AP 3207 Rules
OD,
The point is surely not whether the CinC thought his findings to be reasonable - you have to assume he did, as he presumably also did for the Mull. The point is whether he could meet the burden of proof requirements of 3207 - the BoI and AOC did not think so - so should deceased aircrew be found guilty of negligence by one man's opinion - for that is all it can be unless there is clear evidnece of legal advice being taken (and even that apparently wasn't too reliable in the case of the Mull) - even if he is sitting at the top of tree! For the Mull a learned judge (and indeed learned judges before him) found that the burden of proof had not been met (nothing to do with whether they knew anything about the operation of RAF aircraft, but everything to do with the law and justice) - is the Akrotiri finding any different?
JB