Cilliers Trial UK.

[shorehambeach 9]

Just asking that's all !

Does the BPA have the power to ban anyone from jumping at a UK BPA affiliated DZ ?

Has it ever revoked someone's BPA license ? Or given them a lifetime ban?

[cpoxon 0]

shorehambeach

Just asking that's all !

Does the BPA have the power to ban anyone from jumping at a UK BPA affiliated DZ ?

Has it ever revoked someone's BPA license ? Or given them a lifetime ban?

We seem to be going round in circles here. A licence is a Certificate of Proficiency and can not be revoked. The Articles of Association state,

Quote

6.2 A Member shall cease to be a Member if he or she:

...

6.2.3 is expelled by a simple majority decision of the Council acting in its absolute discretion for conduct prejudicial to the Association, providing that the Association’s disciplinary procedure has been followed;

but as I very much doubt he is a current member Council would be unable to do anything until he reapplied for membership (at which time he would have served his time, albeit remaining on licence for the rest of his life).

There have been bans in the past, in relation to fixed-object jumping fatalities but they turned out not to be lifetime (I'm confused as to whether that was the intention or not), but there were threats of lifetime bans if BPA Members were found to be BASE jumping afterwards. The BPA Operations Manual later changed to state that Fixed Object jumping did not come within the provisions of the Operations Manual in order to distance itself.

So here's an interesting question; has it actually been prejudicial to the Association? Would people think less of the sport and the association because of the actions of a criminal? Or do they think it is the act of a psychopath who could have used a number of methods to carry out his crime? If he'd tampered with the brakes of the car would it be prejudicial to the manufacturer of the car?

I suspect it is all moot as I too doubt he would ever visit a dropzone ever again.

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[obelixtim 147]

cpoxon

***Just asking that's all !

Does the BPA have the power to ban anyone from jumping at a UK BPA affiliated DZ ?

Has it ever revoked someone's BPA license ? Or given them a lifetime ban?

We seem to be going round in circles here. A licence is a Certificate of Proficiency and can not be revoked. The Articles of Association state,

Quote

6.2 A Member shall cease to be a Member if he or she:

...

6.2.3 is expelled by a simple majority decision of the Council acting in its absolute discretion for conduct prejudicial to the Association, providing that the Association’s disciplinary procedure has been followed;

but as I very much doubt he is a current member Council would be unable to do anything until he reapplied for membership (at which time he would have served his time, albeit remaining on licence for the rest of his life).

There have been bans in the past, in relation to fixed-object jumping fatalities but they turned out not to be lifetime (I'm confused as to whether that was the intention or not), but there were threats of lifetime bans if BPA Members were found to be BASE jumping afterwards. The BPA Operations Manual later changed to state that Fixed Object jumping did not come within the provisions of the Operations Manual in order to distance itself.

So here's an interesting question; has it actually been prejudicial to the Association? Would people think less of the sport and the association because of the actions of a criminal? Or do they think it is the act of a psychopath who could have used a number of methods to carry out his crime? If he'd tampered with the brakes of the car would it be prejudicial to the manufacturer of the car?

I suspect it is all moot as I too doubt he would ever visit a dropzone ever again.

I think it would reinforce the perception amongst the great unwashed that skydiving is an incredibly dangerous activity, and so it could be argued to have damaged the sport.

Although it would be unlikely to change the minds of those so prejudiced anyway.

But it is bad PR, especially for those making a living from skydiving. I've spent a lot of time over the years educating the public about skydiving, so anything that reinforces an opposite view is a negative, in my mind anyway.

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[cpoxon 0]

obelixtim

***So here's an interesting question; has it actually been prejudicial to the Association? Would people think less of the sport and the association because of the actions of a criminal? Or do they think it is the act of a psychopath who could have used a number of methods to carry out his crime? If he'd tampered with the brakes of the car would it be prejudicial to the manufacturer of the car?

I suspect it is all moot as I too doubt he would ever visit a dropzone ever again.

I think it would reinforce the perception amongst the great unwashed that skydiving is an incredibly dangerous activity, and so it could be argued to have damaged the sport.

Although it would be unlikely to change the minds of those so prejudiced anyway.

Yep. To those too stupid to not read past the headlines and see that it was an evil action that caused the problem here, but I don't think you are ever going to persuade people who are that dumb.

Besides, she survived a double (induced) malfunction; how dangerous can it be?

Quote

But it is bad PR, especially for those making a living from skydiving. I've spent a lot of time over the years educating the public about skydiving, so anything that reinforces an opposite view is a negative, in my mind anyway.

