Honour amongst thieves.
I think the good AAT commissioner was as perplexed as the rest of us as to why a witness would allegedly change the entire thrust of their evidence, without which no offence could even have been alleged, Six weeks after an event.
Then again, previous evidence would support otherwise...
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've probably missed something here, but;
1) The owner of the aircraft, (Hope), was the student who was probably flying it at the time? He gave a "statement" to CASA which they relied upon as evidence then subsequently changed that "statement" after prompting by CASA of "industry intelligence"?
2) The PIC was the Instructor, (Hanley), who gave a "sworn affidavit" that was at odds with Hope's amended "statement"?
3) There is only "industry intelligence" to back the "amended statement" of Hope?
4) The "industry intelligence" has not been supported with an identity nor corroborated.
5) It seems to appear that an "amended", "anonomous" "statement to CASA" has some form of superior Court meaning to that of a "sworn affidavit".
6) By my definition there is no evidence to support the notion that the aircraft was hover-taxied however meters and, on the balance of probabilities the quad was the most sensible method of moving the carcass.
May I be so bold as to post an excerpt from Jetblast, http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4776...litics-40.html Where I am an avid reader which reminds people how one can get into trouble with "fiddling" with rules that have served us well for hundreds of years;
"Unfortunately, there is no presumption of innocence for Mr Slipper. My advice, from an experienced industrial lawyer, is that Mr Ashby is accusing Mr Slipper of an 'Adverse Action' under s. 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which provides that the onus of proof is on the employer (Slipper) to prove that his action (putting the hard word on Ashby) was not intended to do what the complainant Ashby claims it was intended to do.
This reversal of the onus of proof is friendly to complainants and unfriendly to employers. It's a controversial provision of the new Fair Work Act.
Guess who drafted the Fair Work Act and insisted on the reversal of the onus of proof?
Julia Gillard. Ha ha.
Here's the provision:
Commonwealth Consolidated Acts
FAIR WORK ACT 2009 - SECT 361
Reason for action to be presumed unless proved otherwise
(1) If:
(a) in an application in relation to a contravention of this Part, it is alleged that a person took, or is taking, action for a particular reason or with a particular intent; and
(b) taking that action for that reason or with that intent would constitute a contravention of this Part;
it is presumed, in proceedings arising from the application, that the action was, or is being, taken for that reason or with that intent, unless the person proves otherwise".
1) The owner of the aircraft, (Hope), was the student who was probably flying it at the time? He gave a "statement" to CASA which they relied upon as evidence then subsequently changed that "statement" after prompting by CASA of "industry intelligence"?
2) The PIC was the Instructor, (Hanley), who gave a "sworn affidavit" that was at odds with Hope's amended "statement"?
3) There is only "industry intelligence" to back the "amended statement" of Hope?
4) The "industry intelligence" has not been supported with an identity nor corroborated.
5) It seems to appear that an "amended", "anonomous" "statement to CASA" has some form of superior Court meaning to that of a "sworn affidavit".
6) By my definition there is no evidence to support the notion that the aircraft was hover-taxied however meters and, on the balance of probabilities the quad was the most sensible method of moving the carcass.
May I be so bold as to post an excerpt from Jetblast, http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4776...litics-40.html Where I am an avid reader which reminds people how one can get into trouble with "fiddling" with rules that have served us well for hundreds of years;
"Unfortunately, there is no presumption of innocence for Mr Slipper. My advice, from an experienced industrial lawyer, is that Mr Ashby is accusing Mr Slipper of an 'Adverse Action' under s. 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which provides that the onus of proof is on the employer (Slipper) to prove that his action (putting the hard word on Ashby) was not intended to do what the complainant Ashby claims it was intended to do.
This reversal of the onus of proof is friendly to complainants and unfriendly to employers. It's a controversial provision of the new Fair Work Act.
Guess who drafted the Fair Work Act and insisted on the reversal of the onus of proof?
Julia Gillard. Ha ha.
Here's the provision:
Commonwealth Consolidated Acts
FAIR WORK ACT 2009 - SECT 361
Reason for action to be presumed unless proved otherwise
(1) If:
(a) in an application in relation to a contravention of this Part, it is alleged that a person took, or is taking, action for a particular reason or with a particular intent; and
(b) taking that action for that reason or with that intent would constitute a contravention of this Part;
it is presumed, in proceedings arising from the application, that the action was, or is being, taken for that reason or with that intent, unless the person proves otherwise".
