Could it be that because FAA actions are civil, that there is no
presumption of innocence? That being the case, the burden of proof of
compliance rests on the individual committing the violation of the
rule/administrative rule.

If the offense becomes criminal, and is heard by an administrative law
judge, then the burden of proof lies with the FAA.

My 2 cents worth.



On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:01:54 GMT, Jack wrote:

Larry Dighera wrote:


If you are able to prove your innocence, the FAA is powerless.

Wonderful. All you have to do is prove your innocence.

Why do we give bureaucracy more leeway than the courts to prosecute, and
persecute?


Jack

-- Vote Libertarian --