Clapton
Why not take your CASA wig orf and examine this objectively.
Remember the world was going to come to an end with strict liability according to AOPA.
This was an offence of strict liability - therefore one asks why around four and a half thousand other criminals have been allowed to commit VCA without punitive action if the offence justifies the SL categorisation?
I have yet to see a factual story about CASA in the AOPA magazine.
Oh dear, that ruins my reading. I have their current mag in front of me and it says good things about CASA in several cases. Oh well, I guess if it's not factual I'll just have to believe your impression of the CASA 'Judge Roy Bean' instead 
Your bias is showing, Clappers. Bit like the bias of one of the involved parties in the CASA investigation of this matter - if we moved to the real world of business and company law we might call it conflict of interest perhaps.
If this had been Mr Plod waiting for one motorist out of 4500 driving past it would be getting a media pasting.
I'm still researching and my hope of visiting the location to examine their doco might slip to next week due to needing to sort out some research into a dodgy shire matter, so I'll leave it at that for now.
Sorry about the delay but if it takes CASA over 3 years to prosecute a 'danger to aviation' I think my delay is acceptable.
Perhaps readers can give some thought to my earlier comment re statistical probability and when a matter becomes NOT the due process of law as you suggest with your Crimes Act etc quotes - but the use of the CASA process for selective attack on someone who was a thorn in the side for pointing out publicly a number of apparent CASA failures to pursue serious safety matters.
Hint - you don't just need to owe money to payback 
Last edited by james michael; 20th Aug 2008 at 22:20.
Reason: Fix spelling of a word now glasses put on