#31
|
|||
|
|||
There may be an attempt to tender material, but it is another thing whether it will be allowed into evidence. Put simply, the tendering of a document may (1) be objected to, and (2) the magistrate/judge may not allow it into evidence (after hearing legal argument on its admissibility).
Quote:
One MAJOR point I am completely bemused by is why the pilot didn't exercise his right to silence. My mind boggles at his decision to talk to the police, especially considering they are seeking life upon conviction. People will generally dig themselves a hole when trying to assist / cooperate with the authorities by participating in an interview; Rarely is it helpful for a defendant. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Does Indonesia provide the accused the right to silence?
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Today's news:
Quote:
__________________
Philip |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
here's hoping he's not made a scapegoat and that Garuda gets processes & recommendations sorted so this doesn't happen again.
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
Garuda crash trial to proceed
News just in:
Quote:
__________________
Philip |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Garuda crash trial update
An update from ABC News on the original story:
Quote:
__________________
Philip |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
And is it just me, or is it extremely light punishment to get 4 years for killing 21 people, and Schapelle Corby gets 20 years for 4kg of dope? Which never killed a single person. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Sounds to me like typical Indonesian justice (or lack thereof) at work here!! |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Could one of the pilots on this board please tell me what is the difference between the responsibilties of driving a car and flying an aircraft?
There seems to be a theme through this thread that pilots should not face criminal charges from an accident in which they are involved and found to be at fault. There also seems to be a view that the findings of an accident investigation should never be used by the justice system in the support of any charges. There was also a comment made that pilots would simply pull the circuit breaker on the CVR in fear of it being used as evidence. Surely no pilot worthy of his license would ever stoop to that? Do we need to have control of that sort of equipment taken away from the flight crew? And if the data recorded is good enough for a correct finding in an accident investigation, then assuming evidential rules are met, why should it not be allowed in court if needed? I agree the report is not intended to be proof of criminal conduct or intent, but it is a factual statement of what was done. I'm not commenting on the Garuda case, simply in general. If you have an at fault accident in a car for any reason you rightly face prosecution for negligence. The same applies for the crew of a ship. Why should the same thing not apply to pilots. I most certainly agree that no charges could be laid until after the accident investigation was complete, however long that might take. But if you allow yourself, or choose, to stuff up, how could you possibly think you should not be brought to task for what you had done? I though airlines went out of their way to train "The God Concept" out of their crews these days. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Bump.
Come on guys, I'm not a pilot or in any way associated with the aviation industry, so could one of the pilots on this board, perhaps AdamP, Nigel C, or Chris G please explain your view points in an answer to my question? You make it sound as if Pilots think they should be absolved of all responsibility in all circumstances, and wish to deny anyone outside the aviation industry the chance to understand what is going on. As a member of the general travelling public, that sounds rather reckless and scary to me. Stephen. |
|
|