F15 Court Martial (Merged thread)
A really irritating PPRuNer
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with being a Scouser!!
Unless, of course, Spot's an Evertonian
Hope everyone's hangover has now gone
Regards
Brian
Unless, of course, Spot's an Evertonian
Hope everyone's hangover has now gone
Regards
Brian
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At last my computer has accepted a new 50p coin.
Frankly I am lost for words at present. Thankyou is the only word that I can express. The list of people who deserve thanks is so enormous that it is a bit like a wedding list; If you miss someone out they may take offence. Thank you ALL for the great support that you have given to Sue, the children and I during this nightmare. The experience has been harrowing to say the least and all I feel at the moment is a very saddened numbness for all concerned. As Sue said in her press statement there are no winners in this tragic situation. The huge support afforded through pprune has been very humbling, many thanks.
Yours Aye SPOT
To follow on from Spot, I cannot begin to tell you all how much the daily support notes via pprune have helped Spot and me. Every morning, over the cornflakes, we discussed and were boosted by the hundreds of messages from you all. Particularly when I had a couple of low moments , it was always uplifting to be reminded of the warmth of our friends out there. We could not have got through the ordeal without you lot.....it made a big difference. Our defence team was fantastic, Spots sister Barbara is missing the banter which we all shared throughout the Court Martial. I can't mention team players but they know who they are.
Finally I want people to know that Spot has endured two years of hell but faced the trial with utter dignity.
Many thanks Susan
Frankly I am lost for words at present. Thankyou is the only word that I can express. The list of people who deserve thanks is so enormous that it is a bit like a wedding list; If you miss someone out they may take offence. Thank you ALL for the great support that you have given to Sue, the children and I during this nightmare. The experience has been harrowing to say the least and all I feel at the moment is a very saddened numbness for all concerned. As Sue said in her press statement there are no winners in this tragic situation. The huge support afforded through pprune has been very humbling, many thanks.
Yours Aye SPOT
To follow on from Spot, I cannot begin to tell you all how much the daily support notes via pprune have helped Spot and me. Every morning, over the cornflakes, we discussed and were boosted by the hundreds of messages from you all. Particularly when I had a couple of low moments , it was always uplifting to be reminded of the warmth of our friends out there. We could not have got through the ordeal without you lot.....it made a big difference. Our defence team was fantastic, Spots sister Barbara is missing the banter which we all shared throughout the Court Martial. I can't mention team players but they know who they are.
Finally I want people to know that Spot has endured two years of hell but faced the trial with utter dignity.
Many thanks Susan
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Spot and Sue,
How you coped is beyond me. But you did - and admirably. The utmost respect to both of you.
As ex-TG12, you deserve such admiration for the way you stood up and were counted against such devious tactics by the RAF. Their actions in this were despicable, but sadly untypical.
But the most important thing in this is now yourselves. Move on and enjoy the rest of your lives. You deserve every happiness after the hell you've been so cruelly put through.
Very best wishes to you both.
ps Great to see you on Pprune !
How you coped is beyond me. But you did - and admirably. The utmost respect to both of you.
As ex-TG12, you deserve such admiration for the way you stood up and were counted against such devious tactics by the RAF. Their actions in this were despicable, but sadly untypical.
But the most important thing in this is now yourselves. Move on and enjoy the rest of your lives. You deserve every happiness after the hell you've been so cruelly put through.
Very best wishes to you both.
ps Great to see you on Pprune !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Shrewsbury
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Washup
Just a note to say that Dick and I intend to post a wash-up on the other (Updates) page to round the subject off, sometime over the next few days. As it's expected to be a statement of events and prospects for the future, it seems unlikely at this stage that it will warrant a response, but don't let that stop you if you feel 'driven' to reply.
The only problem at the moment is that there IS no 'reply to topic' button on the other page; I've e-mailed Pprune for their advice.
Best wishes
MickyD
The only problem at the moment is that there IS no 'reply to topic' button on the other page; I've e-mailed Pprune for their advice.
Best wishes
MickyD
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: England
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought......... I've seen Commanders Briefing Notes on Op Telic, Pensions, Aircrew retention bonuses, but seemingly the longest courts martial in RAF history does not warrant a line on the proceedings or outcome?
