are confounded and under these particular circumstances. I consider it is futile to indulge in hypothesis.
There is a 'wealth of evidence' and it is futile to indulge, yet where there is minimal evidence, there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever.
I think not.
Still no news from Westminster folks, but as soon as there is, I will let you know.
My best, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook