awblain:
I'd say that the FAI/inquest is a little less theatrical than a trial, since the sheriff/coroner is seeking to find the cause of death without any direct monetary or criminal jeopardy hanging over the process. He/she can control which witnesses testify, and who is allowed to question them. Individuals' styles of managing the process vary, and the atmosphere can be very different from case to case.
As I explained earlier:
I suspect I am at least as familiar as you with the precise role of the AAIB in such a case as this. Having listened to many days of their evidence at another Fatal Accident Inquiry into a high profile helicopter crash, in which there was similarly no evidence from CVR, FDR, or survivors.
The FAI I sat through lasted four weeks. I am familiar with the process. I sat through every day, and still refer to that transcript from time to time.
It's theatre which hopefully the sheriff is able to see through. Certainly it's
very much more than simply "seeking to find the cause of death." (A post mortem tells you that.) And there absolutely
IS jeopardy involved, since subsequent claims might be based upon it's findings. There are other things in your post about which I am very doubtful. How familiar are you with FAIs, and their interaction with the AAIB?
As I have said, the AAIB will make no attempt whatsoever to apportion 'blame'. (whatever that means) Their report will simply lay out the facts, as best they can be known.