F/O responsibilities
MrWooby, I did not suggest that the F/O should just sit there and accept the inevitable crash. In fact, I said that the Captain ignored the F/O's expressions of concern with the approach and landing. He did call for a "Go-around", he did point out the instability of the approach. He did not attempt to physically take control, which given his lack of training and the importance placed on the hierarchy in Asia, I can understand. There have been many times where the handling pilot has screwed up the approach and has conducted a missed approach before subsequently landing.
This aircraft left the runway at 110 kts, and unlike the Qantas B744 at Bangkok, which made a "long and hot" touchdown on a contaminated runway and which went off the end at 88 kts, did not have a quagmire to bring it to a stop. The Qantas accident could have been much worse had there not been a very wet and soggy over-run area. Maybe the Garuda F/O could have been more forceful, but to suggest he was culpable is a bit too strong in my view. His situation was not one of taking control from a physically incapacitated handling pilot, although one may contend that he was mentally incapacitated.