Originally Posted by
Boslandew
This point has always bothered me. If the Mull was obscured by cloud, (Mr Holbrook), all the witnesses on the Mull were in fog and Mr Ellacott was within 100 metres of the crash site yet could not see it, how could the crash site not have been in fog?
Bos,
It quite probably was in fog but as there are no eyewitness's we have to also concede that maybe it wasn't, hence the "no doubt what so ever" judgment is quite clearly flawed