DCC, HQ STC (Wg Cdrs and above especially) and ACAS' Office listen in... it's not difficult:
"Sorry. It should never have happened. We apologise to Flt Lt Williams for the unecessary stress and trauma he has suffered. We will ensure an impartial and thorough inquiry is conducted to establish how this ever reached courts martial"
If the "S" word is too difficult to say or a thorough inquiry too difficult to do as it seemingly was for the Prosecution, you need to wake up and smell the coffee! There is a tidal wave of discontent out here and silence reads " We don't give a stuff. Don't mention the CM. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it!"
HELLO IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE THAT GIVES A DAMN???
DCC, HQ STC (Wg Cdrs and above especially) and ACAS' Office listen in... it's not difficult:
"Sorry. It should never have happened. We apologise to Flt Lt Williams for the unecessary stress and trauma he has suffered. We will ensure an impartial and thorough inquiry is conducted to establish how this ever reached courts martial"
If the "S" word is too difficult to say or a thorough inquiry too difficult to do as it seemingly was for the Prosecution, you need to wake up and smell the coffee! There is a tidal wave of discontent out here and silence reads " We don't give a stuff. Don't mention the CM. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it!"
HELLO IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE THAT GIVES A DAMN???
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Said
Well said, ready4departure.
About time we heard something from the top brass. But then I suppose too many are looking after their own A**** to worry what anyone else out there thinks.
A public appology is the very least Spot deserves from this farce.
About time we heard something from the top brass. But then I suppose too many are looking after their own A**** to worry what anyone else out there thinks.
A public appology is the very least Spot deserves from this farce.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot the Scapegoat
Whilst I am not one who has ever readily sprung to the defence of the 'top brass' in the ATC specialisation, some of the comments recently fired in their direction on this forum take no account of the individuals involved and their own views. Like many people who have spent 30+ years in this organisation, I have known the Air Cdre and both Gp Capts at HQSTC for many years and, like most people in this position, I believe all three are decent, sensible individuals who are liked and respected.
Whilst I am not in a position to speak for them, I am absolutely convinced that privately these individuals share exactly the same views on this tragic incident as everyone else in the ATC specialisation. As I understand it, they did not recommended that Spot was sent for court martial, this decision was taken by the 'Legal Eagles' and endorsed by a 2 star - they are the people who should apologise to Spot. However, politics will probably prevent the true opinions of the ATC 'top brass' ever reaching the coal face. So, when something is finally released for public consumption, I doubt it will be anything other than the usual banal 'policy' statements we have become so used to over the years. So, all I would say is - don't shoot the messenger, sometimes it's the only message they're allowed to send.
Whilst I am not in a position to speak for them, I am absolutely convinced that privately these individuals share exactly the same views on this tragic incident as everyone else in the ATC specialisation. As I understand it, they did not recommended that Spot was sent for court martial, this decision was taken by the 'Legal Eagles' and endorsed by a 2 star - they are the people who should apologise to Spot. However, politics will probably prevent the true opinions of the ATC 'top brass' ever reaching the coal face. So, when something is finally released for public consumption, I doubt it will be anything other than the usual banal 'policy' statements we have become so used to over the years. So, all I would say is - don't shoot the messenger, sometimes it's the only message they're allowed to send.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: England
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matoman,
exactly my point. Perhaps a bit of back-bone is called for! It's all very well being a fine upstanding decent kind of chap, but decency stops when people are perceived as putting their own careers ahead of the people they are supposed to be looking after, although that undoubtedly happens at all levels. I agree that the decision to proceed with the CM was probably beyond the control of those at STC and anyway it's done now; no point in wishing it hadn't happened. What's needed is damage limitation within the branch and I would argue your point and suggest that respect for the individually decent chaps is now dwindling rapidly because that hasn't been seen to happen. Perhaps I'm naive/old-fashioned or just plain stupid but being an Officer isn't always about looking after your own interests and getting to the next rank. Playing the political game is killing the Branch so why not do the decent thing? Sometimes it calls for those quaint old concepts of morale courage and fortitude. You get paid a senior officer's salary then you need to accept that sometimes you have to earn it. We've got into this mess because the controllers and FOAs feel they have been cast adrift and senior management aren't prepared to stand up for them. I'm not calling for resignations, sackings etc just simply for someone to show a few Officer qualities that they spend so long bleating on about at IOT. The ATC branch needs someone to earn their money and demonstrate that the individual is the most valuable asset not the OJAR.
