Really? Then you seem to know more about this case than the prosecuting attorneys did. Maybe you could enlighten us. What was the BAC of the pilots at the time that they boarded the airplane? Keep in mind that BAC levels can change up OR down over time. So while it's unlikely that the pilots were legally sober when -someone else was pushing the plane around-, it's still possible that they could have legally flown the airplane. It's possible. Not likely, but possible. Now go research "reasonable doubt". Just thinking that someone is probably guilty is NOT enough to convict. Our justice system is intentionally biased to allow some criminals to "walk" so that no innocent people will be unjustly punished. Not one. That's why this case is a clear failure.
I'm saying that a drunk pilot should be punished. But this conviction was still wrong. How would you like to go to prison for five years for DUI because a prosecutor could prove that you had several drinks SIX HOURS before you drove your car? Not enough evidence you say? Gee, the prosecutor in this case had nothing else. A BAC level was measured, but not at the time of the alleged offense. Oh, and what if you were just in the car while it was being towed? Again, these pilots weren't charged with ATTEMPTED DUI. -Dave
