364
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
364 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
1345 readers
132 users here now
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
Not how it works. They are innocent until proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that they are guilty. Not having a recording doesn't make them guilty. The recording itself though, probably would.
But that isn't the case here. The FAA is very clear, you must have the documents or you are in the wrong. That is it. You are only innocent by having the documents. To pass off a plane are good but not have its documents very clearly puts them guilty. There is no gray area here. The FAA and NTSB are very clear about this and who is at fault. When planes change hands or get work done, everything must be documented or it never happened. To then sell a plane and claim it was up to any spec, but without it being documented, then it isn't up to spec.
The only way to prove they are innocent is to have those documents. The documents were audited, they didn't have them, so they are being charged. They have been shown beyond any reasonable doubt that they did not have the required documents, otherwise there would have been no charges. The only way to prove their innocents is to show the documents that they failed to show in the audit, that they didn't have, that lead to the charges. The reasonable doubt was already established when they failed the audit.
People who say "innocent until proven guilty" have never had to work in a regulated industry. You have to have all your licenses and documentation available for inspection at all times.
Even barbers and restaurants have these requirements. No, you can't just say "it's around here somewhere". You need to know where it is.
Same with daycare. When we were looking up daycare centers they all had issues on the dcfs website. Almost all of them were for the same paperwork issues.
The default assumption is that they didn't do something, and there's no evidence that they did the thing.
They are guilty of not keeping aircraft maintenance records for one year, which is the law.
The doubt is sounding quite reasonable.