Hanging their Lordships out to dry is commendable if they deserve it, but perhaps we have a case of two negligences to persue...............?
Baston
I think you'll have a hard job finding anyone on my side of the argument who will say that Cook & Tapper definitively
were not negligent. We can never know as there is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove negligence. A cursory reading of the
HoL Cttee findings shows that no-one on this Earth can say that Cook & Tapper were in unhindered control of the aircraft after waypoint change. Day's 'facts' are convincingly shot down as opinion based on a flawed Boeing computer model.
A finding of Gross Negligence requires a standard of proof of "No doubt whatsoever". It is therefore not possible to find Cook & Tapper guilty of gross negligence.
The astonishing turn of events is that now Dalton in his rush to dismiss the BBC revelations with the standard Kafkaesque bureaucratic mantra "not new evidence" has admitted in a letter to the press that the [positively dangerous] Fadec software faults were well known to the MoD but were dealt with in the [incomplete and incomprehensible to aircrew operating the aircraft] aircrew operating instructions.
The campaign has never sought to 'hang' anyone else over this tragedy. Merely to clear Cook & Tapper's names from the unjust finding of gross negligence. By their actions, the RAF seem to be forcing events to a point where an inquiry into the whole release to service becomes inevitable. That being a bureaucratic process, there will be plenty of evidence to prove or disprove negligence in the release to service process.