Is there such a thing? Interest and bookings always increase after such events, don't they?

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[Westerly 61]

franks66

Life, with minimum 18 years. This means if he behaves will be out in 18 years on licence.

No it means if he behaves he is eligible to be out. That's not the same thing as being out. There are millions of inmates that are eligible for release but will never actually be released early. The board can decide not to release the guy 'just because'. They dont really need a reason to retain him. In any case, this is worthless discussion as it's extremely safe to say the guy is never skydiving again. Even if the aero club would grant him a membership, no DZ would ever let him actually jump. They cant. They would create a libility for themselves. Imagine if a DZ let a convicted would-be killer on it's planes and he tried to kill someone again. They could be sued into oblivion. Plus consider the PR. Would you share an airplane with someone who was known to be a parachute saboteur? I dont think many jumpers would.

[mr2mk1g 10]

I'm not sure a random CSI who does kit and docs checks in 10 years time is going to necessarily be in a position to remember him. By then he'll likely be yesterday's news, at least in many circles.

Hence my suggestion to just have the CCI exercise his powers to perma-ground him and advise the BPA as much. That way, should the BPA ever receive a membership request from him, their records say 'no bueno' (assuming there is even a mechanism, in practice, to put into place the theory set out by what the ops manual says - I suspect there quite possibly isn't, for which I don't blame the BPA, it's not as if this is a regularly used provision).

He'd then have the power of appeal and the onus would be on him to get the ban lifted, rather than the onus being on some random 25 year old CSI who was 15 when he was convicted and has likely never heard his name before and is simply responding to a tannoy to come do kit and docs on a busy Saturday morning. Prevents him from quietly just slipping through under the radar in 10 years time.

[shorehambeach 9]

Thanks that makes sense. Apologies if it was a repetition of what you'd already stated.

[yoink 321]

cpoxon

Membership and licence are two different things. A licence is a certificate of proficiency and can't be revoked once earned. The card you are talking about to be endorsed refers to the membership card.

I'm not sure about the license thing. Technically you're absolutely correct, but the reality is that we ask people to prove their capability despite having a valid license if they've been out of the sport for a while before they get in the air on their own... That implies that a licence does indeed have an expiration or can be revoked if capability can't be shown, doesn't it?

[cpoxon 0]

yoink

***Membership and licence are two different things. A licence is a certificate of proficiency and can't be revoked once earned. The card you are talking about to be endorsed refers to the membership card.

I'm not sure about the license thing. Technically you're absolutely correct, but the reality is that we ask people to prove their capability despite having a valid license if they've been out of the sport for a while before they get in the air on their own... That implies that a licence does indeed have an expiration or can be revoked if capability can't be shown, doesn't it?

The only thing the Operations Manual says is,

Section 5 (Training) - Para 11 (Restrictions Following A Lay-Off)

Where a Student or a BPA ‘A’ Licence parachutist has had a lay-off of two months or more, approval of the CI must be obtained as to the type of descent to be made next.

It can't be revoked; a CI might not let you jump but that doesn't mean the licence is revoked. It is at the CI's discretion to chose to go above and beyond the specifications of the Operations Manual and require that someone undergo revision if they feel it necessary for someone to jump at their dropzone, but that's not to say that another CI might not be so stringent (although I'd hope not) and I would imagine that overseas the scrutiny would be more lax. If there was such a revocation it would imply that there would be a reversal of the process; we don't require people to reapply for their licences.

All that would be required in order not to raise the suspicions of an instructor would be to be able to satisfactorily talk the talk, claim that logbooks had been lost in house fire (not too far from the truth with Cilliers) and say jumps had been made recently (perhaps overseas making it harder to verify). Given what this guy has done, I can't imagine he'd be averse to telling a few fibs.

We seem to be getting wound up in minutiae.

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[topdocker 0]

Is it possible in your country to have the condition of his release that he not be involved associated, or within 500 feet of any skydiving activity?

top

Jump more, post less!

[cpoxon 0]

topdocker

Is it possible in your country to have the condition of his release that he not be involved associated, or within 500 feet of any skydiving activity?

top

Yes.

Quote

Additional Licence Conditions
2.4 Licences may also include additional conditions, for example, exclusion zones or noncontact restrictions, provided that these fall within one of the categories prescribed in the 2015 Order.

2.5 These categories are:

(1) residence at a specified place;
(2) restriction of residency;
(3) making or maintaining contact with a person;
(4) participation in, or co-operation with, a programme or set of activities;
(5) possession, ownership, control or inspection of specified items or documents;
(6) disclosure of information;
(7) curfew arrangement;
(8) freedom of movement;
(9) supervision in the community by the supervising officer, or other responsible officer,
or organisation.