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 27th Apr 2012 at 05:17.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's very lucky this incident involves flying and CASA Imagine if it involved a motorist and a the police. The motorist receives a letter in the mail along these lines: Dear Sir, We are cancelling your license forever effective immediately . After investigating the minor accident which occurred 6 weeks ago we find the following:
1) You are a serial offender. You were nearly speeding 8 years ago.
2) After 6 weeks and a little chat with us your passenger has changed his original statement and now states you were speeding.
3) A second witness has been found who says you were speeding. We neither confirm nor deny that this witness is your ex wife.
You may sell your car,house and kids so you can fight us in our own kangaroo court where we are judge,jury and executioner or you can just go away and leave us free to chase some other dangerous criminals.
If the above really happened to motorists there would be a huge outcry.Heads would roll.Governments would fall. In CASA world it's ops normal. WHY???????
RA
1) You are a serial offender. You were nearly speeding 8 years ago.
2) After 6 weeks and a little chat with us your passenger has changed his original statement and now states you were speeding.
3) A second witness has been found who says you were speeding. We neither confirm nor deny that this witness is your ex wife.
You may sell your car,house and kids so you can fight us in our own kangaroo court where we are judge,jury and executioner or you can just go away and leave us free to chase some other dangerous criminals.
If the above really happened to motorists there would be a huge outcry.Heads would roll.Governments would fall. In CASA world it's ops normal. WHY???????
RA
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because the Office of Legal Counsel has always educated them to believe they are above the law, with a higher cause that entitles them to ignore the rights of citizens and has instilled in all of them a "win at all costs" approach to evidence presentation and gathering.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winner tales all, step right up and spin the wheel
CASA cannot lose, they simply can't, they hold the best hand of cards an overflowing trough can buy!
Their supply of fighting fund money for barristers, lawyers, barristers and more barristers is provided from an endless bottomless pot of taxpayer money. Ace in the hand number one.
Ace in the hand number two is that even if they spend squillions on a case that is pathetically structured or even borderline criminal and it gets thrown out no problems, individuals are covered by government insurance and can't be held accountable or liable! It's perfect!
This industry is littered with decades worth of punters who were innocent but quite simply were never going to be able to slay the dragon. CASA ranks alongside the ATO when it comes to impossible odds at winning.
Rutan around,in a loud voice you cry out Why??? Because they are government. Governments have absolute power, and we know what absolute power does don't we? They make the rules, change the rules, bend them, break them, place/imply/attach/interpret 'intent' to the rule as they see fit. Litanies of built-in escape clauses, get out of jail free cards and 'escape clauses' means it will always be us little bloke wearing the pineapple.
If you work in this industry and have to deal with government organizations such as CASA daily or weekly you are best off ensuring thy each morning you leave for work you leave with a pre-lubricated anus as you never know from one day to the next when they have you in their crosshairs for forgetting to fill in a form with black pen, wearing your pilot uniform untucked and not ironed, forgetting to cross one letter 'T' in your log book 15 years ago or forgetting to place your IATA DG manual back on the middle shelf of the Freight Managers office in the cargo shed..
Their supply of fighting fund money for barristers, lawyers, barristers and more barristers is provided from an endless bottomless pot of taxpayer money. Ace in the hand number one.
Ace in the hand number two is that even if they spend squillions on a case that is pathetically structured or even borderline criminal and it gets thrown out no problems, individuals are covered by government insurance and can't be held accountable or liable! It's perfect!
This industry is littered with decades worth of punters who were innocent but quite simply were never going to be able to slay the dragon. CASA ranks alongside the ATO when it comes to impossible odds at winning.
Rutan around,in a loud voice you cry out Why??? Because they are government. Governments have absolute power, and we know what absolute power does don't we? They make the rules, change the rules, bend them, break them, place/imply/attach/interpret 'intent' to the rule as they see fit. Litanies of built-in escape clauses, get out of jail free cards and 'escape clauses' means it will always be us little bloke wearing the pineapple.
If you work in this industry and have to deal with government organizations such as CASA daily or weekly you are best off ensuring thy each morning you leave for work you leave with a pre-lubricated anus as you never know from one day to the next when they have you in their crosshairs for forgetting to fill in a form with black pen, wearing your pilot uniform untucked and not ironed, forgetting to cross one letter 'T' in your log book 15 years ago or forgetting to place your IATA DG manual back on the middle shelf of the Freight Managers office in the cargo shed..
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Hoper (Don't know why you chose that tag-it doesn't inspire me to get involved)
CORRUPT? Do yourself a favour and read the Phelan Papers. After even a couple you'll get the drift. For a start try "Dudding the Delegate" and "Birds-What Birds?" These articles are not for skimming. Read them very carefully.When you understand their full implications you'll no longer need to use your current monicker.
