MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

[markis10]

This was my understanding, offering position data for minimal cost. I did not state it had anything to do with the black box.

My apologies, I aligned your post with black box streaming which many are asking for, and as posted, I dont expect will happen

 

[QF WP]

I found this post on Flyertalk, very instructive on the currents. Didn't think that much about them until now.

Of course, if the pieces have drifted and then sunk after the weather last week, then finding them will be fun - possible a very large dispersion area.

Only the "pinger finder" (sorry about my technical speak ) will help find the FDR. Haven't seen a latest update on where it is currently situated.

 

[Archphoto]

I read the INYT yesterday, and it had a piece on MH370, namely the law firm involved with suing Boeing for the families. I found it rather disgusting, personally, that the representative was trawling the halls of the hotel the Chinese relatives are staying in, with a model of a 777, pointing out "possible" faults the aircraft may have suffered.

The plane is yet to be found, and yet here is a huge law firm already starting to point fingers at the manufacturer; guess innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this case, huh?

 

[mannej]

I read the INYT yesterday, and it had a piece on MH370, namely the law firm involved with suing Boeing for the families. I found it rather disgusting, personally, that the representative was trawling the halls of the hotel the Chinese relatives are staying in, with a model of a 777, pointing out "possible" faults the aircraft may have suffered.

The plane is yet to be found, and yet here is a huge law firm already starting to point fingers at the manufacturer; guess innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this case, huh?

Like I said - Vultures...

 

[prozac]

......
The plane is yet to be found, and yet here is a huge law firm already starting to point fingers at the manufacturer; guess innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this case, huh?

I think they call it ambulance-chasing.

 

[anat0l]

The plane is yet to be found, and yet here is a huge law firm already starting to point fingers at the manufacturer; guess innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this case, huh?

Since when has the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" been applicable in trials by public / trials by media?

 

[SeatBackForward]

Since when has the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" been applicable in trials by public / trials by media?

Isn't it guilty until ratings drop?

 

[Alanslegal]

To the ordinary person they may be called 'vultures' or 'ambulance chasers', that's fine we can all have different viewpoints, however if I/you was a close relative of the victim I/you would pursue my legal remedies, even on an interim basis, to 'help' me during these difficult times. I will not sit down, wait and accept what MH is telling or offering me. They can offer to fly me from China to Malaysia, Australia, or wherever and pay for my hotel costs whilst the investigation is underway, but now that I am grieving, waiting for answers, what about the mortgage that needs to be paid, the living expenses of the family, education, health costs that needs be taken care of. What happens if the victim’s partner was the sole breadwinner and all they were only offering a free flight and a hotel stay. Now getting legal advice is a positive step to ensure you are receiving your just entitlement even though the issue is nowhere near resolved.

As we are nowhere near seeing a final report to what actually happened, in any civil claim which this one is, the burden of proof is 'the balance of probabilities'. We all understand the notion that its “innocent until proven guilty”, but that notion only applies to criminal matters. For this civil claim to be successful the plaintiffs need to prove is that ‘someone’ on the balance of probabilities, that is anything over 50% chance (even 50.000001% chance), caused it. Courts can make interim judgments, so they do not need conclusive evidence right now at whom the wrongdoer is. All they need to be is satisfied that there was a greater probability that the defendants (eg Boeing) caused it than not. Down the track, a final judgment can then be made and any prior judgments especially damages be taken into account.

Everyone again has a different view on when lawyers should approach the victims, do they wait a week, a month, six months? If I was a grieving victim, I'd want 'someone to be responsible' right now. I would be all emotional, angry, upset and speaking to a lawyer immediately to help me make 'someone pay', not pay in the financial sense, but I'd want someone to be found at fault. There will be other victims who'd never want to speak to a lawyer, so there are many possible victims out there and we can't just assume nobody wants/needs to speak to an 'ambulance chasing' lawyer.

