Manslaughter?

[captain1976 0]

Hope I got this in the right category, but I'm sure the moderators will determine that.

Anyway, can anyone in the legal community out there comment on why charges of manslaughter were never filed in a case where Illegal engine installation and gross negligence of the operator(s) caused the death of 12 fellow skydivers?

I have first-hand knowledge of the origins of the engine in question, but always wondered why law enforcement and prosecutors let it go as an accident.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20001211X15678&key=1

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[riggerrob 558]

This probably belongs in the INCIDENTS thread.

The DZO lost two sons and 5-or-so TIs.
I narrowly missed being killed in that crash, because I was in Wisconsin, challenging an AFF Course, along with the DZO's daughter and another of his instructors. I attended WAAAAY too many funerals during September 1992!
That was also the year that Roger Nelson got out of prison. As soon as (1993) Nelson opened his new DZ (Ottawa, Illinois) most of the senior jumpers followed him.

I don't remember if the Hinckley DZ re-opened the following spring, but around 1993, a South African opened a new DZ in Hinckley.

1992 was a turning-point year for the American skydiving industry.
Two major crashes (see also Twin Otter crash in Perris Valley, California during the spring of 1992).
Then the Beech 18 crash in Hinckley on Labour Day.

Piston-pounding Beech 18s fell out of fashion, while seat-belts suddenly became fashionable!

Over that winter, the FAA told USPA "you either convince skydivers to wear seatbelts, or ... you will not enjoy the second option ...."
Over the winter of 1992-1993 jump-plane owners scrambled to install seatbelts in their airplanes. DZOs who were slow to install seat-belts were pressured into installing seat-belts by knowledgable skydivers who stopped spending dollars at their DZs.

Ironically, I was injured - 16 years later - during the crash of (an American-registered) Beechcraft King Air, that had inadequete seat-belts??????

[captain1976 0]

I too was almost on that plane. I lost 2 friends on that one as 1 of them was supposed to pick me up that day but I guess he forgot.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[AndyBoyd 0]

I was at the DZ that day and scratched off the load that went in. I won't go into the details, other than to say it was absolutely devastating.

As far as the question, why didn't prosecutors charge the DZO or anyone else with manslaughter, the simple answer is most likely because the prosecutors didn't see what happened as a crime. And even if they did, they probably didn't think they could prove it. I've never heard of anyone being criminally prosecuted for a plane crash. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened somewhere, it's just very unlikely. Also, the DZO would have made a very sympathetic defendant. He lost 2 sons in that crash, and it would have looked absolutely heartless to prosecute him. The bottom line is that this just wasn't the type of incident that lends itself to criminal prosecution. Honestly, I doubt the prosecutors gave it much thought, if any at all. These things are usually hashed out through civil lawsuits.

[captain1976 0]

Thanks for your input Andy.

I too never heard of criminal actions myself in the US regarding aviation incidents, but this one had many illegal acts connected to it and I'm sure it was considered by some.

Up until the early 80's, illegal entries and documentation in the US were punished by civil penalties only, then it became a crime punishable by 5 years prison time for each entry.

Additionally, there were others involved besides the person who lost 2 son's.

Many other countries tend to criminally prosecute in any aviation negligence case and I'm sure it will eventually happen here, especially where illegal maintenance, entries, etc are involved.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[strop45 0]

See http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/243595-fatal-crash-blamed-incorrectly-assembled-tail-rotor-drive-shaft.html

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein

[captain1976 0]

Quote

See http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/243595-fatal-crash-blamed-incorrectly-assembled-tail-rotor-drive-shaft.html

Exactly!, Thanks

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[tdog 0]

I googled it, but it happened about 10 years ago, so I couldn't find it... But I remember it... I was driving a semi-truck loaded with lighting equipment for a concert in California, leaving the Colorado warehouse. We got stuck in a huge traffic jam on I-70 going up hill. I saw the road closed on the downhill side and a major accident. The radio said a truck lost control and hit two separate stopped motorists, a quarter mile apart, killing both, as it bounced from one guardrail to the other.

A few weeks later I heard on the news the truckdriver was charged with manslaughter and had to serve time in jail for driving a truck with improperly maintained brakes.

Why? His brakes had a failed component. Something buried inside the brake, not something the average driver would be able to see in a pre-trip inspection. He was driving a truck owned and maintained by someone else, and he was not assigned any maintenance duties, just driving.