exactly my point. Perhaps a bit of back-bone is called for! It's all very well being a fine upstanding decent kind of chap, but decency stops when people are perceived as putting their own careers ahead of the people they are supposed to be looking after, although that undoubtedly happens at all levels. I agree that the decision to proceed with the CM was probably beyond the control of those at STC and anyway it's done now; no point in wishing it hadn't happened. What's needed is damage limitation within the branch and I would argue your point and suggest that respect for the individually decent chaps is now dwindling rapidly because that hasn't been seen to happen. Perhaps I'm naive/old-fashioned or just plain stupid but being an Officer isn't always about looking after your own interests and getting to the next rank. Playing the political game is killing the Branch so why not do the decent thing? Sometimes it calls for those quaint old concepts of morale courage and fortitude. You get paid a senior officer's salary then you need to accept that sometimes you have to earn it. We've got into this mess because the controllers and FOAs feel they have been cast adrift and senior management aren't prepared to stand up for them. I'm not calling for resignations, sackings etc just simply for someone to show a few Officer qualities that they spend so long bleating on about at IOT. The ATC branch needs someone to earn their money and demonstrate that the individual is the most valuable asset not the OJAR.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like a large number of people I've browsed the web page daily to keep up with events, over the last month especially. However, until now I've never felt strongly enough to register and comment. I have worked for and with many of those currently in charge at STC and agree that they are individually good blokes, like the rest of us. Furthermore since this snowball started rolling many of the original staff officer's have changed and the current incumbents have to some extent been handed a poisoned chalice. However, I think I can see where ready4departure, matoman and dem are all coming from. I refer to the previous Air Cdre's letter to all SATCOs on the day the CM was first announced last year. It called for "strong leadership" in difficult times. There cannot be any more difficult times than those we are currently facing and strong leadership is definitely called for at all levels but especially from the top. R4D is correct when he/she states that the entire branch is hurting and in need of a bit of tender care.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a dispassionate observer's perspective on the other side of the world (I've never served in the RAF), I think that that some of the calls for blood posted above are not really all that helpful. The tenor of recent comments leaves me in no doubt that morale in the RAF's Air Traffic Control Branch is alarmingly low. With a potential conflict looming in the Middle East, the RAF's 'brass' should move quickly to restore faith in its ability to properly manage the affairs of the Service and the Branch. But whilst it does so, as doubtless it will, those junior in the food chain might render more productive service for the 'Queen's Shilling' by rallying behind those who are doubtless trying to deal with a difficult situation. Carping anonymously from the sidelines does little to assist.
Curiously, judging from some of the posts on this site, there appears to be a view in some sections of the military and civil ATC world that courts martials or other legal proceedings aren't legitimate for air traffic controllers, irrespective of the factual circumstances. With great respect, I beg to differ. In civil life, people appear before the Courts every day charged with offences ranging from the serious to the quaintly trivial. Some are convicted, others acquitted. Professionals, including lawyers and medicos, are sued for negligence as a matter of course. For almost all concerned, the process is stressful. Once litigation has commenced, the outcome is not guaranteed. Cross-examination elicits admissions. Reputations are lost, bank balances depleted and costs awarded to winners against losers. The English Legal System (and the Common Law world generally) has yet to devise an alternative to a justice system that has generally worked well for some 800 years, and is the envy of many people in less salubrious parts of the world. And if it ain't broke, don't tamper with it!
In this case, two men died, two valuable aircraft were lost and, seemingly, a Coroner's Inquest raised more questions than answers as to potential liability. Viewed from this perspective, I think that the RAF's decision to convene a court martial is easier to comprehend. May I suggest that the strength of the court martial process and the rule of law is shown by the fact that the person charged was able to have his day in court; and was acquitted by his peers of the charges brought against him, after a public hearing during which he was able to put his version of events via a representative of his choice.
Curiously, judging from some of the posts on this site, there appears to be a view in some sections of the military and civil ATC world that courts martials or other legal proceedings aren't legitimate for air traffic controllers, irrespective of the factual circumstances. With great respect, I beg to differ. In civil life, people appear before the Courts every day charged with offences ranging from the serious to the quaintly trivial. Some are convicted, others acquitted. Professionals, including lawyers and medicos, are sued for negligence as a matter of course. For almost all concerned, the process is stressful. Once litigation has commenced, the outcome is not guaranteed. Cross-examination elicits admissions. Reputations are lost, bank balances depleted and costs awarded to winners against losers. The English Legal System (and the Common Law world generally) has yet to devise an alternative to a justice system that has generally worked well for some 800 years, and is the envy of many people in less salubrious parts of the world. And if it ain't broke, don't tamper with it!
