Originally Posted by Sir Richard
This appears to be pure speculation by the "ambulance chaser" acting for the family. I wonder where he gets his "information" from?
Quote:
"Fire department personnel knew she was on the ground, yet they didn't carry her to safety, Tarricone said. Her injuries and her position on the ground show it was unlikely she was ejected from the plane, and her family believes another firefighter carried her off the jet and then left her on the ground, he said.
"We know that several firefighters saw her and knew she was there before she was covered with foam," Tarricone said. "They inexplicably abandoned her."
I suggest you, and others, do a little research before making these kind of attacks. Those comments are directly from a number of different sources and media reports made at the time of the incident.
I did a detailed review of media comments and available photos etc., along with a detailed review and analysis of the amateur video that captured the incident from almost the moment the aircraft came to rest, thru the next 20 minutes or so.
I noted the possibility of a casualty before it was getting much media - based on evidence in the early scene photos, which speculation sadly turned out to be true.
I was highly critical of the emergency response - which was disjointed and uncoordinated ... with firefighters seemingly unprepared for a major incident response. The equipment was poorly positioned, and key equipment (ie: foam booms) either unused or unworkable.
The firefighters clearly had no plan on fighting a fire in a round fuselage - instead of deploying booms (several clearly broken) to spray down into the fire they simply - and ineffectively - emptied whole tankers of foam shooting OVER the top of the fuselage.
The tapes and photos show the girl run over was NOT in that location during the evacuation. She was not placed there until long after the evacuation. They also show firefighters were on scene - the same truck - for many minutes - with a clear view of the spot the girl was placed - and that there was no significant amount of foam deployed there, other than on the isolated engine pylon area, until many minutes later - after the pax evaced and the fuselage became fully involved in fire.
Media and other reports showed the firefighter who ran over the girl had been picking up lunch when the crash occurred, and that she jumped into a truck solo - with no spotter, proceeded to the incident and ran over the girl.
Other reports indicated firefighters had placed the girl there, and for some reason they had determined she was deceased - which was clearly not true. Whether accurate or not, there is NO excuse for abandoning a victim - deceased or not - in harms way, as here.
Helmet cams on firefighters confirmed many of these facts. The SFO Fire Dept responded by banning personal video devices, despite that this incident was well on its way to being covered up before the personal video surfaced.
My opinion, based on hours of review of the video, the photos and numerous reports - is that had their been fire onboard earlier the majority of pax would have perished - in large part a result of the fire response.
Keep in mind as well that nearly 20 minutes after the crash survivors who had run toward approach end of runway, and found the seriously injured crew along the way, had to repeatedly call 911 and beg for emergency responders.
And that we saw media reports that noted ambulances and other responders had been held for a significant time unable to access the field. Which a review of the amateur video confirms - a LARGE contingent of emergency vehicles can be seen to respond in mass, some 15 minutes or so after the crash.
Here are the several posts I wrote originally on this incident including the detailed timeline review and supporting documentation:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post7937757
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post7939704
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post7951640
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post7951724
http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-...ml#post8001903
http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-...ml#post8001940
Please read these. They show at minimum, the criticism is entirely appropriate. I would also note in direct response to 'Sir Richard' and his ignorant and offensive "ambulance chaser" comment ... that the counsel for the girls family appears to be acting in the highest professional manner. I would note in the LVRJ article on no criminal charges, rather than rhetoric and accusations this same attorney stated: “It’s really not the subject of criminal prosecution ... It’s properly the subject of civil action."
Those are the actions of a professional and ethical attorney -the opposite of those who employ "ambulance chaser" name-calling.
I would also note I am usually a strong supporter of law enforcement and emergency responders, however, this incident demands thorough review and accountability, and the SFO FD officials responses to date have been IMO anything but professional.