Crash at Shoreham Air show

[MarkwG]

Vasco said:

MarkwG said:

MarkwG said:

Your first seven words nailed it for me: I find it highly unlikely that there's anything more to this than conjecture. If he has applied, & that information has been leaked then someone has seriously breached privacy rules, putting their job on the line - I doubt very much that's happened, he's not worth the risk.

Uh, people leak things all the time, I don't think it the slightest bit doubtful that one of the dozens (hundreds?) of people who would have had knowledge (should be have applied( might have decided to tell The Sun.

Edited by Gareth79 on Friday 29th December 00:14

Sorry, that's not correct. I know how the system works, it's less than a handful, all of whom will be trackable. It's far less likely to be a leak than a journalist making stuff up.

Really ?

I know the Sun is hardly the best source for anything - but you think a reporter made the story up. Couldn't it have been fairly easy to counter that by now if it's totally wrong ?

They do it all the time - where have you been the last few years? They don't need facts, just supposition. If they're caught out, they'll print an apology somewhere near the back claiming their source was mis informed.

[eccles]

MarkwG said:

Vasco said:

MarkwG said:

MarkwG said:

Your first seven words nailed it for me: I find it highly unlikely that there's anything more to this than conjecture. If he has applied, & that information has been leaked then someone has seriously breached privacy rules, putting their job on the line - I doubt very much that's happened, he's not worth the risk.

Uh, people leak things all the time, I don't think it the slightest bit doubtful that one of the dozens (hundreds?) of people who would have had knowledge (should be have applied( might have decided to tell The Sun.

Edited by Gareth79 on Friday 29th December 00:14

Sorry, that's not correct. I know how the system works, it's less than a handful, all of whom will be trackable. It's far less likely to be a leak than a journalist making stuff up.

Really ?

I know the Sun is hardly the best source for anything - but you think a reporter made the story up. Couldn't it have been fairly easy to counter that by now if it's totally wrong ?

They do it all the time - where have you been the last few years? They don't need facts, just supposition. If they're caught out, they'll print an apology somewhere near the back claiming their source was mis informed.

Just maybe it's not a leak. Just maybe it could be a friend, neighbour or acquaintance who's heard it first hand and doesn't agree with it.

Edited by eccles on Friday 29th December 10:44

[MarkwG]

eccles said:

MarkwG said:

Vasco said:

MarkwG said:

MarkwG said:

Your first seven words nailed it for me: I find it highly unlikely that there's anything more to this than conjecture. If he has applied, & that information has been leaked then someone has seriously breached privacy rules, putting their job on the line - I doubt very much that's happened, he's not worth the risk.

Uh, people leak things all the time, I don't think it the slightest bit doubtful that one of the dozens (hundreds?) of people who would have had knowledge (should be have applied( might have decided to tell The Sun.

Edited by Gareth79 on Friday 29th December 00:14

Sorry, that's not correct. I know how the system works, it's less than a handful, all of whom will be trackable. It's far less likely to be a leak than a journalist making stuff up.

Really ?

I know the Sun is hardly the best source for anything - but you think a reporter made the story up. Couldn't it have been fairly easy to counter that by now if it's totally wrong ?

They do it all the time - where have you been the last few years? They don't need facts, just supposition. If they're caught out, they'll print an apology somewhere near the back claiming their source was mis informed.

Just maybe it's not a leak. Just maybe it could be a friend, neighbour or acquaintance who's heard it first hand and doesn't agree with it.

Is that any more reliable..?

[zsdom]

Vasco said:

You appear to be allowing your absolute love of airshows to be clouding your judgement.

For various personal reasons I've watched everything that's gone on about this case, and the pilot in particular. He's never appeared to fully accept what happened and seems to usually convey the 'it must be someone else's fault' approach to the accident.

You're probably right that nobody on PH knows him personally - but nor do you, so your views are just as irrelevant as others.

Why should he be allowed to fly again - regardless of the type of aircraft ?. He is still just as capable of causing problems, or an accident, as he was before. Why should we allow such people to be flying above any of us ?.

How will you react if he flies again - and kills again ?

Surely if my love of airshows is clouding my judgement I’d be in the ‘never let him near an aircraft again’ camp,but I’m not

The language used here, “it appears, suggests, he seems” amongst others but no one knows, including me, his feelings and what he goes through so we shouldnt be quick to jump to conclusions.

If he kills again of course I’ll be devastated and hope that a court of law & a jury of his peers will apportion the correct punishment but what if he doesnt, what if he goes about the rest of his life never being mentioned again?

NDA said:

Selectively edited.

Firstly Hill doesn't appear to carry any sort of burden.