 

[robd]

To the ordinary person they may be called 'vultures' or 'ambulance chasers', that's fine we can all have different viewpoints, however if I/you was a close relative of the victim I/you would pursue my legal remedies, even on an interim basis, to 'help' me during these difficult times. I will not sit down, wait and accept what MH is telling or offering me. They can offer to fly me from China to Malaysia, Australia, or wherever and pay for my hotel costs whilst the investigation is underway, but now that I am grieving, waiting for answers, what about the mortgage that needs to be paid, the living expenses of the family, education, health costs that needs be taken care of. What happens if the victim’s partner was the sole breadwinner and all they were only offering a free flight and a hotel stay. Now getting legal advice is a positive step to ensure you are receiving your just entitlement even though the issue is nowhere near resolved.

As we are nowhere near seeing a final report to what actually happened, in any civil claim which this one is, the burden of proof is 'the balance of probabilities'. We all understand the notion that its “innocent until proven guilty”, but that notion only applies to criminal matters. For this civil claim to be successful the plaintiffs need to prove is that ‘someone’ on the balance of probabilities, that is anything over 50% chance (even 50.000001% chance), caused it. Courts can make interim judgments, so they do not need conclusive evidence right now at whom the wrongdoer is. All they need to be is satisfied that there was a greater probability that the defendants (eg Boeing) caused it than not. Down the track, a final judgment can then be made and any prior judgments especially damages be taken into account.

Everyone again has a different view on what lawyers should approach the victims, do they wait a week, a month, six months? If I was a grieving victim, I'd want 'someone to be responsible' right now. I would be all emotional, angry, upset and speaking to a lawyer immediately to help me make 'someone pay', not pay in the financial sense, but I'd want someone to be found at fault. There will be other victims who'd never want to speak to a lawyer, so there are many possible victims out there and we can't just assume nobody wants/needs to speak to an 'ambulance chasing' lawyer.

I don't have issue with the guilty party being sued, but until such guilt is proven against the manufacturer, the pilot, the airline, a government etc., how and who does the law determine to be responsible for the financial burdens of those family members left behind?

 

[SeatBackForward]

Ok heres another idea from left field, bear with me on this one..

There lies between Perth and Singapore an undersea fibre optic cable used for telecommunications. Now fibre optic cables are very sensitive to vibration, they are only about 2~3cm in width, but the pulses of light being beamed along them can provide indications of vibration, The networks that operate these networks can detect such vibrations (albeit they may not be able to attribute such vibrations to any particular event).

It would be interesting to see how the position of the PER-SIN cable lines up with the "southern arc" and whether the cables are able to detect any shock that may be caused by the plane crashing into the water...that is of course if sub-sea cables can detect such shocks in the first place.


Here's a link to an article that explains a bit: https://mozillaignite.org/ideas/260/

 

[Fruitcake]

As we are nowhere near seeing a final report to what actually happened, in any civil claim which this one is, the burden of proof is 'the balance of probabilities'. We all understand the notion that its “innocent until proven guilty”, but that notion only applies to criminal matters. For this civil claim to be successful the plaintiffs need to prove is that ‘someone’ on the balance of probabilities, that is anything over 50% chance (even 50.000001% chance), caused it. Courts can make interim judgments, so they do not need conclusive evidence right now at whom the wrongdoer is. All they need to be is satisfied that there was a greater probability that the defendants (eg Boeing) caused it than not. Down the track, a final judgment can then be made and any prior judgments especially damages be taken into account.

So basically, it's imperative for plaintiffs to move fast so that they can use emotional arguments to extract the maximum cash from defendants before actual facts are known?

 

[Archphoto]

The full story from their online version is here: http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com...ey-for-air-crash-victims-families-in-beijing/

It is slightly different to what I read in print, but was interesting to read this extract, which I don't remember seeing in the print version (full story: Legal action over Flight 370 raises questions - Chicago Tribune)

“It wouldn’t be the first time the tactics of Ribbeck Law Chartered or its associates had drawn complaints. Last year, after the Asiana crash, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that Illinois regulators investigate the firm over allegations its attorneys violated U.S. law barring uninvited solicitation of air crash victims in the first 45 days after a crash.

