This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/world/europe/germanwings-crash-father-defends-andrea-lubitz.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Grieving Father of Germanwings Co-Pilot Tries to Clear Son’s Name Grieving Father of Germanwings Co-Pilot Tries to Clear Son’s Name
(about 13 hours later)
BERLIN — While families and friends gathered in Germany and southern France to mourn the victims of the crash of Germanwings Flight 9525, Günter Lubitz broke his silence to challenge the authorities’ conclusion that his son Andreas deliberately crashed the plane into the face of a mountain two years ago. BERLIN — While families and friends gathered in Germany and southern France to mourn the victims of the crash of Germanwings Flight 9525, Günter Lubitz broke his silence on Friday to challenge the authorities’ conclusion that his son Andreas deliberately crashed the plane into the face of a mountain two years ago.
Mr. Lubitz sat stiffly in his dark suit, flanked by two lawyers, and faced journalists’ questions about why he had chosen this, of all days, to try to cast doubt on the execution and findings of the investigation into the crash, in which his son and 149 others died.Mr. Lubitz sat stiffly in his dark suit, flanked by two lawyers, and faced journalists’ questions about why he had chosen this, of all days, to try to cast doubt on the execution and findings of the investigation into the crash, in which his son and 149 others died.
His decision to use the second anniversary of the crash to defend his son outraged many. But Mr. Lubitz, 63, insisted that he would have been subjected to criticism on any day for his decision to question whether experts and the authorities had leapt too quickly to the conclusion that his son deliberately caused the crash because he was mentally ill.His decision to use the second anniversary of the crash to defend his son outraged many. But Mr. Lubitz, 63, insisted that he would have been subjected to criticism on any day for his decision to question whether experts and the authorities had leapt too quickly to the conclusion that his son deliberately caused the crash because he was mentally ill.
“We did not choose this day to hurt the other families,” Mr. Lubitz said, reading deliberately from a prepared statement. “We chose this day because it promised the greatest attention.”“We did not choose this day to hurt the other families,” Mr. Lubitz said, reading deliberately from a prepared statement. “We chose this day because it promised the greatest attention.”
Investigators in France and Germany found that the younger Mr. Lubitz, the co-pilot of the plane, was alone in the cockpit at the time of the crash. They determined that he “intentionally modified the autopilot settings” to cause the plane to swiftly descend and refused to allow the pilot back into the cockpit. They also found he had been taking antidepressant medication the day of the crash and “was experiencing mental disorder with psychotic symptoms.”Investigators in France and Germany found that the younger Mr. Lubitz, the co-pilot of the plane, was alone in the cockpit at the time of the crash. They determined that he “intentionally modified the autopilot settings” to cause the plane to swiftly descend and refused to allow the pilot back into the cockpit. They also found he had been taking antidepressant medication the day of the crash and “was experiencing mental disorder with psychotic symptoms.”
But Mr. Lubitz repeatedly insisted that his son had fully recovered from the bout of depression he experienced six years before the crash and that he had “found his way back to his original energy and joy of life.” Although Mr. Lubitz was unable to provide proof to support his claims, he insisted that his son’s visits to several doctors, including a psychiatrist, in 2014 and late 2015 were linked only to problems with his eyesight.But Mr. Lubitz repeatedly insisted that his son had fully recovered from the bout of depression he experienced six years before the crash and that he had “found his way back to his original energy and joy of life.” Although Mr. Lubitz was unable to provide proof to support his claims, he insisted that his son’s visits to several doctors, including a psychiatrist, in 2014 and late 2015 were linked only to problems with his eyesight.
“Our son was not suffering from depression at the time of the crash,” Mr. Lubitz said repeatedly during a news conference in a Berlin hotel, which went on for more than two hours.“Our son was not suffering from depression at the time of the crash,” Mr. Lubitz said repeatedly during a news conference in a Berlin hotel, which went on for more than two hours.
Mr. Lubitz explained that while other families were able to grieve the loss of their sons, daughters, spouses or friends, his family’s grief was different.Mr. Lubitz explained that while other families were able to grieve the loss of their sons, daughters, spouses or friends, his family’s grief was different.
“We have to live with the fact that we not only lost our son and brother but that already two days after the crash he was labeled by French prosecutors as the only one responsible,” he said. “We must live with the fact that he was, and still is, portrayed in the media as a depressive mass murderer.”“We have to live with the fact that we not only lost our son and brother but that already two days after the crash he was labeled by French prosecutors as the only one responsible,” he said. “We must live with the fact that he was, and still is, portrayed in the media as a depressive mass murderer.”
That a father would seek to exonerate his son “is human and understandable,” said Christian Kumpa, a prosecutor in Düsseldorf who led a German investigation into the crash that determined it was caused solely by the co-pilot. He and his office stood by their report, he said.That a father would seek to exonerate his son “is human and understandable,” said Christian Kumpa, a prosecutor in Düsseldorf who led a German investigation into the crash that determined it was caused solely by the co-pilot. He and his office stood by their report, he said.
“There are no indications for a cause of the crash that are not attributable to deliberate, presumably suicidal behavior,” Mr. Kumpa said.“There are no indications for a cause of the crash that are not attributable to deliberate, presumably suicidal behavior,” Mr. Kumpa said.
Tim van Beveren, a journalist and pilot who appeared with Mr. Lubitz at the Friday news conference, said that both French and German prosecutors were biased against the younger Mr. Lubitz at the outset of their investigations.Tim van Beveren, a journalist and pilot who appeared with Mr. Lubitz at the Friday news conference, said that both French and German prosecutors were biased against the younger Mr. Lubitz at the outset of their investigations.
Mr. van Beveren questioned whether investigators had sufficiently taken into account the winds at the time of the crash and whether the keypad to open the cockpit door had malfunctioned. He offered no new theory or evidence for investigators to pursue.Mr. van Beveren questioned whether investigators had sufficiently taken into account the winds at the time of the crash and whether the keypad to open the cockpit door had malfunctioned. He offered no new theory or evidence for investigators to pursue.
Yves Deshayes, of the French pilots’ union SNPL, spoke to France Bleu Azur radio and defended investigators’ findings. “Based on what I saw in the Bureau of Investigations and Analyses report, there were no elements that would allow for calling into question the scenario put forward,” Mr. Deshayes said. “Of course, if new elements are discovered, we look at them.”Yves Deshayes, of the French pilots’ union SNPL, spoke to France Bleu Azur radio and defended investigators’ findings. “Based on what I saw in the Bureau of Investigations and Analyses report, there were no elements that would allow for calling into question the scenario put forward,” Mr. Deshayes said. “Of course, if new elements are discovered, we look at them.”
Ulrich Wessel, the principal of a school in Haltern am See, Germany, that lost two teachers and 16 students in the crash, called Mr. Lubitz’s decision to hold the news conference on the anniversary a “provocation” and an “insult to the parents.”Ulrich Wessel, the principal of a school in Haltern am See, Germany, that lost two teachers and 16 students in the crash, called Mr. Lubitz’s decision to hold the news conference on the anniversary a “provocation” and an “insult to the parents.”
Josef Cercek, whose daughter Sonja was one of the teachers killed, chose to mark the day by assembling his long, wooden Alpine horn on the platform that overlooks the jagged mountains where the crash occurred. “There,” he said, “I will play ‘Amazing Grace’ for her and for all the victims.”Josef Cercek, whose daughter Sonja was one of the teachers killed, chose to mark the day by assembling his long, wooden Alpine horn on the platform that overlooks the jagged mountains where the crash occurred. “There,” he said, “I will play ‘Amazing Grace’ for her and for all the victims.”