Secondly there is a sense that justice has been evaded. Hill is hoping to put his life back together to have some 'normality' - why the hell should he?? The victims of his appalling actions and the many hundreds of family and friends of those who died senselessly would like to see him punished rather than being able to 'pootle' about in his Cessna.

You dont know he doesnt carry that burden, appearances can be deceptive, secondly its not for you to decide whether justice has been evaded, thats for the courts & the jury, it’s also not your decision to take away someones rights to a life & their enjoyment of it

[NDA]

zsdom said:

You dont know he doesnt carry that burden, appearances can be deceptive, secondly its not for you to decide whether justice has been evaded, thats for the courts & the jury, it’s also not your decision to take away someones rights to a life & their enjoyment of it

The victims don't feel that justice has been served. But great that he has the rights to enjoy life whilst others have been ended.

[pocketspring]

Bonefish Blues said:

Dogwatch said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

On one hand, he was tried and found to be innocent.

He was found not guilty. The Prosecution failed to prove its case.
The Coroner took a very different view.


BTW the junction is (very) slowly disappearing under the bullozers as it is being relocated to a giant roundabout several hundred yards further West.

The Coroner explicitly stated that her verdict did not detract from the Jury's not guilty verdict. Still puzzled as to how that could be the case.

Commentary here:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/20/sh...

A coroner's court isn't to find someone to blame but to consider the facts and see how that person died from hearing evidence and then giving a verdict. A criminal conviction is based on beyond reasonable doubt whereas a coroners court is the balance of probability.
The families could bring in a private prosecution but it is very costly and time consuming.

[zsdom]

NDA said:

zsdom said:

You dont know he doesnt carry that burden, appearances can be deceptive, secondly its not for you to decide whether justice has been evaded, thats for the courts & the jury, it’s also not your decision to take away someones rights to a life & their enjoyment of it

The victims don't feel that justice has been served. But great that he has the rights to enjoy life whilst others have been ended.

Am I right then by saying you know every single victim personally to make that statement on their behalf?

What should Andy Hill do then, wear black for the rest of his life, shed tears & beg for forgiveness every time he leaves the house, do nothing that he enjoys, no walks in the country, no watching TV, no listening to music, no gardening,nothing at all.

I’m fully aware before the retort that the victims will never get to do any of that but he was found not guilty in a court of law, irrelevant of anyones feelings, not one person on this forum has the right to reverse that or choose a mans punishment, the people that heard every single piece of evidence made a decision based on the facts presented to them Pistonheads did not

Andy Hills punishment is he has to live with the guilt that his actions caused people to die every single day for the rest of his life

[dmsims]

Wonder what an RAF board would made of his too low and too slow at the start (+ not enough power)

How can you claim impairment in straight and level flight ?

[Bonefish Blues]

pocketspring said:

Bonefish Blues said:

Dogwatch said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

On one hand, he was tried and found to be innocent.

He was found not guilty. The Prosecution failed to prove its case.
The Coroner took a very different view.


BTW the junction is (very) slowly disappearing under the bullozers as it is being relocated to a giant roundabout several hundred yards further West.

The Coroner explicitly stated that her verdict did not detract from the Jury's not guilty verdict. Still puzzled as to how that could be the case.

Commentary here:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/20/sh...

A coroner's court isn't to find someone to blame but to consider the facts and see how that person died from hearing evidence and then giving a verdict. A criminal conviction is based on beyond reasonable doubt whereas a coroners court is the balance of probability.
The families could bring in a private prosecution but it is very costly and time consuming.

Thanks for that, appreciate your thoughts. I'd been musing in the interim as I don't like being hard of thinking, as it were, so yes I'd got to the distinction - but the thing that remains is the discrepancy between the two in the public's (and posters') mind. That won't be overcome, no matter how the difference in terms of proof is explained.

Where we differ is on a private prosecution subsequent to his acquittal - I don't think that is in any way a possibility. Did you mean the families could bring a civil action for damages?

[Mr Pointy]

zsdom said:

Andy Hills punishment is he has to live with the guilt that his actions caused people to die every single day for the rest of his life

Does he feel guilty though? Has he ever accepted guilt for his actions?

[zsdom]

Mr Pointy said:

zsdom said:

Andy Hills punishment is he has to live with the guilt that his actions caused people to die every single day for the rest of his life

Does he feel guilty though? Has he ever accepted guilt for his actions?

Only one person knows the answer to that

[NDA]

zsdom said:

Am I right then by saying you know every single victim personally to make that statement on their behalf?

Stupid question.

You should try reading what the families have said. Leslye Polito, who lost her son Daniele in the crash, said: "I feel extremely disappointed, very upset and primarily let down by the justice system when someone who has clearly made some very bad errors of judgment is allowed to walk free."

