1
$\begingroup$

I’m having a hard time understanding why pilot error technically can’t be criminal negligence all the time? So I’m curious to find out some examples of this exact scenario, and how investigators determine if ones negligence is punishable by law.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is certainly very related to aviation, but it seems like more of a legal question to me and you may get a better answer on law.SE. $\endgroup$ – Pondlife Mar 21 at 1:46
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Accident investigators do not apportion blame, they only serve to determine cause. Moreover, the Convention on International Civil Aviation stipulates that accident investigation reports cannot be used in a court of law to apportion blame. Therefore, to bring a case of criminal negligence would require a very significant technical investigation, independent and separate from the official accident investigation, to produce enough evidence to stand any chance in a coutt of law. $\endgroup$ – Fiddlesticks Mar 21 at 1:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Mistakes made in good faith (u just blew what you thought was a reasonable decision, or a situation is beyond your ability though you're trying to do your best) are not generally criminal in Common Law legal systems. If they were, everybody would hide their mistakes, and a lot of people would avoid doing the activity in the first place. Go to places like China and Russia, and pilots can go to jail for good faith mistakes (I've seen Chinese authorities throw maintenance directors in jail for screwups of their staff). Result: incidents don't get reported, and mistakes are hidden at all costs. $\endgroup$ – John K Mar 21 at 2:03
  • $\begingroup$ Searching google for “Pilot negligent homicide” returns quite a few results. $\endgroup$ – Ron Beyer Mar 21 at 2:42
3
$\begingroup$

Most countries will not prosecute pilots for accidents with good reason - the safety system depends on people being open and honest about their actions, so as to ensure someone else does not repeat them. Investigation agencies like the NTSB make it clear that their reports are not intended to assign blame, and so typically cannot be used in court for that purpose.

Pilot convictions for airliner crashes are quite rare but I can think of 2:

  • Garuda flight 200, where the captain landed 100kts too fast ignoring dozens of warnings, killing 21

  • Air France 296, where the captain on a display flight flew much too low and too slow, killing 3. France is a slightly different situation however, as every fatal accident automatically triggers a criminal (technically 'judicial') investigation alongside the safety investigation by the BEA.

  • Tuninter 1153, where after fuel exhaustion the pilot judged that he did not have glide distance to make an airport and ditched in the Mediterranean resulting in 16 fatalities. The captain was convicted in an Italian court of manslaughter and was sentenced to 10 years. The first officer and the chief operating officer of the airline also received prison sentences.

There are some more examples from the General Aviation world (light aircraft), where you don't necessarily have the same professionalism and certainly not the same oversight and standards from an airline, but the principle of refraining from criminal proceedings remains the same.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I added another entry to your answer. $\endgroup$ – TomMcW Mar 22 at 1:23
3
$\begingroup$

In the US, negligence would imply willfulness. Errors and accidents don’t imply willfulness nor negligence. That’s the difference between a death caused by an automobile traffic accident due to weather and one caused by a drunk driver. The latter is criminally punishable. The willfulness to do something wrong or not do something right is negligence. Making a decision that an average person would consider reasonable should not be prosecuted. Even if it is the wrong one.

The converse of making a reasonable decision in the case of flying would be to willingly fly the aircraft in a manner beyond the pilots capability or legal competency. If the pilot is not certificated and current, or flying the aircraft into a situation for which it is not certificated could be considered as negligent. The pilot had to do so due to an emergency, that would be a different story.

The same is true regarding intent. If your intent was to break a law, rule, or regulation (even if you did not know there was a law, rule, or regulation regarding your actions), that is criminal. A prosecutor or FAA official can even argue for the criminality of breaking a recommendation, best practice, or commonly accepted procedure if your actions led to an accident, injury, or fatality.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.