Folks,
A point that will have most definitely occurred to the defense counsel is a matter of the fundamental meaning of "reckless" behavior.
I quote from the Act:
20A Reckless operation of aircraft
(1) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the life of another person.
(2) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the person or property of another person.
Firstly, it is fundamental that you can't be reckless and negligent to yourself (although and older version of S20A(2) purported to advance that curious legal concept), so it remains for CASA to prove that towing a water skier is being "reckless" to the person being towed.
This is a completely different issue to the matter of whether regulations have a provision for towing anything, water skier or whatever, from a chopper.
The legal test for "reckless" (and negligent) is a high test. Even if CASA get their hands on all the footage, to prove the event, they will still have a long way to go to prove recklessness and/or negligence ---- particularly as the water skier was obviously a willing participant.
Voluntary assumption of risk by the person towed will be significant.
flyingfiend,
T28D, Gobbledock; the law and how it 'works', to put it in layman's language is obviously not your strength.
I can assure you that T28D (being a lawyer) has a very good grasp of the law!!
Tootle pip!!