LATEST: DAVID HENDERSON FLIGHT TRIAL

A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Wed Oct 20, 2021 11:45 am

Engineer David Smith next to give evidence. Answers yes to does he know Henderson and does he have his telephone number. He did a maintenance check on the aircraft on 30th November. No faults found.

Henderson and Ibbotson contacted him on January 19th to discuss possible issues with aircraft. Mr Smith says he told them both he could not certify the aircraft for flight without seeing it and insisted that they get a French Engineer to check the aircraft.

Henderson contacted him again to inform him of the crash and telling him to "Say Nothing". On cross examination he confirms no faults found on 30th November maintenance check. Again confirmed he could not certify a plane without seeing it and that he insisted a French mechanic look at the plane. No further questions asked.

Serious questions being raised was the aircraft airworthy?

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Advertisement

Advertisement
Login or Register to remove this ad.

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby piledriver64 » Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:19 pm

castleblue wrote:Engineer David Smith next to give evidence. Answers yes to does he know Henderson and does he have his telephone number. He did a maintenance check on the aircraft on 30th November. No faults found.

Henderson and Ibbotson contacted him on January 19th to discuss possible issues with aircraft. Mr Smith says he told them both he could not certify the aircraft for flight without seeing it and insisted that they get a French Engineer to check the aircraft.

Henderson contacted him again to inform him of the crash and telling him to "Say Nothing". On cross examination he confirms no faults found on 30th November maintenance check. Again confirmed he could not certify a plane without seeing it and that he insisted a French mechanic look at the plane. No further questions asked.

Serious questions being raised was the aircraft airworthy?

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:


Wow, some of this testimony is simply astounding.

Henderson must have a hell of a defence if he's not pleading guilty to this :o :?
piledriver64
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Sven » Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:55 pm

piledriver64 wrote:
castleblue wrote:Engineer David Smith next to give evidence. Answers yes to does he know Henderson and does he have his telephone number. He did a maintenance check on the aircraft on 30th November. No faults found.

Henderson and Ibbotson contacted him on January 19th to discuss possible issues with aircraft. Mr Smith says he told them both he could not certify the aircraft for flight without seeing it and insisted that they get a French Engineer to check the aircraft.

Henderson contacted him again to inform him of the crash and telling him to "Say Nothing". On cross examination he confirms no faults found on 30th November maintenance check. Again confirmed he could not certify a plane without seeing it and that he insisted a French mechanic look at the plane. No further questions asked.

Serious questions being raised was the aircraft airworthy?

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:


Wow, some of this testimony is simply astounding.

Henderson must have a hell of a defence if he's not pleading guilty to this :o :?

Loads more to come out and then consider, if two weeks have been set aside for this case, sobthere may yet be a twist

Can't see it though and dragging it into Court and failing usually sees an increases penalty?

I'm not actually aware of the potential punishments in this case but the one positive is that the (suspected long before now) truth is coming out into the public domain

Going to be intersting when it's time for McKay Enterprises to take the stand and explain/justify their involvement; particularly the patriarch, Willie
"If you think what I say is 'offensive' to you, you should hear what I keep to myself...!"
User avatar
Sven
Moderator
 
Posts: 27462
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:28 pm

Evidence this afternoon has focused on 2 main areas firstly the qualification of Ibbotson. A Mr John Overall of the CAA has given evidence and it's powerful stuff:

Ibbotson held a pilots licence, but NOT COMMERCIALLY, and therefore could not receive payment for any flights.
Ibbotson held a single engine piston rating and an IR restricted rating. UK only qualification. NO INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS.
Ibbotson IR Rating had expired on 30th November 2018. Any flight after 30/11/2018 without an instructor at his side was ILLEGAL.
There is no record of Ibbotson EVER doing the training required to fly at night, unless he was training and had an instructor at his side.

Stunning evidence which puts this flight firmly in the ILLEGAL BOX.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Sven » Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:33 pm

castleblue wrote:Evidence this afternoon has focused on 2 main areas firstly the qualification of Ibbotson. A Mr John Overall of the CAA has given evidence and it's powerful stuff:

Ibbotson held a pilots licence, but NOT COMMERCIALLY, and therefore could not receive payment for any flights.
Ibbotson held a single engine piston rating and an IR restricted rating. UK only qualification. NO INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS.
Ibbotson IR Rating had expired on 30th November 2018. Any flight after 30/11/2018 without an instructor at his side was ILLEGAL.
There is no record of Ibbotson EVER doing the training required to fly at night, unless he was training and had an instructor at his side.

