Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Hunter crash at Shoreham

Your understanding of the Legal Aid system is, sadly, very out of date and very inaccurate.

As a taxpayer, I am delighted, but you could have posted some detail for the benefit of all our readers.

You have stated twice now that the long report is because the CAA wants to cover its back. But is the AAIB really part of the CAA in the UK?

No, but everybody in the regulatory establishment is in the same boat here. As they are everywhere – who will say the BEA never talks to the DGAC? They are all old chums, everywhere.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

No, it isn’t. They’re an independent unit within the Department for Transport. The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents reports directly to the Secretary of State for Transport.

The CAA is part of what it investigates.

But don’t let facts stand in the way of a good story. If it’s good enough for POTUS it’s good enough for us :-D

EGKB Biggin Hill
EGKB Biggin Hill

Airborne_Again wrote:

You have stated twice now that the long report is because the CAA wants to cover its back. But is the AAIB really part of the CAA in the UK?

No it is not.

EGTK Oxford

Legal aid

OK but that is like closing down euroga.org and redirecting it to google.com.

But I am not interested in diverting this thread. I have to get a breakfast and go to work.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Well, suffice it to say that Legal Aid applications now go through rigorous scrutiny and it is very difficult to get unless you are virtually destitute and at risk of imprisonment.

EGKB Biggin Hill

Peter wrote:

No, but everybody in the regulatory establishment is in the same boat here. As they are everywhere – who will say the BEA never talks to the DGAC? They are all old chums, everywhere.

Of course I don’t know much about the internal politics of UK government agencies, but generally speaking the authority investigating accidents is not part of the regulatory establishment.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
He can consider himself lucky then that this happened in the UK. Elsewhere any degree of negligence is sufficient for a criminal conviction after people lost their lives.

Is that really a good idea though? I’ve heard it said that all doctors have a death or two on their conscience – even the best ones. For senior doctors, I think it’s probably true. Junior doctors may not yet have had a sufficient number of opportunities. Following this to its logical progression, should we should abolish all the doctors who have enough experience to be competent?

If people are to be punished for lapses, I think it would be fairer if they were punished equally, whether or not any given lapse resulted in deaths. In practical terms I can see why this is unlikely to happen. Ultimately any punishment will be partly for purposes of retribution (understandable but not always a good use of public funds) and partly pour encourager les autres – which I don’t think generally works on people who are already trying.

I would agree that at a certain level, negligence becomes culpable and should be prosecuted, but in my mind the bar should be set quite high, or a prosecution should proceed if someone has a history of being generally reckless.

This is a very emotional topic, rational arguments never solved this.

Punishment could serve multiple purposes:

  • Deterrence (both in general, or of the individual “don’t do that again” kind). Clearly not required here.
  • Societal protection (lock the thief up, he can’t steal while he is in prison). Again makes no sense here. If at risk of repeat, just remove the licence / strike the physician off
  • Restoration. None of the typical punishments for negligent homicide achieve anything here.
  • Rehabilitation (teach him so he doesn’t offend again). Would be appropriate, but I don’t think when people ask for prosecution the want him to study the limitations of aerobatics in more detail and demonstrate his skills.

which leaves…

  • Retribution / revenge.

Sorry, guys, but unless I missed something, all the “he should be prosecuted” guys want is revenge/retribution, on behalf of society

Biggin Hill

Cobalt wrote:

Sorry, guys, but unless I missed something, all the “he should be prosecuted” guys want is revenge/retribution, on behalf of society

I think you are probably right. I expect it will be a brave CPS official who chooses not to prosecute however. The outcry would be incredible.

EGTK Oxford
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top