Voyager Plummets (Merged)
Maybe but I can't see the difference between a military court and a civilian one and if legally they are not allowed to comment on ongoing cases why have the daily papers.
I wonder if Flying Lawyer ever shows up on the military forum I'd be interested in what he thinks. Maybe one of the mods can point him in this direction.
I wonder if Flying Lawyer ever shows up on the military forum I'd be interested in what he thinks. Maybe one of the mods can point him in this direction.
No comments have been shown in the Telegraph piece, elsewhere is a different matter. The JAG will assist the President of the Court in addressing the jury about how they should put out of mind any information not given in evidence. In fact, in a civilian court if a jury member uses MSM google etc or social media they can and people have been found to be in contempt of court and maybe fined or imprisoned.
I am sure you are right AP but the question remains, the rags always put - we are not accepting comments on this matter due to legal process. I've seen it many times so why because it is a military court are they allowed to - is it a case of one rule for one and another for another? I don't actually care about the the unfortunate in the dock that's for the panel/jury to decide. Where is Flying Lawyer when you need him.
Surely this chap guilty or not, yet to be established - should be afforded the same principle in law or does the fact he is serving negate that right - I certainly don't think so.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Odiham
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mostafa my understanding is that the press will only prevent public comment if there are reporting restrictions in place as a comment by the public could leave the newspaper in contempt as it is the publisher. No restrictions are in place for this trial and I have certainly seen public comments on other civilian trials where there are no restrictions.
Last edited by Chinny Crewman; 7th Feb 2017 at 07:57.
As I see it, if this l guy had been completely honest about this incident it would have been no more than that, a frank and open a discussion with his boss,. Getting to a court martial , unbelievable in the era of a "just culture ".
Been there, done that,with an educated nanagement.
Been there, done that,with an educated nanagement.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Back from the sandpit
Age: 63
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RetiredBA/BY
I don't think this unbelievable at all, I think a Court Martial is fully justified and I hope they throw the book at him and that he loses his commission. This is not about cameras, sidesticks and a rapid descent this is about a total lack of integrity, a cornerstone of being in the military, or it used to be. If he'd have fessed up immediately, as you say, a hats on one way conversation with the boss, poss loss of seniority/captaincy for a couple of years and that would/should have been that. As it is he has brought the whole weight of military justice down on himself. Have I ever made a mistake when flying? YES Have I ever tried to cover it up and blamed someone else or the aircraft? NO
This is only opinion, we have to wait and accept the CMs findings.
I don't think this unbelievable at all, I think a Court Martial is fully justified and I hope they throw the book at him and that he loses his commission. This is not about cameras, sidesticks and a rapid descent this is about a total lack of integrity, a cornerstone of being in the military, or it used to be. If he'd have fessed up immediately, as you say, a hats on one way conversation with the boss, poss loss of seniority/captaincy for a couple of years and that would/should have been that. As it is he has brought the whole weight of military justice down on himself. Have I ever made a mistake when flying? YES Have I ever tried to cover it up and blamed someone else or the aircraft? NO
This is only opinion, we have to wait and accept the CMs findings.
BA/BY,
A "just culture" is exactly that - "just". It is not a "blame-free culture". If it turns out that the extended grounding of the Voyager fleet and corresponding additional expense for Defence was all down to one man's lack of integrity then some kind of punishment would be entirely appropriate.
A "just culture" is exactly that - "just". It is not a "blame-free culture". If it turns out that the extended grounding of the Voyager fleet and corresponding additional expense for Defence was all down to one man's lack of integrity then some kind of punishment would be entirely appropriate.
Top Bunk Tester, Tankertrashnav and Avtur, you would be wise to note the words posted earlier by MOSTAFA:
The Courts Martial is there to decide whether there is any guilt or not. I would certainly not comment either way until then.
It really is for the court to decide before condemning the man. That the camera impinged in the controls is common ground and his statements afterwards are a matter of fact, so the key point will be the clearing of the camera from the stick and if this was a conscious act or not.
Certainly the SI opined that the camera could not free itself (but limited their testing to static conditions and not those experienced during the incident) and offered that the coincidental changes in stick movements and 'ok, ok, ok' commentary suggested a conscious recognition of the obstruction and clearance.
Notwithstanding the 'conscious removal' he has admitted negligence and his career is over.
Certainly the SI opined that the camera could not free itself (but limited their testing to static conditions and not those experienced during the incident) and offered that the coincidental changes in stick movements and 'ok, ok, ok' commentary suggested a conscious recognition of the obstruction and clearance.
Notwithstanding the 'conscious removal' he has admitted negligence and his career is over.
RetiredBA/BY
I don't think this unbelievable at all, I think a Court Martial is fully justified and I hope they throw the book at him and that he loses his commission. This is not about cameras, sidesticks and a rapid descent this is about a total lack of integrity, a cornerstone of being in the military, or it used to be. If he'd have fessed up immediately, as you say, a hats on one way conversation with the boss, poss loss of seniority/captaincy for a couple of years and that would/should have been that. As it is he has brought the whole weight of military justice down on himself. Have I ever made a mistake when flying? YES Have I ever tried to cover it up and blamed someone else or the aircraft? NO
This is only opinion, we have to wait and accept the CMs findings.
I don't think this unbelievable at all, I think a Court Martial is fully justified and I hope they throw the book at him and that he loses his commission. This is not about cameras, sidesticks and a rapid descent this is about a total lack of integrity, a cornerstone of being in the military, or it used to be. If he'd have fessed up immediately, as you say, a hats on one way conversation with the boss, poss loss of seniority/captaincy for a couple of years and that would/should have been that. As it is he has brought the whole weight of military justice down on himself. Have I ever made a mistake when flying? YES Have I ever tried to cover it up and blamed someone else or the aircraft? NO
This is only opinion, we have to wait and accept the CMs findings.
As I see it from what I have read here and in other sources, he is not facing the CM for his error on the flight deck, but for his attempted coverup.
Like you , I too have made mistakes, but have never covered it up.
Total honesty and integrity when errors occur are the cornerstones of the "just culture", at least in civil aviation. I don't recall it being much different in my days in the RAF albeit 40 years ago.
We, inc. TTN and two others are obviously of similar beliefs.
Anyway the findings of the CM will make interesting reading.
Last edited by RetiredBA/BY; 8th Feb 2017 at 08:15.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Back from the sandpit
Age: 63
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RetiredBA/BY
We reside upon the same song sheet
Beags
Are we now not even allowed to voice an opinion? I believe I caveatted accordingly. Unless I directly quoted sub judice information outside the public domain, which I didn't, then where is the problem? Genuinley interested in your view.
We reside upon the same song sheet
Beags
This is only opinion, we have to wait and accept the CMs findings.
Nobody is asking anybody to fall out over this, or throw their teddy's out of the cot.
My question was simple and I don't think anybody has actually answered it yet! I did make a point and I still stand by it, in the best part of 30 years of piloting HM aircraft around the world I made some whoppers. The whole purpose of the Courts Martial is to decide with all the available evidence of guilt or not, not the media or come to that some posters on here.
Can I suggest those that are; are perfect, I'm not.
My question was simple and I don't think anybody has actually answered it yet! I did make a point and I still stand by it, in the best part of 30 years of piloting HM aircraft around the world I made some whoppers. The whole purpose of the Courts Martial is to decide with all the available evidence of guilt or not, not the media or come to that some posters on here.
Can I suggest those that are; are perfect, I'm not.