I told my boss - "I don't need this S&*^ anymore, hire a professional truck driver, my CDL hereby expires." Anyone who has driven a truck knows how absolutely unfair the state patrols can be in weigh stations etc. (I got a $2,000 fine for 'defacing' my medical card when it got wet and the ink ran from another business card next to it in my wallet, but was still 100% legible.)

Googling looking for the incident - I found many other cases of truck drivers charged with manslaughter for incidents.

So it is an interesting question my aviation incidents, as others have posted, don't get the attention of prosecutors, but truck drivers are thrown under the bus even when they are driving someone else's rig and have no warning signs of problems...

Now that I told my story, be careful what you wish for. The truck story I just told is the opposite extreme... If all of a sudden the government decides to treat aviation like truck driving, skydiving instructors will soon be spending time in jail for Scott Lutz type incidents.

Although I agree, it sounds like the Hinkley incident you posted about is a case where maybe someone deserved a little more punishment as a deterrent for others to not do the same.

[stratostar 5]

It wouldn't have been the DZo who they would have been looking at. The engine in question was taken off a static display D-18 from PA. That Static display had been sitting for some time (years) it was then taken down and the motors sold as scrap or cores.

The one in questions was sold a a skydiving operator in south west Ohio where it sat (based NTSB & FAA records) for an additional 18 years without proper long term storage and exposed to the elements. It was then sold to Mr. Barron and transported to Hinkley and hung on the aircraft by a non A&P person who was strongly connected (staff) and or instructed by the person who sold the engine.

In 1998 or so, there was a skydiver safety expo @ SDC, some highly respected DZO's who attended that told me there was a presentation done by a retired NSTB go team member. this guy worked the hinkley crash and had made comments to the effect that "he couldn't understand why a dzo from SW Ohio was not in prison for 12 counts of manslaughter" I was not there and didn't hear this first hand, however I don't doubt the people who spoke of this event... ALL names are blacked out in the NTSB report, but it's not real hard to follow the dots for a good idea of who they were talking about, all you need to know is your skydiving history.

Mostly I find it all very easy to believe based on the past actions of the person who sold the engine in question and his well known years of corner cutting on aircraft MX and over all operations. I strongly believe had the events of 9-11-01 not happened this guy would have in fact been in a court of law on a number of other charges from the DOT related to aircraft & skydiving operations.

The good news is these kind of outlaws are a dying bread in the industry today , there are only a few left and they are getting old in age, so sooner then later they will be out for good.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[captain1976 0]

Quote

It wouldn't have been the DZo who they would have been looking at. The engine in question was taken off a static display D-18 from PA. That Static display had been sitting for some time (years) it was then taken down and the motors sold as scrap or cores.

The one in questions was sold a a skydiving operator in south west Ohio where it sat (based NTSB & FAA records) for an additional 18 years without proper long term storage and exposed to the elements. It was then sold to Mr. Barron and transported to Hinkley and hung on the aircraft by a non A&P person who was strongly connected (staff) and or instructed by the person who sold the engine.

In 1998 or so, there was a skydiver safety expo @ SDC, some highly respected DZO's who attended that told me there was a presentation done by a retired NSTB go team member. this guy worked the hinkley crash and had made comments to the effect that "he couldn't understand why a dzo from SW Ohio was not in prison for 12 counts of manslaughter" I was not there and didn't hear this first hand, however I don't doubt the people who spoke of this event... ALL names are blacked out in the NTSB report, but it's not real hard to follow the dots for a good idea of who they were talking about, all you need to know is your skydiving history.

Mostly I find it all very easy to believe based on the past actions of the person who sold the engine in question and his well known years of corner cutting on aircraft MX and over all operations. I strongly believe had the events of 9-11-01 not happened this guy would have in fact been in a court of law on a number of other charges from the DOT related to aircraft & skydiving operations.

The good news is these kind of outlaws are a dying bread in the industry today , there are only a few left and they are getting old in age, so sooner then later they will be out for good.

Stratostar,

I'm not sure about the DZ not being involved in at least having knowledge of the engine.

I know about the "outlaw" you are speaking about and I figured there must have been at least a collective effort between the parties in a decision to hang that piece of shit engine.

And that engine "did not" come from a static display in PA.