Stunning evidence which puts this flight firmly in the ILLEGAL BOX.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:

WOW! Just WOW! :o :shock: :cry:
"If you think what I say is 'offensive' to you, you should hear what I keep to myself...!"
User avatar
Sven
Moderator
 
Posts: 27462
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:53 pm

Next witness comes from a Training and Test Company represented by a Mr Anthony Hather. He recalled taking Ibbotson through training to renew his PPL in 2015 which remained valid until 30th November 2018. He SEEMED to recall Ibbotson doing his IR renewal in 2017 which would have remained valid until May 2019. He also stated he had NO recollection of Ibbotson ever failing a test or doing any night flight training with his Company.

A Mr David Kendrick MBE head of airline licensing at the CAA then gave evidence by way of written statement. He described how a plane registered outside the EU was required to hold a Third Country Operator to fly in EU airspace.

In the UK, planes registered outside the UK are prohibited from taking on board or discharging passengers in the UK unless granted permission by the CAA and given a foreign carrier permit. This wouldn’t have been permitted without a Third Country Operator Certificate.

Mr Kendrick said he was aware of the N264DB flight which involved a flight from Cardiff to Nantes and back to Cardiff.

He said: “I have undertaken a search of the records the CAA holds and there is no record on those dates, authorisation for the flights were neither sought or granted.”

The witness said the CAA didn’t hold any records of permit registration for N264DB and none had been granted at any point since 2015.

Further evidence of the ILLEGAL nature of these flights.

The last live witness to give evidence today was Mr Barry Mooney, flight operations standards lead for the CAA.

He said there are two types of pilot licence, a private recreational licence and professional licence, which a commercial pilot would fly under.

The witness said a night rating would be required whenever a pilot wished to fly at night. In order to get a night rating, it would involve the pilot taking part in five hours of training.

In cross examination, Mr Spence asked if a pilot’s experience was measured by fights. Mr Mooney said it was in part.

The witness is then questioned about the IR rating by the defence barrister.

Mr Spence says each country has its own aviation authority but Mr Mooney said ratings were “agreed by the industry”.

Regarding Mr Ibbotson’s failure to renew his rating, the witness said: “In theory could someone still be competent, potentially, but from a legal standpoint, no.

Further evidence of the ILLEGAL nature of these flights.


Before adjourning for the day the Judge tells the jury the trial is ahead of schedule as the prosecution will likely close it's case tomorrow morning.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby epping blue » Wed Oct 20, 2021 4:04 pm

Its pretty much what I was expecting although the extreme level of indiscretion is a bit startling. Always thought this would be the line of responsibility that would see Nantes ultimately and possibly unknowingly responsible for the flight. But there's enough grey still in this to scupper any premature claims of success. Our previous use of this transport arrangement for one.

The fact an employee of Cardiff city at the time, namely Mackays son had some involvement in the arrangement of the flight albeit the minor details. Nobodies suggesting he acted in anyway on behalf of the club but what if he gets up next week and tells the court, he told Warnock or someone else he was arranging the flight for Sala. They'd have told to get on with it, it was no big deal without the benefit of hindsight.

And thirdly we may have to pursue our claim in a French court - good luck there.

UEFA will make us pay the transfer fee as its a football related mater but could tell us our claim against them is a matter outside of their jurisdiction.
epping blue
 
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:06 pm

epping blue wrote:Its pretty much what I was expecting although the extreme level of indiscretion is a bit startling. Always thought this would be the line of responsibility that would see Nantes ultimately and possibly unknowingly responsible for the flight. But there's enough grey still in this to scupper any premature claims of success. Our previous use of this transport arrangement for one.

The fact an employee of Cardiff city at the time, namely Mackays son had some involvement in the arrangement of the flight albeit the minor details. Nobodies suggesting he acted in anyway on behalf of the club but what if he gets up next week and tells the court, he told Warnock or someone else he was arranging the flight for Sala. They'd have told to get on with it, it was no big deal without the benefit of hindsight.

