Originally Posted by
AN2 Driver
I don't think what triggered that article was the question of guilt, but the question whether there were things in this investigation which deserve scrutiny because they are either wrong or at least do not live up to the standards of a normal accident investigation.
With respect, Avherald isn't remotely qualified to make that judgement.
While it's easy to understand the reluctance of a grieving father to accept that his son was, in all probability, guilty of causing the pointless deaths of of 150 people, that reaction has no relevance whatsoever to the BEA investigation. Few now doubt that the "what" and the "how" has been established beyond reasonable doubt; the "why" is not for the investigation to determine.
There sadly seems to be a trend nowadays among otherwise competent aviation journalists to stray outside of their area of competency, and Avherald is fast becoming one of the worst offenders. Stick to facts, Simon, and leave the analysis to the professionals.