If that's what the full NTSB report says "I haven't read it", it's contrary to what was reported in the interviews and investigation.

The only static display that engine came from was as a display in high grass along side a hanger in Florida. It was sold as a "core" only.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[stratostar 5]

You know what.... I'm recalling you & I comparing notes on this subject a few years back, in regards to the "sold as scrap or cores"..... The first paragraph is was not meant to say it was in the report... the later stuff is in the report as to chain of custody, time line of events, names blacked out, happen the be the only time in years of inspections of log books by the FAA that those very log books were "in the plane" and not in the off site location they were those other times (wink wink)... all that really good shit is in the reports but with the names blacked out you have to play connect the dots and know a little history, it's not that hard to do.

Regardless of the small detail mis-stated you & I along with along with a number of other people how fucked up that whole deal was, yes they had to have known the condition, yes there had to be more then one party in the know as to the condition prior to take off roll. The really big shit is and was pretty hard to mis.

I have to look I'm pretty sure I have copies of the redacted reports. This subject has been posted about before and believe there are more detailed reports posted in those threads if you can find them.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[strop45 0]

Quote

Quote

See http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/243595-fatal-crash-blamed-incorrectly-assembled-tail-rotor-drive-shaft.html

Exactly!, Thanks

And they were ultimately found guilty ....

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein

[Jumperintheair 0]

A very interesting read from the Chicago Tribune, has a lot of detail on the engines history....

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-06-03/news/9306030181_1_plane-ntsb-fiery-crash

[stratostar 5]

Interesting how that (even for media) fills in some blanks that are later redacted in published documents. It also answers a few questions or I should say clears up a few smaller details that have become "telephoned gamed" over time. this and that

Thanks for posting the link.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[captain1976 0]

Quote

You know what.... I'm recalling you & I comparing notes on this subject a few years back, in regards to the "sold as scrap or cores"..... The first paragraph is was not meant to say it was in the report... the later stuff is in the report as to chain of custody, time line of events, names blacked out, happen the be the only time in years of inspections of log books by the FAA that those very log books were "in the plane" and not in the off site location they were those other times (wink wink)... all that really good shit is in the reports but with the names blacked out you have to play connect the dots and know a little history, it's not that hard to do.

Regardless of the small detail mis-stated you & I along with along with a number of other people how fucked up that whole deal was, yes they had to have known the condition, yes there had to be more then one party in the know as to the condition prior to take off roll. The really big shit is and was pretty hard to mis.

I have to look I'm pretty sure I have copies of the redacted reports. This subject has been posted about before and believe there are more detailed reports posted in those threads if you can find them.

I though you sounded familiar.

According to the news article, the 17 years sitting outdoors would simply have been a rough estimate by the NTSB.
I only reported to them that the engine sat outside for at least a couple of years before I sold it as a core about 1990.

There were no maintenance records or logs either and I never would have believed that this engine core would end up unserviced and installed on an airplane that killed 2 of my friends.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[jackwallace 3]

They probably don't do it, because how many CEO's, engineers from aircraft companies that have made crappy airplanes would be busted. Then you'd work your way through military contractors who've screwed our troops with carp. And on and on.

U only make 2 jumps: the first one for some weird reason and the last one that you lived through. The rest are just filler.
scr 316

[fencebuster 7]

Every prosecutor knows how to drive. Very few know how to fly airplanes and even less have a clue what is involved in being a pilot.

Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

[dpreguy 14]

Be careful what you wish for, you may get it. A quote attributed to many, the latest of which was Colin Powell.

Negligence, defined, is failing to abide by some sort of standard. Medical malpractice/ civil,cases, and indeed, professional malpractice of any sort, (accountants, lawyers, riggers, or just about any practice or profession subject to licensing), is covered by jury instructions to the effect that "doctor X failed to perorm his medical duties up to the standard of similarly situated physicians...or up to the standards of recognized texts covering the procedure, or the instructions of the manufacturer of a medical device,"...etc yadda yadda. This standard is the same for all practitioners licensed by a governmental entity, whether the case is civil or criminal.

