It is far too easy for all to start throwing 'I told you so' rocks. The point I'd make is that the standard of proof at a CM is 'beyond reasonable doubt'. As in the criminal courts, the Service Prosecuting Authority must have felt it had sufficient evidence to bring the case but the CM did not agree the case was proved.
Specifically (having no specific knowledge of the case) the SPA felt there was sufficient evidence that Flt Lt Townshend was not truthful after the incident - the CM did not agree. Many clearly agree with that verdict (supported by their view of the individual), but to now suggest this exonerates him from any culpability as A/c Captain is an extraordinary position (and I know people who were on that plane).
Ultimately, for innumerable Flight Safety courses for years to come, I suspect this will remain a fascinating example straddling the thin line between 'just culture' and the appropriate attribution of blame...
Last edited by Politely_amused; 1st Mar 2017 at 22:27.