And thirdly we may have to pursue our claim in a French court - good luck there.

UEFA will make us pay the transfer fee as its a football related mater but could tell us our claim against them is a matter outside of their jurisdiction.


I accept there will always be the worry of something coming out of left field but Henderson has already pleaded guilty to organising this flight. I can only imagine tomorrow or sometime before before the trial ends that the text messages between Henderson and McKay which have already been mentioned will be entered into evidence. Even today there was evidence from employees at Cardiff and Nantes Airport who told of communication from either Henderson and Ibbottson regarding the timing and providing fuel for the plane. The only time Cardiff City were mentioned was in relation to a club employee asking about the arrival time of the flight. The employee at Cardiff airport even gave evidence that he reported the plane lost to the person who arranged the flight - Henderson.

3 words are being repeated a lot in relation to Henderson and this flight, Recklessness, Negligence and illegal. For me this only strengthens the clubs position.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby wez1927 » Wed Oct 20, 2021 6:15 pm

castleblue wrote:
epping blue wrote:Its pretty much what I was expecting although the extreme level of indiscretion is a bit startling. Always thought this would be the line of responsibility that would see Nantes ultimately and possibly unknowingly responsible for the flight. But there's enough grey still in this to scupper any premature claims of success. Our previous use of this transport arrangement for one.

The fact an employee of Cardiff city at the time, namely Mackays son had some involvement in the arrangement of the flight albeit the minor details. Nobodies suggesting he acted in anyway on behalf of the club but what if he gets up next week and tells the court, he told Warnock or someone else he was arranging the flight for Sala. They'd have told to get on with it, it was no big deal without the benefit of hindsight.

And thirdly we may have to pursue our claim in a French court - good luck there.

UEFA will make us pay the transfer fee as its a football related mater but could tell us our claim against them is a matter outside of their jurisdiction.


I accept there will always be the worry of something coming out of left field but Henderson has already pleaded guilty to organising this flight. I can only imagine tomorrow or sometime before before the trial ends that the text messages between Henderson and McKay which have already been mentioned will be entered into evidence. Even today there was evidence from employees at Cardiff and Nantes Airport who told of communication from either Henderson and Ibbottson regarding the timing and providing fuel for the plane. The only time Cardiff City were mentioned was in relation to a club employee asking about the arrival time of the flight. The employee at Cardiff airport even gave evidence that he reported the plane lost to the person who arranged the flight - Henderson.

3 words are being repeated a lot in relation to Henderson and this flight, Recklessness, Negligence and illegal. For me this only strengthens the clubs position.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:

Agree
CARDIFF CITY TILL I DIE !
wez1927
 
Posts: 18680
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Thu Oct 21, 2021 11:05 am

First witness this morning is Mr Russell Woodland again of the CAA who gives evidence on Air Operator Certificates. Mr Woodland says an AOC is basically a safety certificate for commercial flights and gives the operator the right to carry passengers. He says it is an internationally recognised certificate not just UK.

Mr Woodland goes through the process of getting an AOC, he describes the process as a "Tough One" and takes between 6-8 months. He says in order to obtain the certificate, a high threshold has to be passed with the operator, senior management figures and those fulfilling safety roles on the particular flight required to meet with the CAA for an interview. You have to have a good background in the industry.

Mr Woodland then went through the standards required to obtain an AOC and the checks in place to ensure standards are maintained. We look at a whole range of issues, flight operator records is one of them. We would check training is completed and we will sometimes go and monitor that training. If an operator wishes to fly at night an operator would need to contact the CAA in order to expand their AOC privileges, and there would be a number of standards the operator would need to prove.

Under cross Mr Woodland is asked if an AOC would be required for the simple fact of carrying passengers in a non-commercial capacity.

Mr Woodland says an AOC would not be required in this instant but if money changed hands it would be a different matter.

He said: “We’re now approaching the line if this is commercial, is it then a commercial operator, am I taking money for the hiring of my services. You have to look at who is organising the flight.”

Suggests to me that Henderson is going to claim no money changed hands and the flight was therefore NOT COMMERCIAL.

