Aircraft has slid off runway at MDW

[FN FAL]

No, what I'm saying is that it's "likely" the previous two flight crews that landed immediately prior were given the same information the accident crew received.

Given that, would a reasonable person conclude the accident crew disregarded "substantial and unjustifiable risk" at the time they began the approach?

That could be the question. Or, it could be as simple as touching down halfway down the runway and they just ran out of room...in which case the 737 is exactly where it should be.

time will tell.

In any case, a homicide is defined by most state statutes as a death that was from unatural causes. From the moment of the childs death, this case became a homicide investigation.

You're right, maybe there won't be any charges...I'm just telling you about criminal process and the state law of illinois. To say what a prosecutor will or wont do is not for me. They may have a law in Illinois that says all homicides must at least go to a grand jury before they will "no bill".

Keep in mind, I'm not a lawyer. However, criminal prosecution for negligent crimes, even those without obvious "intent" is all the rage.

I have done papers in college on "overcriminalization". Seems that people were asleep at the wheel when these negligence laws got passed...now there are no such things as "accidents" just "unsafe acts".

Good luck to the crew, passengers, the injred and others that were there today.

 

[ultrarunner]

In any case, a homicide is defined by most state statutes as a death that was from unatural causes. From the moment of the childs death, this case became a homicide investigation.

You're right, maybe there won't be any charges...I'm just telling you about criminal process and the state law of illinois. To say what a prosecutor will or wont do is not for me. They may have a law in Illinois that says all homicides must at least go to a grand jury before they will "no bill".

Keep in mind, I'm not a lawyer. However, criminal prosecution for negligent crimes, even those without obvious "intent" is all the rage.

I have done papers in college on "overcriminalization". Seems that people were asleep at the wheel when these negligence laws got passed...now there are no such things as "accidents" just "unsafe acts".

Good luck to the crew, passengers, the injred and others that were there today.

Excellent points and insight FN FAL. I appreciate the response. Given IL law, this could be very interesting.

It's not often pilots face criminal prosecution.

 

[SiuDude]

Seems that people were asleep at the wheel when these negligence laws got passed...

Literraly.:laugh:

 

[atrdriver]

In any case, a homicide is defined by most state statutes as a death that was from unatural causes. From the moment of the childs death, this case became a homicide investigation.

So if I go jump off a bridge onto rocks, since that is most certainly a death from "unnatural causes", it would become a homicide investigation? And what about a 1 car accident where someone ran into a bridge abutment? The police and the prosecutors decide whether a death of any kind is going to be investigated as a homicide. If the pilots are shown by the NTSB to have acted in a reasonable and prudent manner a prosecutor would be an idiot to try to prosecute them for anything, let alone any type of murder.

 

[PCL_128]

To the best of my knowledge, no air line pilot has ever been prosecuted in any state in the country as a result of a death in an accident or incident. In fact, I don't believe there have been any succesful civil cases against air line pilots after accidents either.

 

[satpak77]

lots of FI lawyers

I didn't realize how many FI-ers had law degrees, and specialized in criminal defense....



To prosecute for a criminal violation, two things must exist

MENS REA - the mental state of the violator and his intention

ACTUS REAS - the actual action itself

BOTH must exist for a prosecution (or should I say a successful prosecution)

Example

Joe, aware that his car has an exhaust leak, asks his ex-girlfriend to go with him to the store. He enters the store and tells her to stay inside, knowing she will be dead in 15 minutes. She dies and Joe gets prosecuted, because he has intent (he wanted to kill her) and he completed the action (he physically got her into the car and told her to remain in the car). Joe would not have been prosecuted if one of these elements did not exist.

Larry, is headed to the store in his beat up jalopy, his only car available, and his baby needs formula, so he has no choice. His neighbor, Cindy, would like to go the store and she joins him. Upon arrival, Cindy asks him to buy some milk and she will stay in the car and listen to her song on the radio. Unfortunately, an exhaust leak kills Cindy. Larry is not prosecuted since no intent exists nor criminal action to carry out the intent.

