Hkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 940 times:
Strange how you know who did not post this. Well with his one sided posting that's not a shock !!
As for this news, I think only the pilot in charge at the time should be sued along with the Captain. My view is this is disgusting how they are getting away free after killing 80 + people due to stupidity.
How can anyone fly SQ these day's knowing that this guy could be at the controls ?, Oh sorry its OK unless the weather is bad !!
Red Panda From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2000, 1521 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 885 times:
That the Taiwan gov't prosecuting the pilots is a criminal case.
That the pax relatives sueing the pilots is a civil case. Probably the relatives are not satisfied with the compensations.
If pax relatives are really sueing the pilots, then they are probably sueing them for their neglience as professionals. Also, the relatives have to sue for something as remedies, for example, $$ compensation. They cannot just sue the pilots if they are NOT UNsatisfied with the compensations.
I would say the captain might have contributory neglience. Which means the captain is only part of the causes contributing to the accident. So the captain should not fully reliable for it.
SQ, as an employer, should be reliable for the pilots' fault as well if there is any.