In this case, two men died, two valuable aircraft were lost and, seemingly, a Coroner's Inquest raised more questions than answers as to potential liability. Viewed from this perspective, I think that the RAF's decision to convene a court martial is easier to comprehend. May I suggest that the strength of the court martial process and the rule of law is shown by the fact that the person charged was able to have his day in court; and was acquitted by his peers of the charges brought against him, after a public hearing during which he was able to put his version of events via a representative of his choice.
Last edited by Argus; 5th Mar 2003 at 09:41.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations!
Dear Spot, Sue & family
Congratulations on the fantastic result! It was great to meet you all - your hospitality to Gretchen and I under such trying circumstances was quite amazing.
You have handled what has to have been the most difficult and trying period of your lives with real dignity. It was so heartening to see first hand the extremely close and loyal family support that has kept you all going.
Well done too to all those who helped you including Mike, Alasdair, Brian Young, Dick Doleman, etc, etc.
All the very, very best for the future to all of you - you deserve it!
Susie
Congratulations on the fantastic result! It was great to meet you all - your hospitality to Gretchen and I under such trying circumstances was quite amazing.
You have handled what has to have been the most difficult and trying period of your lives with real dignity. It was so heartening to see first hand the extremely close and loyal family support that has kept you all going.
Well done too to all those who helped you including Mike, Alasdair, Brian Young, Dick Doleman, etc, etc.
All the very, very best for the future to all of you - you deserve it!
Susie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Argus ...
I believe you missed a salient but vital point which the majority of postings here are dealing with.
Whilst your general comments are undoubtably correct, the issue here was not that CM/legal proceedings were not appropriate to Air Traffic Controllers but that THIS proceeding was totally unwarranted.
The Controller's actions taken were totally in accordance with UK regulations, both civil and military. The wriggling of the Prosecution and its varying stance are indicative of an un-focussed 'blunderbuss' attempt to justify previous 'political' decisions. All the facts were available to previous investigations - if only those involved could have been bothered to ask the questions and to have made at least some attempt in understanding the technicalities and regulations involved.
I believe you missed a salient but vital point which the majority of postings here are dealing with.
Whilst your general comments are undoubtably correct, the issue here was not that CM/legal proceedings were not appropriate to Air Traffic Controllers but that THIS proceeding was totally unwarranted.
The Controller's actions taken were totally in accordance with UK regulations, both civil and military. The wriggling of the Prosecution and its varying stance are indicative of an un-focussed 'blunderbuss' attempt to justify previous 'political' decisions. All the facts were available to previous investigations - if only those involved could have been bothered to ask the questions and to have made at least some attempt in understanding the technicalities and regulations involved.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ATC Specialisation
Ready4departure
I'm sure that we fundamentally agree on who should be blamed for the entire fiasco and it's not anyone currently serving in the ATC staff at HQSTC. Exactly who has put their own career ahead of 'people'? If you expect those currently in senior ATC appointments to 'fall on their swords', my response would be - why should they, what have they done? As far as I'm aware they didn't take any active part in the unnecessary prosecution of Spot, although one of them was called to give evidence, probably against his own personal wishes. However pleasant it might be to those with a taste for vengeance to see someone 'fall on their sword' - I cannot recall any occasion when it has ever happened. What purpose would it serve anyway? Do you really believe that if someone did decide to suddenly PVR it would make any difference whatsoever? Personally, I would rather the current crop stay where they are, they're a sight better than the 'shower' I served with at Hillingdon House - believe me when I say that the 'politics' played out within MATO certainly exceeded anything that might go on at HQSTC. Furthermore, from my own perspective, I don't see many obvious replacements who would be much better. The Specialisation has always needed strong leadership, now more than ever, but I don't see how that can be achieved by those at the top resigning and creating a vacuum. Perhaps ready4departure you could be more specific and suggest what you think needs to be done? What would the damage limitation exercise you recommend actually entail?
So what do I think should be done? Well, I regret the passing of the old ATC Conference that used to be held every couple of years or so. These gatherings were a forum at which the views of the 'grass roots' could be fired at the very top level of the Specialisation. Even if the AOC was adept at ducking the answer and then ridiculing the questioner, and I seem to recall that Maurice was particularly adept at this technique, the message was still received by the entire audience. So, that would be my solution, a controllers conference at which a wide spectrum of controllers, officers, WO's & SNCO's could be brought together and allowed to air their views and hear the views of those at the top end of the Specialisation. It would be difficult to find a suitable venue with sufficient accommodation, and costs might be an issue, but provided support was forthcoming from the very highest level, I am confident this could be arranged. I stand ready to attend, having only missed one if memory serves me correctly.