I think he should be in prison. Many others do too. But great that he's got some supporters wanting him to go back to a normal life.

[zsdom]

NDA said:

Stupid question.

You should try reading what the families have said. Leslye Polito, who lost her son Daniele in the crash, said: "I feel extremely disappointed, very upset and primarily let down by the justice system when someone who has clearly made some very bad errors of judgment is allowed to walk free."

I think he should be in prison. Many others do too. But great that he's got some supporters wanting him to go back to a normal life.

It doesnt matter what you think, it doesnt matter what I think we’re nobody’s in this case, we’re irrelevant, it doesnt matter what we think, what we want or what justice should or shouldnt be served, that was up to the judges & jury and them only.

As for your last comment I guess you chose to disregard this in my original post

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily

[Vasco]

zsdom said:

Am I right then by saying you know every single victim personally to make that statement on their behalf?

What should Andy Hill do then, wear black for the rest of his life, shed tears & beg for forgiveness every time he leaves the house, do nothing that he enjoys, no walks in the country, no watching TV, no listening to music, no gardening,nothing at all.

I’m fully aware before the retort that the victims will never get to do any of that but he was found not guilty in a court of law, irrelevant of anyones feelings, not one person on this forum has the right to reverse that or choose a mans punishment, the people that heard every single piece of evidence made a decision based on the facts presented to them Pistonheads did not

Andy Hills punishment is he has to live with the guilt that his actions caused people to die every single day for the rest of his life

Unbelievable !

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

As for your '.....if he kills again.....'

[TopTrump]

Vasco said:

Unbelievable !

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

As for your '.....if he kills again.....'

I agree, this is the type of limp-wristed acceptance that is pulling the country into the weeds.

[zsdom]

Vasco said:

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

Once again I guess in the fit of unbelievable faux outrage, feather spitting & frothing you failed to acknowledge:

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily, he ruined families lives forever, he single handedly changed the face of the airshow world that I covet & fully immerse myself in every summer & have done for as long as I can remember. He fked everything up

[Vasco]

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

Once again I guess in the fit of unbelievable faux outrage, feather spitting & frothing you failed to acknowledge:

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily, he ruined families lives forever, he single handedly changed the face of the airshow world that I covet & fully immerse myself in every summer & have done for as long as I can remember. He fked everything up

No, I read all that - hence why I found your subsequent comments quite unacceptable.
How you can accept him being allowed up in a plane again is quite beyond me.

[zsdom]

Vasco said:

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

Once again I guess in the fit of unbelievable faux outrage, feather spitting & frothing you failed to acknowledge:

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily, he ruined families lives forever, he single handedly changed the face of the airshow world that I covet & fully immerse myself in every summer & have done for as long as I can remember. He fked everything up

No, I read all that - hence why I found your subsequent comments quite unacceptable.
How you can accept him being allowed up in a plane again is quite beyond me.

Why not, it has zero impact on any of our lives if he does or doesnt fly again, I have more important things to spend my time & energy on but who are we to condem a person?

[Vasco]

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

Once again I guess in the fit of unbelievable faux outrage, feather spitting & frothing you failed to acknowledge:

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily, he ruined families lives forever, he single handedly changed the face of the airshow world that I covet & fully immerse myself in every summer & have done for as long as I can remember. He fked everything up

No, I read all that - hence why I found your subsequent comments quite unacceptable.
How you can accept him being allowed up in a plane again is quite beyond me.

Why not, it has zero impact on any of our lives if he does or doesnt fly again, I have more important things to spend my time & energy on but who are we to condem a person?

So, no concern on your part if he flies again and crashes, again - on more innocents.

Incredible.
.

[zsdom]

Vasco said:

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

zsdom said:

Vasco said:

I'm guessing he must be a relation, or close friend, of yours to keep on supporting anything he wants to do.

Once again I guess in the fit of unbelievable faux outrage, feather spitting & frothing you failed to acknowledge:

zsdom said:

I am in no way shape or form defending him, his actions led to people dying unecessarily, he ruined families lives forever, he single handedly changed the face of the airshow world that I covet & fully immerse myself in every summer & have done for as long as I can remember. He fked everything up

No, I read all that - hence why I found your subsequent comments quite unacceptable.
How you can accept him being allowed up in a plane again is quite beyond me.

Why not, it has zero impact on any of our lives if he does or doesnt fly again, I have more important things to spend my time & energy on but who are we to condem a person?

So, no concern on your part if he flies again and crashes, again - on more innocents.

Incredible.
.

Where did I say that? But again you ignore my question