Yes there is merit in the question being asked - but do you really expect an answer here? The question can only be really answered by the appropriate Attorney General and/or DPP. Do you think they read this forum?
:hmm:

…. Yes well, a bit cryptic :E
.
.. an observation of the ‘balance’ of argument/questioning/opinion within the collective chaos of wide area cyber audience! ... (thank goodness) :rolleyes:
.
.. the question is of course valid, the reason and answer/s would seem to lye elsewhere though as Bleve suggests!
.
.. were the question asked with knowledge (from the judicial system) of unacceptable reason/s for the delay in justice proceedings ..then fine and beaut, I would join the posse of indignation!.
.
I wonder about the motivation though, when a comparison is drawn with Hicks! :suspect:
.
…. All the best to one and all for 2007! :) :ok:

Justapplhere, you ask me to advise who has alleged that half a million dollars has been spent, and the actual evidence that shows this amount has been spent. Unfortunately I can’t oblige with either. The estimated $500,000 was calculated after talking to a number of people. Unfortunately these people cannot be named as their careers could be prejudiced. However, as stated by others, I would imagine that after five years of to-ing and fro-ing in the court system, that this type of money could easily be spent – perhaps more.

Feather #3, you state:

In fact, it is worse than that – one poster has even suggested that the thread should be locked! Why doesn’t someone from CASA come on and explain the situation? Surely such an important prosecution should be completely open.

Come on CASA! How about getting one of your legal experts, or someone from PR, to explain how a simple action (which you put to the DPP) can take over five years and still not get to court.

Of course we have seen this happen in some high profile ASIC cases, where the person being charged has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) to frustrate the court action and stop information from being made available.

I don’t believe this case could be anything like that. There must be a simple explanation on why it has taken so long to get to court.

Scurvy.D.Dog, you state (possibly in reference to my original post):

I thought I had explained this clearly. I believe the situation with David Hicks could be similar to the situation with the Qantas pilots. That is, five years is far too long a time for Hicks, or the Qantas pilots (whom I notice have been named in an ABC report) to have the chance of justice being administered.

I find it amazing that no one from the DPP, CASA, the Department, or someone in the know from Qantas or the pilots’ union, will come on this site and state what is going on. I’m not a conspiracy theorist – being Patron of the Australian Skeptics – however I would simply like to know what is behind the delay. It doesn’t sound to me as if it is all above board.

Dick what makes you think that anyone you mention bothers to read this site? If you are concerned surely a better way to find out is to ask those people/organisations directly.

Dick
The defendants could also “come on this site and state what is going on”, but appear not to want to do so. Perhaps they don't want a fuss made about this, or would prefer to remain anonymous?

Creampuff, the defendants may wish to remain anonymous, however if you look at one of the postings above it is clear that the ABC has named them. It is a bit hard to remain anonymous when you have already been named, don’t you think?

Could the real story be that Qantas considers that they are untouchable – that no one ever takes them on? Qantas has never had administrative fine action taken against them, even though they have had many breaches of the regulations – as undoubtedly any organisation with 15,000 or so staff would. Could it be that Qantas are ‘showing CASA who is in charge of aviation in Australia’ by spending an absolute fortune in preventing the action from ever going to court? Will this show CASA bureaucrats that they should never take on Qantas – in effect, Qantas is above the law.

So, reading your last post, your argument and the entire reason for beginning this thread is not that the 2 pilots concerned have not had their day in court to either finalise the matter and clear their names or be penalised, but that Qantas is above the law?

I'm sure that there must be something else more pressing for you to be challenged by.

Could the real story be that Qantas considers that they are untouchable – that no one ever takes them on? Qantas has never had administrative fine action taken against them, even though they have had many breaches of the regulations – as undoubtedly any organisation with 15,000 or so staff would. Could it be that Qantas are ‘showing CASA who is in charge of aviation in Australia’ by spending an absolute fortune in preventing the action from ever going to court? Will this show CASA bureaucrats that they should never take on Qantas – in effect, Qantas is above the law?
Or maybe Qantas is just defending it's employees whom it considers are the victims of a dubious and jumped up charge?
Dick, you are looking for answers in the wrong place. The pilots are sub-judice so they aren't going to pipe up here; Qantas is not going to answer you because there is nothing to answer for; CASA definitely won't be posting here and the regular members of PPRUNE have zero input.
I suggest you write a letter to the Tasmanian DPP. They are the only people who can answer your allegations/charges/queries...

Cutest, writing to the Tasmanian DPP will have absolutely no effect at all. It is the Commonwealth DPP who you need to write to but I suspect you know that. :}

As for the pilots, if a prosecution is still hanging over them, then they would be taking legal advice to keep the mouth shut lest they fall into the Jack Thomas trap.:uhoh:

As for legal costs they are as long as a piece of string. How much actual time has been spent in court, how much preparation, or more pertinant, how much negotiation has been indulged in between the parties. I suspect the answers are, in order, very little, a bit more but not much, heaps. It is often the last that can consume a lot of time and therefore money.:mad:

I suspect that a decision has to be made on advice from the DPP and the matter is now in the "too hard basket" of the decision maker (CASA or Minister). It would be helpful in concentrating the mind if there was a time limit on deciding whether a matter should proceed or not and not just one in which a charge has to be laid. :ok:

The Cutest of Borg, you state:

If this is so (and it could be), I’m sure you will agree that it is very serious. Why would CASA present to the DPP a “dubious and jumped up charge”, and why would the DPP take it on in the first place?

I’m not sure if the real story is that “Qantas considers that they are untouchable”. I just believe it could be one of the explanations.

In the USA, the UK and Europe, all airlines are regularly fined by the regulator for breaches of the regulations. Why is it that in Australia, of the 70 or so administrative fines given in the last 12 months, not one is against a powerful airline? Are they lily white? Do they actually make no errors? I don’t think so. I think this is the type of thing we should be discussing on this forum, and I believe the Launceston case could lead us to some interesting findings.