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Thu Oct 21, 2021 11:17 am

Next witness is Mr Stephen Hunt Investigating Officer for the CAA. He is going through a letter he sent to Mr Henderson in April 2019 requesting answers to a number of questions about who organised the flight, why was Ibbotson the pilot, did Henderson check his qualifications and here it is Willy McKay is mentioned as the person who hired the plane to fly Emiliano Sala from Nantes to Cardiff.


It's getting interesting now.



:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby piledriver64 » Thu Oct 21, 2021 11:21 am

castleblue wrote:First witness this morning is Mr Russell Woodland again of the CAA who gives evidence on Air Operator Certificates. Mr Woodland says an AOC is basically a safety certificate for commercial flights and gives the operator the right to carry passengers. He says it is an internationally recognised certificate not just UK.

Mr Woodland goes through the process of getting an AOC, he describes the process as a "Tough One" and takes between 6-8 months. He says in order to obtain the certificate, a high threshold has to be passed with the operator, senior management figures and those fulfilling safety roles on the particular flight required to meet with the CAA for an interview. You have to have a good background in the industry.

Mr Woodland then went through the standards required to obtain an AOC and the checks in place to ensure standards are maintained. We look at a whole range of issues, flight operator records is one of them. We would check training is completed and we will sometimes go and monitor that training. If an operator wishes to fly at night an operator would need to contact the CAA in order to expand their AOC privileges, and there would be a number of standards the operator would need to prove.

Under cross Mr Woodland is asked if an AOC would be required for the simple fact of carrying passengers in a non-commercial capacity.

Mr Woodland says an AOC would not be required in this instant but if money changed hands it would be a different matter.

He said: “We’re now approaching the line if this is commercial, is it then a commercial operator, am I taking money for the hiring of my services. You have to look at who is organising the flight.”

Suggests to me that Henderson is going to claim no money changed hands and the flight was therefore NOT COMMERCIAL.

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:


I agree, I'm struggling to see any other way of refuting the factual evidence given.

Although how he is going to convince the jury that he and the pilot organised, paid for the fuel and agreed to fly in ropey, night time conditions out of the goodness of their own hearts with no money being exchanged, will take some doing !!!!
piledriver64
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby darran1927 » Thu Oct 21, 2021 1:59 pm

piledriver64 wrote:
castleblue wrote:First witness this morning is Mr Russell Woodland again of the CAA who gives evidence on Air Operator Certificates. Mr Woodland says an AOC is basically a safety certificate for commercial flights and gives the operator the right to carry passengers. He says it is an internationally recognised certificate not just UK.

Mr Woodland goes through the process of getting an AOC, he describes the process as a "Tough One" and takes between 6-8 months. He says in order to obtain the certificate, a high threshold has to be passed with the operator, senior management figures and those fulfilling safety roles on the particular flight required to meet with the CAA for an interview. You have to have a good background in the industry.

Mr Woodland then went through the standards required to obtain an AOC and the checks in place to ensure standards are maintained. We look at a whole range of issues, flight operator records is one of them. We would check training is completed and we will sometimes go and monitor that training. If an operator wishes to fly at night an operator would need to contact the CAA in order to expand their AOC privileges, and there would be a number of standards the operator would need to prove.

Under cross Mr Woodland is asked if an AOC would be required for the simple fact of carrying passengers in a non-commercial capacity.

Mr Woodland says an AOC would not be required in this instant but if money changed hands it would be a different matter.

He said: “We’re now approaching the line if this is commercial, is it then a commercial operator, am I taking money for the hiring of my services. You have to look at who is organising the flight.”

Suggests to me that Henderson is going to claim no money changed hands and the flight was therefore NOT COMMERCIAL.

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:


I agree, I'm struggling to see any other way of refuting the factual evidence given.

Although how he is going to convince the jury that he and the pilot organised, paid for the fuel and agreed to fly in ropey, night time conditions out of the goodness of their own hearts with no money being exchanged, will take some doing !!!!

Obviously I don't know all the facts but from whats been posted he must have a hell of a defence lawyer to plead not guilty
User avatar
darran1927
 
Posts: 4417
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:30 pm
Location: St.Mellons

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby pembroke allan » Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:09 pm

piledriver64 wrote:
castleblue wrote:First witness this morning is Mr Russell Woodland again of the CAA who gives evidence on Air Operator Certificates. Mr Woodland says an AOC is basically a safety certificate for commercial flights and gives the operator the right to carry passengers. He says it is an internationally recognised certificate not just UK.

