Frank...
...the Pel-Air 'evidence' can still be 'un-lost' and recovered [if] it still exists...
Very good point.
See TSI Act S.49, as follows:
49 OBR ceasing to be an OBR under declaration of ATSB
...
(3) If:
(a) the ATSB decides to investigate the transport safety matter to which an OBR relates; and
(b) the ATSB is satisfied that any part of the OBR is not relevant to the investigation;
the ATSB must, by published notice, identify that part and declare that part is not to be treated as an OBR on and after a date specified in the notice.
(4) The ATSB cannot revoke or vary a notice published under this section.
(5) When an OBR, or part of an OBR, ceases to be an OBR because of a notice published under this section, then any related OBR information also ceases to be OBR information.
The $64K question therefore is:
"Did TweedleDUMB (Dolan) publish a notice pursuant to S.49(3)(b) when the ATSB decided not to recover the recorders at the EARLY stage in the investigation when he (TweedleDUMB) became so confident that the recorders wouldn't reveal data that wasn't available from other sources?"
And if, TweedleDUMB didn't publish that notice, then WHY wasn't it published?
However, if TweedleDUMB DID publish the notice, then the recorders are open slather I reckon to be 'un-lost' as Frank is suggesting, if it's at all possible to do that, and then the information that they
may provide could be made public as/where/when necessary, and as SHOULD have been published in the first place.
And as far as I can see, there's absolutely fcuk-all that TweedleDUMB could do to stop that if he published the requisite notice under S.49 of the TSI Act, because S.53 would seem to not apply if that were the case.
I'm no lawyer - so I'll defer to Creampuff's opinion here.
Notwithstanding, you better get your scuba gear dusted off gaunty - looks like you might be going for a diving trip to Norfolk Is.
