Blah Blah Blah

Try this!



Ice had a role in the crash.

Plane an simple,

there is nothing that you can say that will change that............. NOTHING


When the plaintiff's lawyers come home after the trial(s) with suitcases full of Colgan's money, these posts will be long gone.






and some Jacksonian Philosophy will do you well also

 

I agree with you, and wasn't trying to diminish your point about the timing of the lawsuit. It's just that, in some instances, survivors of crash victims themselves are the ones who are anxious to initiate legal action, for a number of reasons, some of which are not really valid, such as the concern that settlements are awarded "first come, first served" or that the accident will result in a depletion of an airline defendant's resources or ability to pay.

My point primarily was that it is the plaintiffs themselves who hire the attorney or firm and who, basically, drive the timing of the filing.

 

There were no fatalities in any of the SAS mishaps, and there is no valid comparison between the SAS incidents and the CO3407 accident. CO3407 was the first fatal accident of the DHC-8 Q400 aircraft.

It is also unlikely that the jurors in any potential jury trial will hear much, if anything about the SAS mishaps. For one thing, raising those incidents in conjunction with a trial examination of the CO3407 accident is not necessarily probitive, and SAS' own maintenance procedures inter-related with a landing gear component part, were determined to be the cause of those accidents, not the design, the pilot's actions, the operating procedures, etc., etc.

 

The reporting of the gear problems some years ago may look bad, but it's doubtful that those reports will be afactor in the ensuing litigation pertaining to CO3407.

 

You are making an assumption that you know "what the lawyers are suing for."

First of all, unless you have read the complaint in the one action that has been brought so far, then you can't know "what the lawyers are suing for" nor can you, or anyone else "debunk" it. Furthermore, any "debunking" will have to be done in the due course of the litigation, to include, if necessary, a trial.

Second, you will recall, that immediately after the accident, there was so much talk of icing as a likely cause, that icing then became "the" cause, even to a lot of people who should know better.

In the days and weeks since the accident, other possible, plausible theories have emerged to supplant the wild speculation about icing. These include pilot error in allowing the aircraft to stall on the approach. The use of the autopilot at that point in the approach, under those conditions, may, or may not have anything to do with it, but the point is, all of the speculation so far about the probable cause of the accident is suspect, short of an official finding of probable cause by the NTSB.

Likewise, any and all "debunkings" are suspect and premature.

 

If the name calling continues, this thread will be closed. Let's express our opinions with respect to others and their opinions.

 

Almost finished my second winter in the Q400 and I have NEVER seen any problems. I am actually comforted by the surplus of power as well as the responsiveness of the props.
I honestly wasn't too excited to go back to a plane with boots but they do an awesome job... with of course no loss of power.

 

So my last post got deleted. Ok, fine, I got too loud and angry. Mea Culpa

I've intensely researched law and lawyers and thought alot about what they do and how the legal system works. It's a definite disaster.

Allow me to calmly break down what's wrong with the legal system. Please not that in many ways they may all be inter-related:

1) Incompetent design: The tort system seems to be designed to invite fraud and abuse. The 7th Amendment is way too loose. Law in general relies on often illogical premises and "gray areas". It emphasizes witness testimony (proven to be highly fallable and corruptable) over hard evidence.

2) Dishonest practitioners: My one and only friend whose a lawyer admits and laments that lawyers tend to be extremely greedy and sleazy. Over the last couple years some of the nation's most powerful and notorious trial lawyers have been jailed for serious illegal infractions in their practices. And just the other day two judges were indicted for taking bribes. Other medical and scientific professionals I've spoken with say they often have attorneys propositioning them to falsify evidence.

3) Complete lack of regulation: Any of you airline pilots here may have an FAA inspector waiting for you at the gate for your next flight. I work in a pharmacy and at any time a representative from the state pharmacy board can come to check on us. But how often do attorneys have state bar inspectors come to inspect their activities? It doesn't happen. The government has an official see/hear/speak no evil policy for the practice of law. This means lawyers can generally act with impunity and without any direct supervision.

4) Massive political influence: Attorneys donate more money to politicians than any other group. In the 2004 election trial attorneys gave $187M in contributions, 98% of which went to democrats. In comparison the oil, healthcare and insurance industries combined only gave $167M. Through these contributions and the fact that the majority of politicians are themselves lawyers, the profession has worked to prevent the government from enacting "tort reform" measures. In addition to politicians they also contribute to the electoral campaigns of judges, who in most jurisdictions are elected. In no-consequence surveys roughly 60% of elected judges admitted that donations and gifts from local trial attorneys affected their decision making during trials.

That's basically it. There it is; there's your legal system. Speaking as a scientist I would not rely on this system for any reasonable or reliable decisions or assertions.

Finally, a message to the moderators and administrators: I'm not sure how much control you have over third party advertising on this website but I have noticed several dubious and sleazy trial lawyer advertisements here.

 

OJ was never convicted of killing anything or anyone, Saab. OJ is always in the wrong place at the wong time....poor Juice

 

Man o man thats fricken hilarious, does anyone actually still believe that...