Mr Woodland goes through the process of getting an AOC, he describes the process as a "Tough One" and takes between 6-8 months. He says in order to obtain the certificate, a high threshold has to be passed with the operator, senior management figures and those fulfilling safety roles on the particular flight required to meet with the CAA for an interview. You have to have a good background in the industry.

Mr Woodland then went through the standards required to obtain an AOC and the checks in place to ensure standards are maintained. We look at a whole range of issues, flight operator records is one of them. We would check training is completed and we will sometimes go and monitor that training. If an operator wishes to fly at night an operator would need to contact the CAA in order to expand their AOC privileges, and there would be a number of standards the operator would need to prove.

Under cross Mr Woodland is asked if an AOC would be required for the simple fact of carrying passengers in a non-commercial capacity.

Mr Woodland says an AOC would not be required in this instant but if money changed hands it would be a different matter.

He said: “We’re now approaching the line if this is commercial, is it then a commercial operator, am I taking money for the hiring of my services. You have to look at who is organising the flight.”

Suggests to me that Henderson is going to claim no money changed hands and the flight was therefore NOT COMMERCIAL.

:bluescarf: :bluescarf:


I agree, I'm struggling to see any other way of refuting the factual evidence given.

Although how he is going to convince the jury that he and the pilot organised, paid for the fuel and agreed to fly in ropey, night time conditions out of the goodness of their own hearts with no money being exchanged, will take some doing !!!!



Somebody somewhere paid money to fly him to Cardiff unless of course he paid for the fuel himself? Which is dubious at best.... there is no way on God's earth that money didn't change hands at some point so making it a commercial flight......Only way get out of it is if it was a flight amongst friends but clearly this wasn't..
User avatar
pembroke allan
 
Posts: 29546
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Cardiff

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby piledriver64 » Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:26 pm

The trouble is with this is that it would be laughable until you remember that a young, talented footballer died as a result of these wreckless actions.

Forget the money side of it, how would the poor family feel reading these details :cry:
piledriver64
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby darran1927 » Thu Oct 21, 2021 3:32 pm

piledriver64 wrote:The trouble is with this is that it would be laughable until you remember that a young, talented footballer died as a result of these wreckless actions.

Forget the money side of it, how would the poor family feel reading these details :cry:

Agree, awful that he was mixed up in all these dodgy dealings. Poor guy and his family
User avatar
darran1927
 
Posts: 4417
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:30 pm
Location: St.Mellons

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Thu Oct 21, 2021 3:50 pm

The evidence today has been quite frankly stunning and as David Henderson begins giving evidence it is absolutely clear he is pointing the finger of blame at Ibbotson. On multiple occasions he has said "It's the pilots responsibility to make sure the aircraft is safe"

Henderson has said the flight was not "Commercial" in nature rather just a "Private Hire" and it was arranged at the request of Mr Willy McKay. Although he claims he had no discussions about payment with Mr McKay, REALLY, but the stunning piece of evidence is that McKay wanted Henderson to fly the plane:

Henderson said he knew football agent Willie McKay over a number of years and he hired out a number of aeroplanes to him.

He added: “He used to travel quite a lot

Mr Spence says: “You were due to be on holiday (on January 19-21)

Henderson said: “Yes in Paris.

“He asked me if I was able to fly this weekend to France, didn’t have any details at the time but I said ‘Sorry Willie I can’t, I’m on holiday with my wife’.

“I asked him if he wanted me to find a pilot, he said yes so I messaged David Ibbotson and asked him if he fancied a weekend in Nantes. He immediately said yes.

“I gave him the details, out on Saturday morning and back on Monday. I was told there would be one passenger, Emilano Sala.


Henderson also said the plane owner wanted him to "Hire" the plane out on the basis of Fuel costs and an hourly rate. She didn't want the plane on the ground doing nothing.

The day ended by Henderson being taken through the many text message he made following the crash. In my opinion much of what he is saying flies in the face of earlier evidence.

The stunning news today is that this flight was arranged at the request of Mr Willy McKay, a banned football agent and employee of Nantes Football Club.

