criminal charges against airline mechanic

[Phil Bunch]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/world/europe/07concorde.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print

Remarkable story...

[stekeller]

This will get overturned on appeal. It is so tenuous to hold an airline and its mechanic responsible for a piece of metal falling off that did no damage to that aircraft or hurt its passengers.

That another aircraft (Concorde) could not handle debris of this type is the bigger issue. But hardly criminal. Just a tragedy. Why not blame Aeroports de Paris for not removing the FOD? You could go on and on, etc. etc.

- Stekeller
KORD

[delcom]

Sad thing indeed...however I do not totally understand it.
How one can blame that mechanic ONLY who actually performed the task? How about the ground engineer who inspected and stamped off the task? How about the other (totally independent) ground engineer performing the second inspection if this task involved flight controls. One of these guys took full responsibility for the task that was performed. Poo clearly went downstream...hope they won't throw the guy from the equipment store in jail who gave that poor kid the screwdriver.

I think there's a whole lot more to the story. This does not add up.

regards,
delcom

[OKD]

Delcom..I share your view...but I was thinking something further than that, in which, the Insurance companies are trying to recover their money since thay have paid out to most of the victims' families...therefore, someone (company) must bite the bullet.

If the mechanic recieved a suspended sentence, why not the airport authority's inspector who was responsible for picking up debris off the runway recieved the same punishment....? In other word, CDG itself must also be blamed...now the appeal will take another 10 years