Cheers RA
CORRUPT? Do yourself a favour and read the Phelan Papers. After even a couple you'll get the drift. For a start try "Dudding the Delegate" and "Birds-What Birds?" These articles are not for skimming. Read them very carefully.When you understand their full implications you'll no longer need to use your current monicker.
Cheers RA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it's all in the name of safety Senior Member
Defined root problem.
Defined root cause.
Defined end result.
Proposed solution.
One of the more interesting, although ignored side bars to this issue is the Safety Case; the mealy mouthed ATSB report begs some interesting questions. It appears there are some lessons to be learnt from this incident which should be amplified, explained and passed along to the industry. The old "Crash Comic" could have done a bang up job on this incident – there are lessons to be learnt. A real investigation would highlight the issues and may have produced a sensible, valuable result.
Does the industry derive a benefit from the experience ?.
Does the money spent on this AAT hearing provide an improved safety outcome?.
Will the planned crucifixion of the CFI improve helicopter training safety?.
Yet again the mantra of 'air safety' covers all public outrage, beggars common sense, decency and allows the 'investigator' yet another whack at the industry. You see M'lud, there are a lot of phsyco hooligans out there, we need to eradicate them. Your job Senior Member is to decide who they are.
RA - Imagine if it involved a motorist and a the police. The motorist receives a letter in the mail along these lines: Dear Sir, etc.
T28 - Because the Office of Legal Counsel has always educated them to believe they are above the law, with a higher cause that entitles them to ignore the rights of citizens and has instilled in all of them a "win at all costs" approach to evidence presentation and gathering.
GD - This industry is littered with decades worth of punters who were innocent but quite simply were never going to be able to slay the dragon. CASA ranks alongside the ATO when it comes to impossible odds at winning.
PM'd by Anon - However one of the basic civil liberties is the presumption of innocence, it is a given everyday of the week....So I think we should create a submission to the Australian Council for Civil Liberties (the big enchilada) citing the occasions (and there are many) where CASA have violated this basic civil liberty in a AAT hearing!.
Does the industry derive a benefit from the experience ?.
Does the money spent on this AAT hearing provide an improved safety outcome?.
Will the planned crucifixion of the CFI improve helicopter training safety?.
Yet again the mantra of 'air safety' covers all public outrage, beggars common sense, decency and allows the 'investigator' yet another whack at the industry. You see M'lud, there are a lot of phsyco hooligans out there, we need to eradicate them. Your job Senior Member is to decide who they are.
Last edited by Kharon; 27th Apr 2012 at 21:16. Reason: Second coffee late arrival.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears there are some lessons to be learnt from this incident which should be amplified,
Rutan Around, asked ozzie friends about your name, not sure inspires me either. Here we have ROTO Rooter for cleaning sewerage pipes Good articles that you refered to, online search didn't show any action taken agains Aust Authority for corruption. Is your entire government colluding in this corruption?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Hoper, Collusion is too strong a word and suggests at least an awareness of the CASA cesspool. Apathetic and hopeless are words that more accurately describe our governments position.Unfortunately that's both major parties.This corruption has been going on ever since the word "safety" was inserted into the aviation authorities name. Whenever they are cornered they bellow "SAFETY" Because no one knows what this enormously broad term means in any given situation so they get away with murder. eg a fictional hearing in our AAT relating to a heavy landing.
Barrister acting for CASA: Mr Hoper you are charged with operating your helicopter in a dangerous manner likely to endanger the general public. When your engine failed you panicked and let your machine fall almost to the ground before you appeared to regain some control albeit to late to avoid impacting the ground.
Barrister for Mr Hoper: Mr Hoper applied SOP's for an engine failure and under the prevailing conditions produced an acceptable outcome.
Civilian Judge; It appear a nonsense to me that you would speed up an already falling machine. Guilty as charged. Hand in your license as you go out the door.
Cheers RA
PS Ask your Ozzie and Yank mates who Burt Rutan is and how he could possibly be involved in my monicker. It's an enjoyable pastime. Nearly as good as the one I suspect your Ozzie mates suggested. Never heard of a ROTO Rooter but I've been told it's a good thing to clean your pipes out now and again.
Barrister acting for CASA: Mr Hoper you are charged with operating your helicopter in a dangerous manner likely to endanger the general public. When your engine failed you panicked and let your machine fall almost to the ground before you appeared to regain some control albeit to late to avoid impacting the ground.
Barrister for Mr Hoper: Mr Hoper applied SOP's for an engine failure and under the prevailing conditions produced an acceptable outcome.