I wonder whether a parole board would automatically consider this or whether it would have to come from a victim (who would be asked to contribute to a parole hearing).

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[topdocker 0]

cpoxon

***Is it possible in your country to have the condition of his release that he not be involved associated, or within 500 feet of any skydiving activity?

top

Yes.

Quote

Additional Licence Conditions
2.4 Licences may also include additional conditions, for example, exclusion zones or noncontact restrictions, provided that these fall within one of the categories prescribed in the 2015 Order.

2.5 These categories are:

(1) residence at a specified place;
(2) restriction of residency;
(3) making or maintaining contact with a person;
(4) participation in, or co-operation with, a programme or set of activities;
(5) possession, ownership, control or inspection of specified items or documents;
(6) disclosure of information;
(7) curfew arrangement;
(8) freedom of movement;
(9) supervision in the community by the supervising officer, or other responsible officer,
or organisation.

I wonder whether a parole board would automatically consider this or whether it would have to come from a victim (who would be asked to contribute to a parole hearing).

Or could the Association speak on the behalf of participants who don't want to lock their gear down between jumps, constantly check if equipment has been tampered with, etc.?

top

Jump more, post less!

[Westerly 61]

cpoxon

******Membership and licence are two different things. A licence is a certificate of proficiency and can't be revoked once earned. The card you are talking about to be endorsed refers to the membership card.

I'm not sure about the license thing. Technically you're absolutely correct, but the reality is that we ask people to prove their capability despite having a valid license if they've been out of the sport for a while before they get in the air on their own... That implies that a licence does indeed have an expiration or can be revoked if capability can't be shown, doesn't it?

The only thing the Operations Manual says is,

Section 5 (Training) - Para 11 (Restrictions Following A Lay-Off)

Where a Student or a BPA ‘A’ Licence parachutist has had a lay-off of two months or more, approval of the CI must be obtained as to the type of descent to be made next.

All that would be required in order not to raise the suspicions of an instructor would be to be able to satisfactorily talk the talk, claim that logbooks had been lost in house fire (not too far from the truth with Cilliers) and say jumps had been made recently (perhaps overseas making it harder to verify). Given what this guy has done, I can't imagine he'd be averse to telling a few fibs.

And all it would take to blow that whole plan away is for someone to Google his name on their phone while sitting around waiting for the next load. If the guy did in fact show up to a DZ and started jumping, I seriously doubt it would take long before someone figures out who he is and tells everyone. All it would take is 15 seconds on Google.

[flying_phish 8]

It sounds like you and I have very different pre-jump routines if you don't think it's weird to Google the new guy between loads.

People don't just go around Googling each other. How many skydivers have you Googled after you met them? Personally, I've never once felt the need to Google someone just because they showed up at the drop zone.

People can't remember their own passwords half the time. The chances of anyone recognizing his name or his face in the year 2038 are not great. It's certainly not impossible considering the notoriety of this case, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

[Westerly 61]

flying_phish

It sounds like you and I have very different pre-jump routines if you don't think it's weird to Google the new guy between loads.

People don't just go around Googling each other. How many skydivers have you Googled after you met them? Personally, I've never once felt the need to Google someone just because they showed up at the drop zone.

People can't remember their own passwords half the time. The chances of anyone recognizing his name or his face in the year 2038 are not great. It's certainly not impossible considering the notoriety of this case, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

I am just saying someone is going to put two and two together. You dont serve 20 years in prison for a serious felony and then expect to get out and no one will ever know. Everyone knows. It's public knowledge. People will always figure it out sooner or later. You also assume this guy has a standard skydiver personality and no one will view him as strange. I am pretty sure it takes a certain personality to try to murder your wife for money and that personality might strike others as strange which will further prompt them to do some research.

[SethInMI 160]

flying_phish

The chances of anyone recognizing his name or his face in the year 2038 are not great. It's certainly not impossible considering the notoriety of this case, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

I feel like he will become a skydive legend. Like DB Cooper or fictional Truman Sparks or Bohdi, his name will be a bonfire staple, enough that people will remember. It only takes one person to post "Hey remember that guy, his release date just passed, wonder where he is" and refresh everyone's memory.

It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

[Erroll 75]

SethInMI

***The chances of anyone recognizing his name or his face in the year 2038 are not great. It's certainly not impossible considering the notoriety of this case, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

I feel like he will become a skydive legend. Like DB Cooper or fictional Truman Sparks or Bohdi, his name will be a bonfire staple, enough that people will remember. It only takes one person to post "Hey remember that guy, his release date just passed, wonder where he is" and refresh everyone's memory.