“The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission doesn’t confirm pending investigations and declined to comment Friday on the status of that 2013 referral.”

​

 

[Alanslegal]

I don't have issue with the guilty party being sued, but until such guilt is proven against the manufacturer, the pilot, the airline, a government etc., how and who does the law determine to be responsible for the financial burdens of those family members left behind?

The court does not or need to determine guilt as such in civil matters. If a claim was made, all the court would be required to do is be satisfied that 'someone' is more responsible for the incident than not, that's the balance of probabilities test .... that's why if its over 50% chance, that's sufficient for that test purpose. If the first step is proven, then it may follow with damages - that's the financial assessment. There's various categories which damages can fall under. Some simple ones include actual loss (eg couldn't work for a month now, had to pay for a babysitter etc), some anticipated costs (eg. will miss work for another two months until they find the plane), there's also exemplary damages (ie to punish the wrong-doer and teach them a lesson so they won't cause the same incident again - this will be more difficult depending on the jurisdiction). In addition to that, there will be precedents (ie past judgments) of similar claims that can be relied on to assist in an interim judgment. So there will be multiple factors.

 

[drron]

Not in the US where the family of the Silkair crash which the NTSB found was due to pilot suicide won their case with a maker of a part of the tail of the 737.that part had caused previous 737 crashes.
However the jury was not allowed to hear the NTSB report and the Silkair 737 involved was built after the tail problem had been rectified.
So the firm lost even though there was 0% proof of their wrongdoing.

 

[Alanslegal]

So basically, it's imperative for plaintiffs to move fast so that they can use emotional arguments to extract the maximum cash from defendants before actual facts are known?

No, not at all. I say act immediately to ensure that the victims aren't going to be 'out of pocket'. It costs money to be grieving, to not be able to work, not able to care for family, children, to not be able to meet mortgages, loans, education, schooling etc. You need to show actual and potential loss because of the incident. I think you are thinking where large payments can be awarded, that's called exemplary damages. That's where the wrong-doer is made to pay large amounts as forms of punishment. Exemplary damages are much harder to be awarded, and usually occurs when all the information is known, whether the wrong-doer knew about the possible issues/problems etc.

 

[Archphoto]

Not in the US where the family of the Silkair crash which the NTSB found was due to pilot suicide won their case with a maker of a part of the tail of the 737.that part had caused previous 737 crashes.
However the jury was not allowed to hear the NTSB report and the Silkair 737 involved was built after the tail problem had been rectified.
So the firm lost even though there was 0% proof of their wrongdoing.

Guess you can't sue a dead man. . . . . . easier to sue a company?

 

[Fruitcake]

No, not at all. I say act immediately to ensure that the victims aren't going to be 'out of pocket'....

Thanks, you're correct, I was thinking of the exemplary damages type of award. Personally I use insurance to cover this sort of risk to my family but that's expensive, and I can now better understand the process you're describing.

 

[robd]

Guess you can't sue a dead man. . . . . . easier to sue a company?

Do airlines insure for their pilots actions, be it error or otherwise? In other words, is the airline liable for what their pilots do? If the pilot had a heart attack which resulted in a crash and passenger death, is the airline liable?

 

[amaroo]

No, not at all. I say act immediately to ensure that the victims aren't going to be 'out of pocket'. It costs money to be grieving, to not be able to work, not able to care for family, children, to not be able to meet mortgages, loans, education, schooling etc. You need to show actual and potential loss because of the incident. I think you are thinking where large payments can be awarded, that's called exemplary damages. That's where the wrong-doer is made to pay large amounts as forms of punishment. Exemplary damages are much harder to be awarded, and usually occurs when all the information is known, whether the wrong-doer knew about the possible issues/problems etc.

Interesting point.....I can see the logic.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

But who is the wrong doer?

It could well be one of the passengers.

It could be the pilot.

It could be Boeing

It could be MH for say lax procedures

Personally I think situations like this should initially be covered by insurance.