Case now adjourned for the day will tomorrow see Mr McKay give evidence.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Thu Oct 21, 2021 4:06 pm

piledriver64 wrote:The trouble is with this is that it would be laughable until you remember that a young, talented footballer died as a result of these wreckless actions.

Forget the money side of it, how would the poor family feel reading these details :cry:


ES family apparently have their own legal representatives watching this case. I cannot begin to imagine how they deal with all this and my heart goes out to them.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby ealing_ayatollah » Thu Oct 21, 2021 7:30 pm

Paul Keevil wrote:A while back I posted on this in relation to Vicarious Liability

https://www.cardiffcityforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=206206

Firstly, and this is the main priority, let us not forget that someones life was lost and his Argeninian Family, His footballing family and friends all across the globe were effected by this tragedy.

Following a death, particularly one like this, finances do come into play, and this guilty plea (In my opinion) will have an effect on the ongoing battle over "who owes what".

There are two sets of proceedings in play:
1) Criminal Proceedings - Over Sala death
2) Civil Proceedings - Between Cardiff and Nantes FC

Section 11 of the Civil Evidence Act states that if a person is found guilty in criminal proceedings then they are considered negligent in Civil Proceedings


So, if in organising the flight, Henderson was acting as an agent for Nantes FC then Nantes FC are vicariously liable for his actions.

And if he is negligent that Nantes, being vicariously liable for his actions, then become liable for any monies lost as a result of that negligence.

Monies lost could include (but not limited to)
1) Money owed to Sala family - as a result of lost income during his career.
2) Money owed to CCFC - in respect to the transfer fee
3) Money owed to CCFC - as a result of Loss of Income as a result of being deprived of his services (this could be huge given we were relegated that season).

The way I see it is as follows:

Irrespective as to anything else we owe Nantes £15m there was intention to form a contract there

As a result of being vicariously liable for Hendersons actions Nantes deprived us of the benefit of that £15m investment and civil proceedings should see it being restored to us.

I believe CCFC should also now pursue Nantes FC for Loss of Income as a result of being deprived of his services. If a Court could be persuaded that we would have stayed up then we could be looking at 1,2 or even 3 years worth of Premier League Income.


Paul first of all thank you for explaining this so succinctly. :thumbup:

One question and I'm not sure I'm understanding this right so probably wrong, then would the fact that we didn't pay the fee potentially leave us in a position where we couldn't go after Nantes for the loss of income?

I'm thinking that Nantes could potentially use our argument that he wasn't a registered CCFC player against us and as the transaction wasn't complete they could claim they wouldn't be liable for loss of income?

Whereas if we had paid the transfer fee (even though we were not at fault) we could have then gone after them for money owed on the transfer fee and the loss of income?
I'm just a wine drinking monkey that has a penchant for fine bannanas. You can check out my human alter-ego singing and speaking nonsense on the you tube if you like @ https://www.youtube.com/user/sibaronimusic
User avatar
ealing_ayatollah
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:29 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Paul Keevil » Thu Oct 21, 2021 9:25 pm

Hi Ealing

Yes, your post is, in my opinion, entirely correct in my opinion.

There are two potential outcomes here in my opinion:

a) CAS find that a contract was in place or intended to be in place and CCFC owe Nantes £15m

In that scenario
(i) Cardiff can sue FC Nantes for £15m as they are vicariously liable
(ii) Cardif can also sue FC Nantes for somewhere between £50m to £100m for Loss of Profits

(b) CAS find that no contract was in place and CCFC do not own Nantes anything

(i) Its all even - No transaction. No fee due. End of any civil proceedings. Cannot claim for Loss of Profits in my opinion.
Looking for a Photographer?

Accredited Champions League, Premiership and FL Photographer
Cover RL, RU, Motorsport etc
Accredited - 2012 Olympic Games
Attend "Celebrity Events" - papping
Weddings & Porfolio Work
User avatar
Paul Keevil
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Paul Keevil » Thu Oct 21, 2021 9:30 pm

I have purposely fallen short of saying that we should want the CAS to find that we do owe Nantes £15m

because:

A young man, a young promising footballer with his whole life ahead of him, has died - and the effect this has had on his family, his friends and many in the footballing world is immense.


