If a crew of a major airline can take off at night without switching the runway lights on and our dear regulator cannot successfully prosecute them,
Icarus 2001,
The evidence of the crew was that the lights were on.
Testing of the lighting timing on the spot, and the recorded on and off times supported the crew evidence that the lights were on, and that they probably went off (the timer ran out) very shortly after they became airborne.
There was a serious credibility issue, in my opinion, as to the source of the allegations.
In complete contrast, a Go-Pro recording from the cockpit is irrefutable evidence of a Go-Pro in the cockpit, what must be determined then is a matter of process: Was there an engineering order, what other permissions were required, and were they obtained.
In short, the QF B-737 crew were not "convicted", because there was no evidence (even in the balance of probabilities) beyond a reasonable doubt that the event had occurred.
What would you prefer, that a CASA allegation is, in and of itself, evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that the crime has been committed.
The treatment of the QF crew of that aeroplane was an absolute disgrace and an abuse of process.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Of course, it is the DPP that runs cases, CASA itself does not directly prosecute, but Oh Boy!!! can they take administrative action that will make your life hell, or eliminate your aviation career, and you chances on appeal in the AAT (if you can afford it) are not good, no matter how strong your case.