Matoman
I'm sure that we fundamentally agree on who should be blamed for the entire fiasco and it's not anyone currently serving in the ATC staff at HQSTC. Exactly who has put their own career ahead of 'people'? If you expect those currently in senior ATC appointments to 'fall on their swords', my response would be - why should they, what have they done? As far as I'm aware they didn't take any active part in the unnecessary prosecution of Spot, although one of them was called to give evidence, probably against his own personal wishes. However pleasant it might be to those with a taste for vengeance to see someone 'fall on their sword' - I cannot recall any occasion when it has ever happened. What purpose would it serve anyway? Do you really believe that if someone did decide to suddenly PVR it would make any difference whatsoever? Personally, I would rather the current crop stay where they are, they're a sight better than the 'shower' I served with at Hillingdon House - believe me when I say that the 'politics' played out within MATO certainly exceeded anything that might go on at HQSTC. Furthermore, from my own perspective, I don't see many obvious replacements who would be much better. The Specialisation has always needed strong leadership, now more than ever, but I don't see how that can be achieved by those at the top resigning and creating a vacuum. Perhaps ready4departure you could be more specific and suggest what you think needs to be done? What would the damage limitation exercise you recommend actually entail?
So what do I think should be done? Well, I regret the passing of the old ATC Conference that used to be held every couple of years or so. These gatherings were a forum at which the views of the 'grass roots' could be fired at the very top level of the Specialisation. Even if the AOC was adept at ducking the answer and then ridiculing the questioner, and I seem to recall that Maurice was particularly adept at this technique, the message was still received by the entire audience. So, that would be my solution, a controllers conference at which a wide spectrum of controllers, officers, WO's & SNCO's could be brought together and allowed to air their views and hear the views of those at the top end of the Specialisation. It would be difficult to find a suitable venue with sufficient accommodation, and costs might be an issue, but provided support was forthcoming from the very highest level, I am confident this could be arranged. I stand ready to attend, having only missed one if memory serves me correctly.
Matoman
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EXATCO
With respect, I don't agree that this CM was unwarranted.
Courts and tribunals are obliged to follow the law of evidence. There are particular rules about the admissibility of evidence. These rules allow for the proof of alleged facts. They also reflect other important values in the legal system, especially the notion of a fair trial conducted by the parties on fairly equal terms.
It is for the Prosecution to prove the truth of its assertions. To do this, it must adduce evidence according to the law of evidence. Essentially, such evidence must be relevant, not hearsay and meet other statutory and common law tests.
You and your colleagues may assert on these pages that you believe certain actions were in accordance with the ATC rules. But, from a legal perspective, how do you know the truth of your statement? Do you have first hand knowledge of your assertion? Where you there on the day and saw/heard what happened? Or is your assertion based on second, third or fourth hand hearsay, crew room gossip or merely rumour in confidence? At law, are you competent to make that assertion? If you weren't in the radar room, listening on the frequency or in the crash vicinity either airborne or otherwise, then I don't think you'll get to first base.
It is for the court (and not the gallery) to decide on the admissibility of evidence and if a case is made out to the requisite standard of proof. In this case, it decided to acquit. But an acquittal decision doesn't necessarily mean that the Prosecution behaved improperly. By what legal standard do you make that assertion? There are rules of professional conduct for barristers and solicitors. There are also procedures by which complaints can be investigated. If you have some concerns, you should pursue them via a formal complaint.
As I previously said, the strength of the court martial process and the rule of law is shown by the fact that the person charged was able to have his day in court. He was acquitted by his peers of the charges brought against him, after a public hearing during which he was able to put his version of events via a representative of his choice.
Had this CM not occurred, there would have been lingering doubts as to liability, responsibility and possibly allegations of a cover-up. That would have been in no one's interests, least of all, those of your colleague.
Courts and tribunals are obliged to follow the law of evidence. There are particular rules about the admissibility of evidence. These rules allow for the proof of alleged facts. They also reflect other important values in the legal system, especially the notion of a fair trial conducted by the parties on fairly equal terms.
