Originally Posted by
Genghis the Engineer
I would be interested, if anybody is in a position to comment, on the legal basis on which the court decision was reached?
From the press report:
The pilot faced two charges of being reckless and negligent in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft and any person on board.
(It is actually '
or or any person in an aircraft.')
The offence of endangering may be committed either recklessly or negligently, the former being more serious than the latter.
Both forms of the offence require the Prosecution to prove endangering.
The Defence argued that there was no endangering.
From the report:
The District Judge (Magistrates Court) dismissed the case, saying: “I am not satisfied that there is any evidence that this aircraft was in any danger.”
Well done barrister Stephen Spence.
