I did not create the program. I did not choose the way in which words would be woven together for effect. I'll have to listen again, but I don't think anyone said there was a mechanical failure. We *thought* we had found "the smoking gun" in that fitting. Hana Gartner asked if "negligence" was found and that fitting should not have been there, and that is negligence as far as I'm concerned. As is not resealing float hatches, and a variety of other proofs of extremely poor maintenance on the aircraft.
Besides which, there was no way to test whether the carb, fuel or ignition systems were functioning at the time of the accident because they sat corroding with the fuselage for three years before they were examined.
The point of "my" segment was that the neither TC nor the TSB investigated this accident of a commercial aircraft with five working fatalities for causes, contributing factors or regulatory infractions including the Canada Labour Code. Moreover - no one learned anything. The damned TSB file A05P0039 doesn't even exist on the TSB website.
If you want to rehash the rest of the accident "story", there's already a thread that exists which you participated in. You should know well enough there is much more to the "accident" than maintenance problems. Dave's death was all about swiss cheese.
... how does it all come together?
Pretty obvious to almost everyone I talked to. Transport isn't enforcing the regulations, they're "trusting" the operators, and John Q. Public doesn't like that.