In the time between the initial not guilty verdict on the two counts of perjury and one count of falsifying a document, although I respected the the Courts verdict, I personally found it to be incredulous and still do, even though at that stage we knew the Captain had pleaded guilty to negligently performing a duty (which I opine was the lesser charge of the four) . I was suspicious that some horse trading had occurred between prosecution and defence.
I would have wholeheartedly agreed with the sentence IF and it's a big IF the Captain had been found guilty of the first three counts, it would have been proportionate to the alleged offence(s). But the fact is that he wasn't found guilty.
We all know that it wasn't a premeditated act, it was a mistake. A mistake that led to a situation with consequences that no aircrew would ever knowingly put themselves in. I regarded the negligence charge as the minor charge in the bigger scheme of things. I have tried to get the JC tables in post #763 to reflect a guilty outcome on the Captain and cannot, whichever way I cut it.
This all leads me to conclude that the sentence passed is wholly disproportionate in a Just Culture environment and was more of a revenge sentence for the Captain being found not guilty on the integrity charges. Something stinks and the unintended consequence of this is loss of the Just Culture environment ( if, of course, it ever existed in the first place )
In this case there will always be those that sit firmly on one side of the fence or the other and the repercussions of this poorly handled incident ( from the time the Co-pilot left his seat to the time the sentence was passed yesterday ) will be felt for many years to come.