Mock Trial 2023 Henderson Cross

Your Honor, may I proceed?

Good ____, Dr. Henderson

You stopped working at Boeing a little over 18 years ago, didn’t you?

So since then, you have worked at a consulting firm, haven’t you?

So for the past 18 or so years, you have done exclusively consulting work, haven’t you?

And you did not consult with Caborite on their Model 2 design, did you?

Dr. Henderson, you would agree that the field of aeronautical engineering has changed in the past 18 years, is that right?

And so for the past 18 years, your knowledge of the industry has only been through the consulting work that you do with your clients, isn’t that also correct?

Caborite Model 2 was first sold in the summer of 2020, is that correct?

And John Jacob’s crash was only a year later on July 3, 2021, right?

So periodicals and journals about this new Model 2 could not have been published by the time of the crash, is that right?

(if no) But nothing has been written about crashes in the Model 2, has there?

The Model 2 was built with carsonium, wasn’t it?

And because Carsonium is so new, you didn’t have any knowledge of it until this crash, isn’t that right?

So you don’t know the properties of Carsonium, do you?

(if no) But most of what you know about Carsonium has come from Caborite, hasn’t it?

And you cannot tell the judge what the effect of Carsonium would be when subject to great amounts of g-force, can you?

The software you used is regularly relied upon by leading aircraft manufacturers like Boeing, correct?

But Caborite does not use this software, does it?

And so the software you used did not take the effects of Carsonium into account when testing, correct?

You tested well-performed and poorly-performed Triple Lindys in the Model 2 using your computer model, correct?

But pilots are able to adjust for things like wind or turning errors during flights in ways that a computer model would not take into account, is that right?

So the computer model will generate flight paths which are possibly different from those that an actual pilot would follow, correct?

So the simulation does not accurately reflect what actually happens, correct?

Now that you’ve reviewed the facts of this case, you believe the Caborite Model 2 should have been built to withstand a load factor of 7 g’s, correct?

And yet, in your simulations, you found that during an improper Triple Lindy, the Model 2 exceeded 7 g’s in multiple trials, isn’t that right?

So even a load factor of 7 g’s would not be sufficient to protect a pilot during a Triple Lindy in a Model 2, correct?

You said that the wing fell off because of g-force, correct?

But without the use of an accelerometer, you can’t tell us how many g’s the plane experienced when the wing fell off, can you?

So you don’t know the actual/exact g-force exerted on the Model 2 when it crashed, do you?

As part of your investigation, you knew about the acknowledgement (pg. 49) that John Jacob signed when buying the Caborite Model 2 plane, correct?

(If no) so you are retained to assess the safety and limits of this plane and yet you didn’t review a contract that detailed Caborite’s contract on the safety and limits of the Model 2?

And so you know that the pilot, John Jacobs, acknowledged that he shouldn’t exceed 6 g’s, correct?

[You testified that] Crash happened because the plane went over 6 g’s, right?

So if the plane fell apart because it was subjected to a 6 g load force, John Jacob shouldn’t have flown the plane over the 6 g limit, wouldn’t you agree?

Now, I want to turn your attention to your investigation of the fallen Caborite Model 2.

Before you made a visual assessment of the wing damage, you thought that the wing could have also fallen off due to metal fatigue or foul play, correct?

You decided it wasn’t metal fatigue solely through your visual analysis, right?

And you used the same visual analysis to determine that it wasn’t foul play, correct?

So your opinion that excessive g-forces were the sole cause of the plane’s crash was a process of elimination from your visual analysis, correct?

Thank you, Dr. Henderson. Your Honor, I have no further questions.