I am 105% sure the flight crew did not intend to kill anybody, and the "action" itself was an accident and not of an intended proactive effort to carry out criminal action.

end of story

Civil lawsuits are an entire different animal as is FAA penalties and fines

But there is nothing criminal here

IL homicide definition

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=072000050HArt%2E+9&ActID=1876&ChapAct=720%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B5%2F&ChapterID=53&ChapterName=CRIMINAL+OFFENSES&SectionID=29493&SeqStart=10800&SeqEnd=11700&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+1961%2E

 

[polysciguy9]

Check out the news video on msnbc ... they have a simulation!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10388519/

Click on the video link that shows the nose of the 737 ... they couldn't resist showing flames trailing the plane as it skids down the runway ... unfreakin' believable. Can anyone say Jetblue skit on SNL?

 

[jbDC9]

shes uses promade for style.

She's a Dapper Dan man.

 

[ren]

Only at Trans States.

You're 100% correct. Trans States threatens with the "death penalty".

 

[Going2Baja]

It is surprising to me the "General" forum has almost no flames, jokes, or inapropriate posts. Oh the other hand if you look at the post of the same subject in the "Majors" board there are tons of inapropriate posts.

Here is a copy of my post there - hopefully we can help out the family that lost thier child in this horible accident!
=========================================================
My family's hearts and prayers go out to the families of the injured and dead. It amazes me that some here make light of this situation. Most, if not all here give up many holidays and special events to work and provide for our wives/husbands and especially our little ones. Yesterday someone lost their child in a tragedy that NONE of us know the cause. Stop and think for a second if you were that child’s family, or even the family of one of the SWA pilots. There lives have changed forever in a split second. The holiday season/spirit may be gone forever for these individuals. And here some of you sit and make light. For any of you (E120ASA, Hoke) I hope for your sake you don't have kids and that you guys are Sky Gods, because the Karma train is headed your way and that is one bullet you just can't get out of the way of!

To Admin or moderators: Another board (non-aviation) I belong to from time to time, when the situation warrants, takes a collection and delivers it to special people in need. If the family of the child can be determined and you are willing to, I'd like to donate to a Christmas fund for this family. After all funds are collected a check in the name of Flightinfo.com could be sent to this family. We have two weeks to get this together if you would so choose.

Prayers to all those involved.

Baja

 

[Bumpman]

Well, Steve Cowell seems reasonalbly articulate. He's a retired pilot that "trained with SWA".

What's that mean?

It means he got his 737 type rating at SWA. I know Steve personally, not that I am proud of that fact; but he "used" to fly at my airline. I was not aware that he was retired. Learn something new every day.

 

[FN FAL]

You're trying to superimpose your televison based perception of the definition of the word homicide into something it is not. Illinois has a legal definition of the word "homicide". It would be simple to look it up.

On the crash...

I never accused the pilots of anything...a person died, the death was due to an act. If the end result is that mechanics didn't put the nut that holds the tiller wheel on the shaft properly and it came off, then the mechanic is the one that "ignored" and that "act" resulted in an unnatural death = reckless homicide.

If they find out that the plane that landed ahead of the SWA 737 sprayed skydrol all over the place causing the SWA airliner to lose control, then they got the criminal negligence problem, as whoever is responsible for that, is going to have to face the music in criminal court.

If the thrust reverser failed because of a design flaw...then the manufacturer could face criminal negligence prosecution.

What I'm telling you is, that a) a death from unnatural causes is a homocide and b) prosecutors may be compelled by law to file reckless homicide charges.

As for the feds finding the pilots 'reasonable and prudent' wtf is that? I could see it reasonable and prudent for them to want to get in on time, but if they were unstable on final and ignored that fact, there's your intent.

