ATG:-
oh what bollocks, frankly.
Glasshouses and stones, old boy, glasshouses and stones! qv:-
every post you make that doesn't acknowledge what AT did was wrong and deserved to be punished diminishes any kind of argument you may or may not have against the process.
He pleaded guilty himself to the charge for which he was sentenced. In doing so he accepts that he should be punished. If he didn't then he should have pleaded Not Guilty as he did for the other two charges, otherwise he has been very silly (to quote tuc). I am neither against the process (by which I assume that you mean of Military Justice) nor against punishment, I'm just against this punishment.
It seems that everything that happened was accidental, no criminal forethought present whatsoever. It seems he was not contravening any direct orders about cameras and Flight Decks either, other than generic ones about loose articles (although I bet the FOB is bursting with them now!).
As for RAF VSOs, they seem significantly more people focused than my own Service, and I rather envy them.
I'm glad to hear that your impression of our VSO's people skills is so favourable. As to your comments of those of your own Service, you may well say that, but I couldn't possibly comment!
. It isn't their people skills that concerns me, it is the concerted cover up of past VSO actions that stands in the way of Air Safety reform. Unless and until the RAF comes clean about the attack on UK Military Air Safety by its own VSOs during H-C's so called "Golden Period", then the need to place the Air Regulator (MAA) and Air Accident Investigator (MilAAIB or whatever it's called this week) outwith the MOD and independent of each other is obscured.
Now, let's all try to keep it nice and polite, boys and girls, shall we?