Agreed. Anybody who was around at the time knows the name Stephen Hilder, and I have no doubt his name pops up likewise from time to time.

[cpoxon 0]

topdocker

******Is it possible in your country to have the condition of his release that he not be involved associated, or within 500 feet of any skydiving activity?

top

Yes.

Quote

Additional Licence Conditions
2.4 Licences may also include additional conditions, for example, exclusion zones or noncontact restrictions, provided that these fall within one of the categories prescribed in the 2015 Order.

2.5 These categories are:

(1) residence at a specified place;
(2) restriction of residency;
(3) making or maintaining contact with a person;
(4) participation in, or co-operation with, a programme or set of activities;
(5) possession, ownership, control or inspection of specified items or documents;
(6) disclosure of information;
(7) curfew arrangement;
(8) freedom of movement;
(9) supervision in the community by the supervising officer, or other responsible officer,
or organisation.

I wonder whether a parole board would automatically consider this or whether it would have to come from a victim (who would be asked to contribute to a parole hearing).

Or could the Association speak on the behalf of participants

top

Perhaps:

https://www.gov.uk/getting-parole/parole-board-hearing says,

Quote

Who’ll be at the hearing

You must usually attend the Parole Board hearing.

There will be other people at the hearing, for example:

your solicitor (you may need to represent yourself at the hearing if you cannot get legal aid or do not have a solicitor)

a prison psychologist

the victim (when they’re reading their victim statement)

the victim liaison officer

witnesses

Quote

who don't want to lock their gear down between jumps, constantly check if equipment has been tampered with, etc.?

But you'd have to be married to him, have a life-insurance policy and for him to have racked up debts again to be at risk? I guess the rationale would be if he's capable of it in one situation, he's capable of it in others, but I would argue (having done his time, subject to evaluation) it is unlikely that the public at large would be at risk.

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[topdocker 0]

SethInMI

***The chances of anyone recognizing his name or his face in the year 2038 are not great. It's certainly not impossible considering the notoriety of this case, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

I feel like he will become a skydive legend. Like DB Cooper or fictional Truman Sparks or Bohdi, his name will be a bonfire staple, enough that people will remember. It only takes one person to post "Hey remember that guy, his release date just passed, wonder where he is" and refresh everyone's memory.

I don't think that holds water. Roger Kibbe is a fairly infamous killer here in California (the I-5 strangler) and was a skydiver at the time. Part of his downfall was he used paracord pull up cords to strangle some of his victims and that sent the police looking for skydiver. People think I make the story up about him hanging around the DZ having beers after jumping, just like any other skydiver.

Memory is short.

top

Jump more, post less!

[SethInMI 160]

topdocker

Memory is short.
top

True.

In the USA his memory will fade, but I feel it will live on in the UK, by both being a smaller place, and the unique nature of the crime making it a good conversation piece (can you mess with a rig and make it look like an accident is a conversation I have had before just shooting the shit in the packing area).

It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

[Eiley 0]

This may come out of left field, but in the Stephen Hilder case in 2003 at Hibaldstow, a 24-y-o suspect was arrested and questioned, and apparently later charged with criminal damage but not murder. His name was never released. Cilliers would have been around 24 at the time. Was he at Hib for the Collegiate Nationals that weekend by any chance?

(The coroner released an open finding in the Hilder case)

nothing to see here

[obelixtim 147]

Eiley

This may come out of left field, but in the Stephen Hilder case in 2003 at Hibaldstow, a 24-y-o suspect was arrested and questioned, and apparently later charged with criminal damage but not murder. His name was never released. Cilliers would have been around 24 at the time. Was he at Hib for the Collegiate Nationals that weekend by any chance?

(The coroner released an open finding in the Hilder case)

I thought they had figured that case out?

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[mr2mk1g 10]

The police declared they had but in reality all they did was pull their thumb out of their arse and announce that the answer was 5.

It became apparent at the inquest that they had thoroughly misunderstood their own forensic science service report and it was nowhere near as conclusive as they had lead the press to believe when they announced it was case closed.

The whole Hilder case remains unanswered, with an open verdict given by the coroner.

[turkeyphant 1]

turkeyphant

Anyone with a Westlaw account able to get a copy of a transcript?

Bump.

Also, first interview (and quite a long piece) with Netheravon CCI Mark Bayada: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/14/emile-cilliers-psychopath-inside-story-parachute-murder-plot.

[Joellercoaster 6]

[edit: *sigh* never mind.]

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?