-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Coast Guard pilot involved in crash to be charged with homicide
- Thread starter HercDriver
- Start date
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Hearing-begins-over-fatal-Coast-Guard-crash-2357377.php#page-2
More information and some quote from folks involved in the process...
More information and some quote from folks involved in the process...
I still haven't seen or heard anything to explain or suggest why this is going to an Art 32. If the H2P fucked the dog, isn't that what FNAEBs are for? I've never heard of a mishap investigation turning into a court without extremely aggravating circumstances (pissed positive or what have you). They really want to court-martial this poor bastard for poor CRM?
It does happen from time to time - reference Marine Prowler mishap in Italy. Obviously all kinds of aggravating circumstances there. I postulate that if (big if) there's really nothings that amount to criminal negligence, USCG is going through the Art. 32 to say they allowed the process to unfold, found no cause to charge the guy and insulate them (and him) from further legal action on the civilian side. Granted, I have no knowledge of the facts in this case, but that's a possible explanation in my mind.
Brett
don't forget that in the case of the Marine Prowler, there was no SIR release because the concept of privilege was jeopardized. The Navy (up through the CNO and JAG-actual) decided that to protect the process they simply would not conduct an AMB or release an SIR.
Re: the Prowler mishap, "international diplomatic shitstorm" being one of those aggravating circumstances I mentioned.
Taking this Coastie to a GCM makes no sense. Usually, that makes me wonder what's the rest of the story...from what's reported being discussed at the Art 32, I'm not hearing a rest of the story. It sounds like the government's position is that the H2P didn't exercise good CRM or good external lookout. I don't know how you make the leap from that to criminal negligence. If there were some other factor (flathatting, dope, strippers in the cockpit), I'd assume the accused's counsel would have to know about it by now. If there isn't, this is a mystifyingly bad precedent to set.
Taking this Coastie to a GCM makes no sense. Usually, that makes me wonder what's the rest of the story...from what's reported being discussed at the Art 32, I'm not hearing a rest of the story. It sounds like the government's position is that the H2P didn't exercise good CRM or good external lookout. I don't know how you make the leap from that to criminal negligence. If there were some other factor (flathatting, dope, strippers in the cockpit), I'd assume the accused's counsel would have to know about it by now. If there isn't, this is a mystifyingly bad precedent to set.
We're all just taking stabs in the dark. The Art. 32 makes sense to someone in the know, and while it's easy to presume they're hanging someone out to dry, there's really no evidence or information available to the public that would justify that conclusion.
My brother in law is an Army JAG, and he indicted to me that Art 32 hearings are routine for Army Aviation mishaps. I seem to remember him telling me he had to defend an Army pilot that damaged blades when she hit trees on landing of an airfield. Hope an Army buba can shed light on that. If it is an Army thing, and the USCG now seems to think that level of review is necessary for mishaps, then maybe it is something we should watch for in the Navy.
That's right, good aviators fuck it away. We can all be plumbers one day and a Blue Angel the next. I'd rather be lucky than good any day. As far as this case goes, there has to be more to it than what we now I think. I'll hold my opinion until then.
Like most of the others, I just don't get it. This guy was the H2P. If I die in a COD crash, the 2P isn't the one responsible - I am. I accepted that fact when I became an aircraft commander and again when I signed for the plane.If the aircraft is being flown at an unsafe altitude, its because the aircraft commander allowed it to be so...
In the Navy, the aircraft commander is the one who will get the violation (if the CNO deems it appropriate). Isn't that the CNO saying he thinks that the AC is the one ultimately responsible? I would think the USCG would be similar to our 3710 guidelines on these things...
In the Navy, the aircraft commander is the one who will get the violation (if the CNO deems it appropriate). Isn't that the CNO saying he thinks that the AC is the one ultimately responsible? I would think the USCG would be similar to our 3710 guidelines on these things...
Sapper!
Excuse the BS...
You are right about stabs in the dark but wasn't one of the issues with the Marines in the Italy incident that they destroyed a tape that could have been used against them? Do you suspect that in the case with this CG Officer?
That would be purely speculative in this case and it's inappropriate to do so in these matters.