LEX Crash F/O blames passengers

The link to the article I posted is different from the one in the Cincinnati newspaper this morning. This article infers that the F/O wants the defense pulled. That was not stated in the print article. However, as a client, I would want to know what's being recorded on my behalf in these suits. I have a hard time believing he was not privy to that strategy.
 
Minnesota_Flyer said:
The continuing question in my mind is why the pax are suing the F/O. Unless he's sitting on a fortune (unlikley), they won't get any money out of him, and considering how badly injured he apparently was, it just seems like piling-on.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the primary reason why corporations are sued for tens of millions after a customer gets burned by a hot cup of coffee? It's a precautionary tale for all further merchants to make their cups of coffee more moderate in temp to prevent further injury.

The financial devastation of this pilot and his dependants for generations is supposed to make professional pilots use more caution in their professional activities.

Isn't this the objective of such suits?
 
People should make excuses for the crew in this one period! I sick of hearing the atc and the "it could happen to any body" argument. Every one else didn't go off the wrong runway. Including the 3 planes that left with in 3 minutes prior to them. Neither did anybody else at that airport before or after that accident. This is a lesson in paying attention to you job i.e. sterile cockpit. More so with the FO's. Don't just go along for the ride. Make sure the CA is taxiing to the right place. Pay attention as if you were the CA. I would definitely appreciate being told I'm screwing up before I make a big mistake. That is the job of an FO. You are a required crew member for a reason. To many people are just happy to be sitting right seat in an RJ. They should be looking at the big picture. If you don't do your job this can happen to you. You wil get violated or die if the CA screws up. So be more than a paid passenger.

I can't believe that scrub approved that for use as a defense. If I was the plaintiff's attorney I would ask if he briefed the passengers that he was going to not follow the rules and operate negligently. WOW is all I can say to that defense. I hope that lawyer gets mauled by a tiger.
 
WalterSobchak said:
People should make excuses for the crew in this one period! I sick of hearing the atc and the "it could happen to any body" argument. Every one else didn't go off the wrong runway. Including the 3 planes that left with in 3 minutes prior to them. Neither did anybody else at that airport before or after that accident. This is a lesson in paying attention to you job i.e. sterile cockpit. More so with the FO's. Don't just go along for the ride. Make sure the CA is taxiing to the right place. Pay attention as if you were the CA. I would definitely appreciate being told I'm screwing up before I make a big mistake. That is the job of an FO. You are a required crew member for a reason. To many people are just happy to be sitting right seat in an RJ. They should be looking at the big picture. If you don't do your job this can happen to you. You wil get violated or die if the CA screws up. So be more than a paid passenger.

I can't believe that scrub approved that for use as a defense. If I was the plaintiff's attorney I would ask if he briefed the passengers that he was going to not follow the rules and operate negligently. WOW is all I can say to that defense. I hope that lawyer gets mauled by a tiger.
Click to expand...


soo....did you read the thread or just immediately respond? I think the general consensus is that this is a tactic of the lawyer and not the personal opinion of the FO.
 
You know the FO on that flight had more time than the captain eh?

Mistakes happen, and instead of lynching the guys in this one we should be saying, "What can we do to prevent something like this from happening to US," because I don't know about you but when I heard about this accident the first thing I thought to myself was, "Wow, I can see exactly how this could happen to me given a few conditions." My understanding is the EXACT same thing happened to an Air Wisky crew at a different airport, but they were able to get the airplane off the ground without hitting anything

Is it acceptable? No, of course not. Accidents are never acceptable, but to say that people don't make mistakes is also unacceptable. Instead of lambasting these pilots about how they screwed up, hows about we try to learn from their mistakes instead?
 
PCL_128 said:
Jim has no fortune. He's always lived very modestly. These people are trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.
Click to expand...

[off-topic]

People that live modest lifestyles are much more likely to be wealthy than those that live extravagantly.

[/off-topic]
 
jtrain609 said:
You know the FO on that flight had more time than the captain eh?

Mistakes happen, and instead of lynching the guys in this one we should be saying, "What can we do to prevent something like this from happening to US," because I don't know about you but when I heard about this accident the first thing I thought to myself was, "Wow, I can see exactly how this could happen to me given a few conditions." My understanding is the EXACT same thing happened to an Air Wisky crew at a different airport, but they were able to get the airplane off the ground without hitting anything

Is it acceptable? No, of course not. Accidents are never acceptable, but to say that people don't make mistakes is also unacceptable. Instead of lambasting these pilots about how they screwed up, hows about we try to learn from their mistakes instead?
Click to expand...

Walter, you need to read this post over and over again. You may think you're immune from this stuff, but you're not. This crash really could have happened to any of us, whether you want to admit that or not.
 
PCL 128,

From your post history, I know you know a lot about ALPA. Are these ALPA attorneys representing the pilot in the civil case? Does ALPA provide such legal assistance in the civil lawsuit?
 