I expect the club to recover the £15m. I also expect the club to recover a significant amount in Lost Profits.

But, on a personal level, I would just have preferred to watch him play, keep CCFC in the Premier League, and maybe one day being signed by a bigger club (eg Man City) because some have said he had that potential.
Looking for a Photographer?

Accredited Champions League, Premiership and FL Photographer
Cover RL, RU, Motorsport etc
Accredited - 2012 Olympic Games
Attend "Celebrity Events" - papping
Weddings & Porfolio Work
User avatar
Paul Keevil
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:14 pm

Today was mainly taken up by Henderson being cross examined by the prosecution and there were no real surprises. Prosecutor Martin Goudie took Henderson through the evidence and whenever he asked a question like "That was a lie wasn't it" Henderson would give his stock answer "No". At one stage he said he didn't keep records of any pilots who flew the plane for him. WOW.

He did however hit Henderson with a few heavy blows in particular amongst the texts, phone calls etc that Henderson made in the hours after the crash. Again facing the question "You were attempting to cover up the can of worms". a phrase Henderson used in one text. Henderson just answered "No". Mr Goudie took him through the order in which he contacted people after being informed of the crash, The order clearly suggested he was contact people who were likely to be questioned about the plane "Say nothing before we get legal advice" was used a few times. He accepted he had ignored a number of calls from Willy McKay.

There was a lot of focus on the calls between Henderson and McKay, again it is not in dispute that McKay requested the flight, but it's interesting that Henderson said this:

Henderson called Mr McKay a “insistent individual” but the prosecutor suggested the call between him and Mr McKay was quick and he didn’t need persuading to agree to arrange the flights.

Mr Goudie said: “Very quickly you checked if David Ibbotson was available and 20 minutes later you call Mr McKay back for 38 seconds. The message that follows is ‘Pilot and Malibu’ is available’.

“They’re very brief conversations, there’s no difficulty in persuading you is there?”

Henderson said: “I can’t recall the conversations.”

Mr Goudie said: “At 10pm that evening Mr McKay calls that off, there’s another call between you and Mr McKay asking for a similar service. Same pattern from you, message from you to Mr Ibbotson, Mr Ibbotson to you and very quickly you’re getting back to Mr McKay.

“The deal was done in 17 minutes, there was no pressure going on here?”

Henderson said: “There was pressure, that’s the way Willie McKay works, he’s insistent. He was trying to say to take my wife.”

Mr Goudie said: “Did you tell Willie McKay he was only a PPL (Private Pilot Licence)?”

Henderson said: “No, I just didn’t tell him. I believed Ibbotson was an experienced pilot and he wanted to do the trip, he was keen to fly.”


In my opinion the prosecutor did land some heavy punches on Henderson and his almost constant "No" looks frankly questionable. The case has been adjourned until Monday when the cross on Mr Henderson will continue.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Desmiller » Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:32 pm

Hi castleblue,is this case open to the public? And if so can you just turn up and walk in or have you to book a seat?
Desmiller
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:41 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:20 pm

Desmiller wrote:Hi castleblue,is this case open to the public? And if so can you just turn up and walk in or have you to book a seat?


No it's closed covid rules but you can follow it on the media who have people watching on video links and reporting as it happens but obviously with a short delay.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Desmiller » Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:41 pm

Thanks m8
Desmiller
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:41 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby ealing_ayatollah » Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:10 pm

Paul Keevil wrote:Hi Ealing

Yes, your post is, in my opinion, entirely correct in my opinion.

There are two potential outcomes here in my opinion:

a) CAS find that a contract was in place or intended to be in place and CCFC owe Nantes £15m

In that scenario
(i) Cardiff can sue FC Nantes for £15m as they are vicariously liable
(ii) Cardif can also sue FC Nantes for somewhere between £50m to £100m for Loss of Profits

(b) CAS find that no contract was in place and CCFC do not own Nantes anything

(i) Its all even - No transaction. No fee due. End of any civil proceedings. Cannot claim for Loss of Profits in my opinion.