Civilian Judge; It appear a nonsense to me that you would speed up an already falling machine. Guilty as charged. Hand in your license as you go out the door.
Cheers RA
PS Ask your Ozzie and Yank mates who Burt Rutan is and how he could possibly be involved in my monicker. It's an enjoyable pastime. Nearly as good as the one I suspect your Ozzie mates suggested. Never heard of a ROTO Rooter but I've been told it's a good thing to clean your pipes out now and again.
"Is your entire government colluding in this corruption? "
Corruption? In Australia? Has Iraq an insufficiency of oil? Is Dolly Parton a catholic?
Does our inveterate poster of profundities, persifilage and perversities, Kharon,
have a detestation of Islamic phrases?
p.s. 'no hoper' - just a little off key, cock.
try a real populist tag - AL K HEEDER OR B LADEN (as in 'sire, I am weary and burdensomely laden') A 'Rutan' reference is OK.... he is an exemplar and an idol of the accolytes of aerodynamic and manufacturing brilliance, though he could never have designed a plane quite as gorgeous as the Fairey Fantome.
Pay no heed to that man's , that poster's (poetaster?) protestations.
"A joke's a joke. A smoke's a smoke. A root's a root. . . . . but to talk about it's effing ridiculous ." (In the original . . . "a poke's a poke." . . . not wishing to labour THE POINT).
p.p.s. anyone have any recent scuttle on how the good J Quadrio's getting on?
Corruption? In Australia? Has Iraq an insufficiency of oil? Is Dolly Parton a catholic?
Does our inveterate poster of profundities, persifilage and perversities, Kharon,
have a detestation of Islamic phrases?
p.s. 'no hoper' - just a little off key, cock.
try a real populist tag - AL K HEEDER OR B LADEN (as in 'sire, I am weary and burdensomely laden') A 'Rutan' reference is OK.... he is an exemplar and an idol of the accolytes of aerodynamic and manufacturing brilliance, though he could never have designed a plane quite as gorgeous as the Fairey Fantome.
Pay no heed to that man's , that poster's (poetaster?) protestations.
"A joke's a joke. A smoke's a smoke. A root's a root. . . . . but to talk about it's effing ridiculous ." (In the original . . . "a poke's a poke." . . . not wishing to labour THE POINT).
p.p.s. anyone have any recent scuttle on how the good J Quadrio's getting on?
Last edited by Fantome; 28th Apr 2012 at 00:31.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like you have had a run in with your CAA GObbledock.
Safety! Bah!
I think Mrs Q has had enough.
PS Are The Kennedy's gun shy?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Persiflage,
Fantome - poster of profundities, persiflage
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't expect anything from Mr Hoper until Tuesday, assuming an RDO on Monday.
YOUR HARD EARNED TAXPAYER DOLLAR AT WORK!
YOUR HARD EARNED TAXPAYER DOLLAR AT WORK!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australia's CAA
Frank, you could have at least added a picture of a pig at a trough.
No Hoper, I look forward to reading more commentary about our malfeasant CAA.
No Hoper, I look forward to reading more commentary about our malfeasant CAA.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Wherever required
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE][In a matter like this where CASA want the guys head, can the AAT offer an arm or a leg instead – mayhap suspend him instead of doing the Queen of Hearts thing ??, provided of course, there is a guilty call made./QUOTE]
When CASA set their mind to it no AAT or Court will dissuade them from their SAFETY task. These measures are just formalities to make SM Fice and his colleagues look good. The six weeks were probably necessary to convince Mr Hope that it would be in his best interest!!! To refresh his memory of events.
The CASA will have had advice from the DPP that there is no case to answer, but then what do they know about SAFETY?
SH
When CASA set their mind to it no AAT or Court will dissuade them from their SAFETY task. These measures are just formalities to make SM Fice and his colleagues look good. The six weeks were probably necessary to convince Mr Hope that it would be in his best interest!!! To refresh his memory of events.
The CASA will have had advice from the DPP that there is no case to answer, but then what do they know about SAFETY?
SH
Stasi Hunter good first post!
Need to get with the program though and drop the sssss.......I think most posters here agree that the regulator has only gone further backwards since adopting the "S"
SH hope you live up to your name....stasi now where I've heard that before??
.........ohh I remember he's the bloke that processes your FOI requests at Fort Fumble!
Need to get with the program though and drop the sssss.......I think most posters here agree that the regulator has only gone further backwards since adopting the "S" SH hope you live up to your name....stasi now where I've heard that before??
.........ohh I remember he's the bloke that processes your FOI requests at Fort Fumble!