Thread: Givealittle page for Dave Armstrong

https://givealittle.co.nz/cause/supportdave

"Dave Armstrong was the "hero" who saved two lives in April 2014. Dave rescued a hunter and his partner in a dire situation from a remote location in Kaikoura. There is a high possibility the two would not have survived the night as they were on a steep cliff and the hunter had a broken femur. The risk of hypothermia was drastically increasing as time ticked on, as well as the risk of falling further. Dave was the only man who was experienced enough to fly the rescue crew in. Westpac had already attempted and failed to locate the injured couple. Dave, at the time had a suspended license due to medical reasons which are debatable. The CAA have decided to prosecute Dave for his actions that day. So we are asking for help to raise funds for Dave's legal fees which are ever increasing as he tries to clear his name.

We believe Dave acted as a hero that day, not as a criminal. The predicament Dave must have been in that day would have undoubtedly been difficult as he had two decisions, either leave the couple out in the bush to most likely die, or fly on a suspended licence. We are forever grateful that Dave made the humane decision that day to come and help us."

He did what he thought was right. But he did fly on a suspended licence, knowing he shouldn't fly.
I don't think he could clear his name as he clearly broke the law. And he admitted that. The circumstances of what he did should only affect the sentence, not prove he didn't commit the offence in the first place.
At best, if he appeals, they may reduce his sentence, but he could have gone to jail.

Good on for helping, but he did it knowing this could be the outcome. Thinking he shouldn't or wouldn't be prosecuted is just naïve. Laws are made for a reason.

I will donate cos I would like to think he would do it again if it was me dieing on the hill.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

I will donate cos I would like to think he would do it again if it was me dieing on the hill.

Exactly the thought running through my head. He had broken aviation laws before, but fuck it, there was every chance that if they were going to go back later it was going to be a body recovery, and he probably knew he'd be charged again and saved that dude anyway. Good for him.

Remember he only stepped up because others had tried and failed to do the job - He deserves a medal, not this crap!

Judge should've given him a wet bus ticket and a pat on the back as he was leaving.

Originally Posted by jim160

He did what he thought was right. But he did fly on a suspended licence, knowing he shouldn't fly.
I don't think he could clear his name as he clearly broke the law. And he admitted that. The circumstances of what he did should only affect the sentence, not prove he didn't commit the offence in the first place.
At best, if he appeals, they may reduce his sentence, but he could have gone to jail.

Good on for helping, but he did it knowing this could be the outcome. Thinking he shouldn't or wouldn't be prosecuted is just naïve. Laws are made for a reason.

What about Heather? Think laws are made for some? He should have left the guy on the hill? The judge should have thanked him and told him last chance! Next time I see a road accident do I drive on because my licence has expired as well as my rego? I'll have to think about that now!

I read one of the articles where they had a quote from the Air police basically it outlines he was caught out flying at 3 different times while suspended and forged his logbook details.

If its tru then he should get a Metal for the Rescue and fined for the other offences.

Yep agree

Originally Posted by Maca49

What about Heather? Think laws are made for some? He should have left the guy on the hill? The judge should have thanked him and told him last chance! Next time I see a road accident do I drive on because my licence has expired as well as my rego? I'll have to think about that now!

That would be a decision that you would make. But im sure you wouldn't even think of that, given I don't think you could you sleep at night thinking you could have saved someones life over the sake of a ticket. That's what Dave thought, he was will to sacrifice everything to save someones life. If someone chooses to not go to protect themselves from their own criminal offending, they aren't worth the oxygen they breath.

But everyone makes their own decisions. I was passed by seven cars after I crashed and I had blood leaking out of the side of my head, people avoid shit for all reasons, but to avoid a ticket is just a shit decision.

Just my opinion anyway

Jim lots of times I carry a Doctor with me! He has to stop and he has to stay if the person is injuried or unwell until medics arrive! It happened climbing the Mount the other day with a sick person? Got the skills use em no matter what, but to be done legally for it is a bad decision by a judge.

I agree its shitty that he got charged, but it says there have been a few times he has broken the rules, and not been charged.
this time they had the evidence to support the charge. He knew what he was doing.

I am totally incredulous that the man has a criminal record now for a humane act that resulted in saving a life. In my opinion the previous infractions should have been dealt with by the CAA in isolation but in this particular incident the value of human life saved far outweighed the breaching of aviation regulations. I have had a transient ischemic attack (mini stroke) a few years ago. Once you have recovered (in my instance it took less than an hour) it does not impair any judgement or motor functions. I understand that CAA might have a requisite stand down requirement for pilots after such an incident but in my opinion Dave Armstrong had the necessary skills and was totally capable of making that flight on the day (when no one else in close proximity was able) and in doing so he saved a life. The man is a hero by every definition of the word and should have an honour befitting his actions bestowed upon him.

ive just donated i bet if it was a celebrity or similar the court outcome would of been different fuck the court and the donations clearly reflect that

You got it right Rushy 100%

and on another way of thinking, this way went to plan. But if he had a passenger, or whilst he was carrying the victim, he crashed killing them, im guessing you would all say he was not at fault and the other persons death was justified in trying to save someone. I don't think so.

It worked out this time, but they always look at worse case scenarios. And also try and limit case laws to minimise people attempting this in the future. Cause next time it may not work out the same.