THE CREW WERE NOT WHERE THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE. They were not facing a 300 ft hill on their intended track, they were instead facing an 800 ft hill over 500 yards to the right of their intended track and they were flying blind or as near to blind as makes no difference.
JP,
This is simply your OPINION and not FACT
What was their 'intended track?' I don't know, but I would wager that it at no time included overflying the mull. It is as likely as not (my OPINION, as valid as yours but not FACT) that having identified the lighthouse, and changing the waypoint to Corran, that they intended to follow the coast northwards. What subsequently happened NO ONE WILL EVER KNOW.
The yachtsman could see both the lighthouse AND the chinook. That means that the helo was almost certainly legally in VMC flying under VFR. (Below 140KIAS clear of cloud and in sight of the surface).
THE RAF's own rules required FACTS to support a finding requiring proof beyond any doubt whatsoever. No such FACTS exist only OPINION and SUPPOSITION.
That is why some of the finest legal brains in this land found the verdict unsafe.
Will you please say what makes that so difficult to accept?