Chugalug2
Let's dot the i's and cross the t's here.
You haven't done that, you;ve just repeated your broad brush conspiracy theories.
In previous fatal accidents the BoI was published ahead of a coroner's inquest. This enabled the family and the coroner to get input from other than the MOD alone.
The SI report was given to the family and the coroner ahead of the coroner's inquest. This enabled the family and the coroner to get input from other than the MOD alone.
The Coroner did that.
The family had a QC advising them and he questioned witnesses on their behalf.
The family could have asked the coroner to hear input from other witnesses including experts if they'd wanted to.
From the Telegraph report of the inquest:
The team leader at the time, Sqd Ldr Jim Turner, said he was frustrated by a lack of support and a shortage of around 20 engineers.
He said: “We were telling them repeatedly we needed more personnel and more aircraft. The sense that I had in the short time I was boss was that we needed more stuff. We needed more manpower. We needed a little bit more.”
He said when he took over the job he was surprised to see some of the engineers were “very young and very inexperienced”.
You still haven't answered my question -
Whose 'version of events' (your expression) do you say should have been available to the coroner and wasn't?