Thanks for clarifying Paul :thumbup:
I'm just a wine drinking monkey that has a penchant for fine bannanas. You can check out my human alter-ego singing and speaking nonsense on the you tube if you like @ https://www.youtube.com/user/sibaronimusic
User avatar
ealing_ayatollah
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:29 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby ealing_ayatollah » Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:11 pm

Paul Keevil wrote:I have purposely fallen short of saying that we should want the CAS to find that we do owe Nantes £15m

because:

A young man, a young promising footballer with his whole life ahead of him, has died - and the effect this has had on his family, his friends and many in the footballing world is immense.


I expect the club to recover the £15m. I also expect the club to recover a significant amount in Lost Profits.

But, on a personal level, I would just have preferred to watch him play, keep CCFC in the Premier League, and maybe one day being signed by a bigger club (eg Man City) because some have said he had that potential.


Agree with all of this sentiment. Well said, mate. :thumbup:
I'm just a wine drinking monkey that has a penchant for fine bannanas. You can check out my human alter-ego singing and speaking nonsense on the you tube if you like @ https://www.youtube.com/user/sibaronimusic
User avatar
ealing_ayatollah
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:29 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Bluebina » Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:31 pm

Is he in court today ?
Bluebina
 
Posts: 13464
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:32 pm

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby castleblue » Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:21 pm

The evidence side of the trial ended today and prior to adjourning for the day the judge has given some of the basic aspects of the case. He has also given the jury some advice on "A route to verdict"

Mr Justice Foxton reads out from a document provided to the jury called the route to verdict.

The document states:

1.

Are you sure the flights did not have the required authorisation or permission

Are you sure the pilot David Ibbotson did not have a commercial pilots licence

Are you sure David Ibbotson’s rating to fly N264DB expired in November 2018

Are you sure bad weather was forecast and David Ibbotson was not confident to fly in such weather

If you are sure of any of these matters, proceed to question two.

2.

Are you sure that the relevant matters individually or in combination gave rise to a real risk to N264DB which could not be safely ignored.
If you are not sure of these matters you should find the defendant not guilty.
If you are sure, proceed to question three

3.

Are you sure that in organising the flights in circumstances which there was a real risk to the safety of N264DB which could not be safely ignored, firstly that the defendant was aware of that risk. If sure, you should find the defendant guilty. If you are not sure, you should move to part two.
If you are sure he failed to show such care or skill that a person in that situation should exercise, you should find the defendant guilty.
If you are not sure, find the defendant not guilty.


Tomorrow morning prosecution and defence will make their closing statements then it will waiting for verdict.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:
User avatar
castleblue
 
Posts: 6110
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Caerphilly

Re: BREAKING: HENDERSON ON TRIAL AND CHANGES PLEA

Postby Bluebina » Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:59 pm

castleblue wrote:The evidence side of the trial ended today and prior to adjourning for the day the judge has given some of the basic aspects of the case. He has also given the jury some advice on "A route to verdict"

Mr Justice Foxton reads out from a document provided to the jury called the route to verdict.

The document states:

1.

Are you sure the flights did not have the required authorisation or permission

Are you sure the pilot David Ibbotson did not have a commercial pilots licence

Are you sure David Ibbotson’s rating to fly N264DB expired in November 2018

Are you sure bad weather was forecast and David Ibbotson was not confident to fly in such weather

If you are sure of any of these matters, proceed to question two.

2.

Are you sure that the relevant matters individually or in combination gave rise to a real risk to N264DB which could not be safely ignored.
If you are not sure of these matters you should find the defendant not guilty.
If you are sure, proceed to question three

3.

Are you sure that in organising the flights in circumstances which there was a real risk to the safety of N264DB which could not be safely ignored, firstly that the defendant was aware of that risk. If sure, you should find the defendant guilty. If you are not sure, you should move to part two.
If you are sure he failed to show such care or skill that a person in that situation should exercise, you should find the defendant guilty.
If you are not sure, find the defendant not guilty.


Tomorrow morning prosecution and defence will make their closing statements then it will waiting for verdict.


:bluescarf: :bluescarf: :bluescarf:



Thanks :thumbup:
Bluebina
 
Posts: 13464
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:32 pm

PreviousNext


Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ias [Bot], Magpie [Bot], Proximic [Bot] and 175 guests

Disclaimer :
The views and comments entered in these forums are personal and are not necessarily those of the management of this board.
The management of this board is not responsible for the content of any external internet sites.