It is for the Prosecution to prove the truth of its assertions. To do this, it must adduce evidence according to the law of evidence. Essentially, such evidence must be relevant, not hearsay and meet other statutory and common law tests.
You and your colleagues may assert on these pages that you believe certain actions were in accordance with the ATC rules. But, from a legal perspective, how do you know the truth of your statement? Do you have first hand knowledge of your assertion? Where you there on the day and saw/heard what happened? Or is your assertion based on second, third or fourth hand hearsay, crew room gossip or merely rumour in confidence? At law, are you competent to make that assertion? If you weren't in the radar room, listening on the frequency or in the crash vicinity either airborne or otherwise, then I don't think you'll get to first base.
It is for the court (and not the gallery) to decide on the admissibility of evidence and if a case is made out to the requisite standard of proof. In this case, it decided to acquit. But an acquittal decision doesn't necessarily mean that the Prosecution behaved improperly. By what legal standard do you make that assertion? There are rules of professional conduct for barristers and solicitors. There are also procedures by which complaints can be investigated. If you have some concerns, you should pursue them via a formal complaint.
As I previously said, the strength of the court martial process and the rule of law is shown by the fact that the person charged was able to have his day in court. He was acquitted by his peers of the charges brought against him, after a public hearing during which he was able to put his version of events via a representative of his choice.
Had this CM not occurred, there would have been lingering doubts as to liability, responsibility and possibly allegations of a cover-up. That would have been in no one's interests, least of all, those of your colleague.
Last edited by Argus; 6th Mar 2003 at 08:41.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a team!!!
I am just bowled over,nay ASTOUNDED at the support of this wonderful team,and you all know who you are!I would like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for being there for Spot and Sue.I don't feel that any of us would have come through without you.I found it very humbling to see the love and support from so many friends;you managed to keep our spirits up when facing a complete nightmare.I thank God that justice has prevailed,and I only wish that the families of the pilots had been able to see the whole case presented,and then they would know beyond all doubt that Spot played no part in this terrible accident.THE RAF HAVE A GREAT DEAL TO ANSWER FOR.How you kept your head up little brother, I will never know.I am so proud of you!!
Sue,what can I say,he couldn't have done this without your love and support.A big thankyou.I only hope now that you and the kids can get back to the carefree and happy family life that you had before.
My love and prayers go out to the pilots families whose lives have been devastated.You are very much in our thoughts.
Love Barbara(Big Sis!)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not blaming the branch!
I feel I have to post this reply in case I was previously misunderstood!!
In previous posts I have called for some kind of Public appology to Spot and this view has not changed.
However I in no way blame anyone in our fantastic branch for putting Spot through this fiasco. The prosecutions investigation was diabolical, to say the least, and it smacks of unprofessionalism of the highest order. How could any investigator not be bothered to inerview eye witnesses?? I feel it is the RAF that have let Spot down very badly and it is for someone high up in command that has to now stand up and say- "Sorry Spot but we made a dreadful mistake. We never investigated properly and you should never have been put through this stressful fiasco".
I in no way want anyone in our branch to say this as I feel sure they are not to blame and anyone testifying against Spot did so against their will. I do not expect that Spot will ever recieve the appology he deserves as the powers that be may see it as "losing face", but hey guess what??? YOU'VE LOST MORE THAN THAT ALREADY.
In previous posts I have called for some kind of Public appology to Spot and this view has not changed.
However I in no way blame anyone in our fantastic branch for putting Spot through this fiasco. The prosecutions investigation was diabolical, to say the least, and it smacks of unprofessionalism of the highest order. How could any investigator not be bothered to inerview eye witnesses?? I feel it is the RAF that have let Spot down very badly and it is for someone high up in command that has to now stand up and say- "Sorry Spot but we made a dreadful mistake. We never investigated properly and you should never have been put through this stressful fiasco".
I in no way want anyone in our branch to say this as I feel sure they are not to blame and anyone testifying against Spot did so against their will. I do not expect that Spot will ever recieve the appology he deserves as the powers that be may see it as "losing face", but hey guess what??? YOU'VE LOST MORE THAN THAT ALREADY.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Shrewsbury
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The End...................
Just a note to say that this page is finally closing. A sincere and heartfelt thank you to you all for your staunch support, without which things would have been so much more difficult.
The update page will be left open for a little longer.
Best wishes
Micky
The update page will be left open for a little longer.
Best wishes
Micky
