Jerry B.
Your post leaves me somewhat piqued.
not intended and, for this, my apologies
how anybody can post an opinion on a topic without having watched the central and only supportive evidence that this topic is offering.
my comments related to the generic subject .. which comes up regularly in the Industry. Specifically, I caveated that comment was not directed at the specific doco
To discredit it after review (if warranted) is OK!
my purpose is not to discredit the doco .. rather to highlight some general observations on docos .. which, possibly, will have some application to the present item
whether there is a safety issue or not
any time that questions relating to design and manufacture arise there is an implied safety consideration. The important matter is for any allegations to be subject to competent audit which, in this sort of instance, is the Regulator. If we are talking about the principal NAAs then we have to start with the premise that the Regulator has a reasonable level of integrity
there appears to be an inappropriate relationship between the investigating and investigated parties
and that may be a relevant observation - I have no way of knowing - however, a TV doco is not the basis for necessary and adequate evidence. If the matter has proceeded to court then one would reasonably presume that folk in appropriate places have instituted audits of material considerations
I refer to original footage of a video taped court affidavit.
such (or similar) was presumed. However, an affidavit doesn't necessarily constitute irrefutable fact .. as most who have been through the divorce courts would opine ...
I reserve my right to form an opinion on any poster's contribution on a post by post basis
a perfectly proper consideration ..