I would be willing to bet a paycheck that "criminal negligence" laws came about as a direct result of drunk drivers using the "I was to drunk too know what I was doing when I was plastered, so you cannot get me for intentionally killing that guy laying under my car!"

However...by ignoring what can happen when you knowingly took that first drink on the way to getting drunk, you ignored. Go back up and look at the definition from illinois state law on reckless homicide if you don't understand the "ignored" analogy.

Once again, I'm not saying the SWA crew did anything wrong. I'm just telling you that once the boy was pronounced dead, the homicide investigation begins. And just because there is an airplane involved, that does not grant any "diplomatic immunity" from prosecution to the flight crew, the people who took the MU readings, ATC, the SWA airlines as a corporation, the people that may have sullied the runway prior to SWA landed (hypothetical example), the people that maintained the plane, the people that designed the plane.

 

[FN FAL]

I didn't realize how many FI-ers had law degrees, and specialized in criminal defense....



To prosecute for a criminal violation, two things must exist

MENS REA - the mental state of the violator and his intention

ACTUS REAS - the actual action itself

BOTH must exist for a prosecution (or should I say a successful prosecution)

Example

Joe, aware that his car has an exhaust leak, asks his ex-girlfriend to go with him to the store. He enters the store and tells her to stay inside, knowing she will be dead in 15 minutes. She dies and Joe gets prosecuted, because he has intent (he wanted to kill her) and he completed the action (he physically got her into the car and told her to remain in the car). Joe would not have been prosecuted if one of these elements did not exist.

Larry, is headed to the store in his beat up jalopy, his only car available, and his baby needs formula, so he has no choice. His neighbor, Cindy, would like to go the store and she joins him. Upon arrival, Cindy asks him to buy some milk and she will stay in the car and listen to her song on the radio. Unfortunately, an exhaust leak kills Cindy. Larry is not prosecuted since no intent exists nor criminal action to carry out the intent.

I am 105% sure the flight crew did not intend to kill anybody, and the "action" itself was an accident and not of an intended proactive effort to carry out criminal action.

end of story

Civil lawsuits are an entire different animal as is FAA penalties and fines

But there is nothing criminal here

IL homicide definition

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=072000050HArt%2E+9&ActID=1876&ChapAct=720%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B5%2F&ChapterID=53&ChapterName=CRIMINAL+OFFENSES&SectionID=29493&SeqStart=10800&SeqEnd=11700&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+1961%2E

Sat pak, you are wrong, you don't need intent for either the involuntary manslaughter or wreckless homicide found in 720 ILCS 5/9-3...Involuntary means you didn't intend for something to happen...

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER AND RECKLESS HOMICIDE​

(unintentional or reckless act resulting in death)720 ILCS 5/9-3

Involuntary Manslaughter and Reckless Homicide.


(a) A person who unintentionally kills an individual without lawful justification commits involuntary manslaughter if his acts whether lawful or unlawful which cause the death are such as are likely to cause death or great bodily harm to some individual, and he performs them recklessly, except in cases in which the cause of the death consists of the driving of a motor vehicle or operating a snowmobile, all‑terrain vehicle, or watercraft, in which case the person commits reckless homicide.

The punishment is the same for involuntary manslaughter as reckless homicide, in fact if you read some of the state court cases, you'll see where the judges consider them the same for the purposes of "double jeopardy".

 

[Guitar rocker]

You're 100% correct. Trans States threatens with the "death penalty".

Does Hulas still run the show over there? I would love to buy him a nice big 20 oz. steak. That place was something else.

 

[jumppilot03]

Just to continue with the illinformed media. Apparently the NTSB is also misinformed. On CNN the NTSB spokesperson stated that they are looking at the Cockpit Video Recorder. I guess I must have missed the memo as to when ALPA agreed to having video recorders in the cockpit.


I am on reserve and have not worked in 2 weeks. Boredom has definintly kicked in.