k_Kahneman
I feel U.S. investigators are more convinced (compared to Indonesian and Singapore authorities) of the suicide theory.
I feel most of the families would endure more pain if they choose to tune in to the suicide theory. A natural cause of crash is the most comfortable answer to hear. Perhaps the 2nd most comfortable is a mechanical failure that’s new and arguably unpreventable. When the families file a lawsuit against the manufacturer, I guess they are motivated financially, and don’t feel so bitter as if dealing with a murder case or conspiracy case.
— legal system: stringent requirements ..
If the Indonesian committee had concluded that Mr. Tsu committed suicide at the controls, it would have been effectively judging him guilty of murder, for which proof beyond reasonable doubt was required. “The amount of /circumstantial/ evidence is pretty overpowering and, frankly, everybody in the business thinks that this is actually what happened,” Mr. Learmount said. “But if you approach this in a completely legalistic way, the evidence that they have simply doesn’t prove what happened.”
The legal judgements have far-reaching implications. The judges have a huge responsibility of utmost impartiality. In contrast, the obligation for the court to reach a “lighter” conlcusion (like mechanical failure or negligence…) is much lower. No murder motive is required.
The incident led to several lawsuits in Singapore and the US against SilkAir, Boeing and other manufacturers of the aircraft’s parts. Many of these cases were eventually settled out of court (financially). The first trial took place in the Singapore high court in 2001, where the families of six victims sued SilkAir for negligence and sought higher damages than what the airline had offered. The basis of their lawsuit was that the pilot or co-pilot had caused the crash. However the judge dismissed the case; their subsequent appeal was also rejected. Most of the other families had accepted SilkAir’s compensation of between US$140,000 and US$200,000 per victim.
Boeing and several aircraft-part manufacturers were also sued in various US states by over 30 families of the victims. In 2004, in the first US trial, the jury in the Los Angeles superior court found that defects in the plane’s rudder control system were to blame and the court ordered the manufacturer Parker Hannifin to pay US$43.6 million to the families of three victims; neither Boeing nor SilkAir were found to be at fault. Evidence of the faulty rudder had been recovered in 2003. After news of the discovery emerged, Boeing dropped its claim that pilot suicide had caused the crash and withdrew its lawsuit against SilkAir, and SilkAir’s insurer likewise dropped its lawsuit against Boeing
— How (un)desirable is such a death experience? A victim had a terrifying [1] but quick passing. No prolonged suffering. For the xpSelf [experiencing self], the ending was swift. The entire body was torn to pieces within a split second. I am not even sure there was pain.
Kahneman described the fictitious Jen’s “painless death” in a car crash.
Princess Diana probably died a violent death and/or quick painless death, lasting several hours but she probably lost consciousness within seconds due to loss blood supply to vital organs. How do people remember her? The ending does have a huge significance, exactly as Kahneman wrote. Some people point at Karma, implying that she was dealt a brutal death, but really? If a victim loses consciousness so fast, then the death is equivalent to an explosive death, just like James Bond’s glorified, painless death. No punishment at all.
[1] Many older adults had short experiences of “Oh Am I getting killed within seconds?”. The prospect is actually less terrifying than many other death scenarios such as bleeding to death or hopelessly trapped somewhere like underground accident. We all see how animals suffer slow, painful deaths. That’s why we develop aversion to slow deaths.
The newspaper reader’s perspective is the rmSelf [remembering self]. In this perspective, the death is deemed unnecessary and therefore tragic. I think reader’s perspective is actually less important than the exSelf perspective, unless you believe the victim has a consciousness in afterlife.
Some family members may take either of these perspectives. If I lose a love one to a crash, I would focus on their xpSelf. That xpSelf was lucky to experience a quick explosive passing. If you have a faith, then I hope it helps you focus on the xpSelf and focus on the afterlife that your loved ones pass into.
I feel this blogpost is not something morbid. It’s one of my first honest and calm examinations of death.