PCL_128 said:
True, but I knew Jim well enough that I think it would have come up at some point if he was independently wealthy.
Click to expand...

I don't mean independently wealthy, as in inherited money. I'm talking about the people that live next door to you, drive older cars, live in a modest home, go out to eat only once or twice a month, and have stashed away $500,000 - $1,000,000 in assests before they're 50 years old. The wealth is a result of their lifestyle and spending choices.
 
B767Driver said:
PCL 128,

From your post history, I know you know a lot about ALPA. Are these ALPA attorneys representing the pilot in the civil case? Does ALPA provide such legal assistance in the civil lawsuit?
Click to expand...

Nope. ALPA attorneys won't be involved in this lawsuit. ALPA attorneys don't have the expertise to handle this sort of case. ALPA attorneys can provide immediate legal advice after an accident about what to say in official statements and that sort of thing, but ongoing lawsuits require counsel experienced in this type of litigation.
 
jtrain609 said:
You know the FO on that flight had more time than the captain eh?

Mistakes happen, and instead of lynching the guys in this one we should be saying, "What can we do to prevent something like this from happening to US," because I don't know about you but when I heard about this accident the first thing I thought to myself was, "Wow, I can see exactly how this could happen to me given a few conditions." My understanding is the EXACT same thing happened to an Air Wisky crew at a different airport, but they were able to get the airplane off the ground without hitting anything

Is it acceptable? No, of course not. Accidents are never acceptable, but to say that people don't make mistakes is also unacceptable. Instead of lambasting these pilots about how they screwed up, hows about we try to learn from their mistakes instead?
Click to expand...

The CA had 4700 hours and the FO had 2,700 from what I've read. I'm lambasting the excuses. How many excuses can we make for people who get burned not paying attention and following the rules? The lawyers are don't help the American way of it wasn't my fault because of xxxx. No excuses when you are part of a crew that killed 48 other people. It's not like the wing fell off. Correcting problems comes from acknowledging them. Blaming every one, but the two people in charge at the controls isn't acknowledgement. It wasn't the runway lights, the controller, the contsruction, or the airport design, It was the crew that caused this. Plain and simple. It presents a conundrum when assessing fault in the lawsuit because the airline wants to blame them soley as if they weren't a representative of the company. I agree on the what is the point of suing the FO. Sue comair, but not the FO.
 
PCL_128 said:
Walter, you need to read this post over and over again. You may think you're immune from this stuff, but you're not. This crash really could have happened to any of us, whether you want to admit that or not.
Click to expand...

No it couldn't if people are paying attention. Bugging the runway of departure prior to taxi(SOP now, did this even when I was flying single pilot freight), Verifying you are on the correct runway i.e. the only one with lights on, instrument markings, crosschecking hsi to make sure it is where it should be.

Does/Did Comair have verifying the runway on your Runway Items/Before TO check?

I'll admit there are alot of things that can get you as a pilot, but this is not one of them when you add up all the ways you can prevent this. Maybe more people need to fly single pilot IFR for 3-4000 hours so they can fly a whole airplane and see the big picture as opposed to flying only half of the airplane.
 
B767Driver said:
A lawyer presents options. The client approves them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, maybe. In this case, from everything I've heard, this guy is pretty devastated and ruined. Now he's being sued and out of necessity he and/or his family has hired a lawyer to defend him.

So the lawyer makes this statement. I just don't see why this should cause any more scorn to be directed at the guy. He's hitting bottom would be my guess, so piling on is kind of easy. And it's not like any of us couldn't make the same kind of mistake, despite any pronouncements to the contrary.
 
Stone Cold said:
Okay, let me rephrase...most lawyers I've met are scum. Keep in mind, my wife used to work as a paralegal in RI, and I've met a few lawyers. Most of them I've met have been egotistical pricks, and scum of the earth...is that better?!:D (and she was just in the real estate department).

Oh yeah, there are 2 lawyers working for my company in management positions...go figure.
Click to expand...

I've met those types too - and yes, there are a lot of them. In fact, I would agree that most of the lawyers out there are egotistical pricks - but only a few of them are actual crooks. In defense of the FO's attorney, however, he's just protecting his client from 21 suits filed by equally crooked attorneys.
 
Murdoughnut said:
I've met those types too - and yes, there are a lot of them. In fact, I would agree that most of the lawyers out there are egotistical pricks - but only a few of them are actual crooks. In defense of the FO's attorney, however, he's just protecting his client from 21 suits filed by equally crooked attorneys.
Click to expand...
I never said crooked, you did:p. I said scum of the earth, as in will sue their parents for having them if they could, will sue their grandparents for not providing enough loot in the birthday card, will sue their child for whatever they can think of.:panic::panic:

Yes, there are some good attorneys out there. You must admit they are few and far between, though. And thanks for lumping them in as crooks...it proves my point. Most lawyers have a spot reserved in hell for them, I am sure of that!!!;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top