Negligence has only "recently" been transferred to
our criminal laws. Negligent manslaughter is used when you are a DWI driver(realize that the DWI is the criminal act which is required to be proven first) and a passenger is killed, child abuse, locking the door of your factory in violation of a fire code regulation and your employees are burned to death because they can't get out, etc etc.. Lawmakers have, and continue to pass criminal laws which use a negligence standard of some kind, and, in my opinon, have gone quite overboard. If a 16 year old child tips over his dad's tractor and is killed, a parent leaves a child in a car on a hot day, oil company executives possbly charged for oil rig fires caused by inadequate oversight, etc; all now bring a review by a prosecutor for the possible filing of manslaughter/criminal charges, based upon the shifting definition of negligence. Manslsughter, by definition, is the unintended causing of another's death. Unintended causation of death is the defintion in every manslughter case.

There is gross negligence, reckless conduct, wanton conduct, willful conduct, criminal negligence(begs the question of it's own definition), the list goes on, all used to justify the bringing of charges. Some are entirely justified, and are necessary for the regulation of citizen conduct, as are all criminal laws. A jury or a judge is then called to decide whther such negligent conduct is so eggregious(define eggregious as criminal, whch sometimes relates in juror's minds to the severity or not so severe=numbr of deaths or suffering or something) results) as to fit the definition of "gross" "criminal" "wanton disregard" etc. (read -crimal negligence) to warrant a conviction.

Careful in hoping errors and negligence applies to skydiving/aviation etc. The guy who fixes your brakes and the brakes fail, the guy who prepares your food at a restaurant, (I know they aren't licensed by a governmental entity , but neither is a jumpmaster or a coach)and you get sick, or die or something, (remember, in some sates, it doesn't always have to cause a death to warrant a conviction for resultant injury for the application of negligent conduct,) you may be included. (Injuries are enough in some jurisdictions) An incident may easily move from civil negligence to the criminal arena, so easily and so often that the distinction between civil and criminal is blurred. Application of the defintion should not be influenced on a case by case basis, by the number of deaths or the suffering or any other aggravating factor. Just because it is a tradgedy, should not alter the standard. The same standards should be applied to all cases. I suppose that engineers who designed a bridge in a negigent manner, reulting in dozens of deaths could be cimially charged 25 years later? (Assume the negligence was only recently discovered bythe investigation.) A stretch?

For example, in skydiving: If a mfg says a Service Bulletin is "mandatory" "recommended" "advisory" or some other term used to describe the SB, then the failure to comply with the SB could be grounds for prosecution? Hmnn... only if it is Mandatory? If a jumper says to the rigger, "It is my decsion not to comply with a SB, so pack it anyway", and the rig is then sold to an unsuspecting buyer and .....well, one could debate whether a manslaughter accusation should or could be made. Removal of an RSL from a rig that comes fron the factory with one, simply removing the RSL lanyard from a rig at the owner's request, ("I do camera, I do CRW"), rigging errors of any type, packing a reserve w/o the battery replacement acc to the mfg. (old Cypres'), failing to hook up a static line , or hooking it up to an inadequate anchor point, (old school) and a hundred other examples in skydiving and aviation alone, can and shoud bring hesitation and worry , lest every mistake, and judgement call be criminalized. OK I realize the brake mechanic, the mother, and the cook at the restaurant aren't licensed), A&P's, rigger's and pilots are, and the list goes on. Overusing the standard of negligence in your own state,"Gross" "Criminal" "Wanton disregard" or what ever wordsmith term is used, might bring a lot more persons prosecuted than you could imagine, for behavior one may agree was just a mistake, but with a death consquence. I am aware the term "overuse' will vary from reader to reader, so this is couched as a comment, expressing my opinon.

My opinion: Maintain and limit the manslaughter accusations to the 'DWI resulting in death' and other causes of deaths which we all probaly would agree with, as representing the most necessary applicaion of negligent manslaughter charges to regulate citizens' behavior, and not encourage or push the charging standard to the areas of A&P errors, rigging errors, pilot erros, farm accicents, etc..

This is my opinion, as a former elected District Attorney, who had the respnsibility of determining wheter charges should be brought.

Tjis is not a comment to the effect that all, and all forms of negligence be immune from manslaughter charges. There are many that should be maintained and prosecuted. I prosecuted them myself. It is just a comment to the effect that classifying too many forms of mistakes as conduct waranting criminal conduct could result in way too many unjustified manslsughter accusations.

This entire post is my opinion. You may repectfully disagree.

When I use the term "you" I am not referring to the poster. I appreciate the poster's bringing this issue to light.