Ron 7 #26 December 1, 2005 QuoteRegardless who did what and whose fault it was...if anyone's. The fact is i'm sure Gus signed a waiver just like everyone else who skydives. Ultimately this means if you jump and get killed as a result of your skydive....no matter whose fault, you indemnify them for any liabilities for any accident or injury you sustain during skydiving operations. You can't sign away negligance no matter what the waiver states. And as someone else pointed out, signing a waiver does not in any way effect Criminal cases. Case in point, if a 17 year old girl wants to sleep with a 25 year old guy, it is still rape no matter how willing she was. QuoteAssuming the pilot didn't "run him down like a dog" the pilot - dz and everything else included cannot be held responsable for this most unfortunate incident. If the pilot was reckless or careless it is still a crime no matter how many waivers you signed. Now I know all involved and I don't think it is the case, but it is the Polices job to look into ALL angles."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Otter8 0 #27 December 1, 2005 License was not reinstated, the pilot accepted a 270 day suspension. Further, the term Accident in the FAA's eyes is a term of art, not to mean accidental, but to define the level of the incident. reference NTSB part 830. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #28 December 1, 2005 QuoteDo you really expect a cop who has no interest in skydiving of flying to know all they need to know about flying? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- but dont you think they should look at what the faa and the ntsb has found? that would be part of their job, and i hope they are doing their job correctly, if they are, then everything should be fine. I am sure they will. If not the DA will look at it. Police collect evidence and offer opinions, but only the DA can bring charges. My point was that the knee-jerk defense is quite common, but many times wrong. How many times have we seen someone die and a bunch of people jump to that persons defense with no facts and no clue about the details? Also calling the cops looking into this "Stupid" just makes them more likely to head hunt later. It also just widens the hate gap of skydivers in DeLand. So those that jump on the "Bill is innocent and the cops are just stupid and out to get us" bandwaggon are just making things worse. Is there a personal vedetta? Maybe. But the best course of action is to let it play out and trust that the NTSB and FAA reports will tell the DA that the cops don't have the whole picture. For what its worth..My opinion. All pilots have a responsability to see and avoid. Yes Gus was in the "Wrong" area. And I do not think Bill was in the wrong. But he still has a responsability to see and avoid. Example. I am driving home from work. I am in a lane, lights on, not drunk, not speeding....doing everything right. A kid runs out in front of me and I kill them. I am not guilty of a crime, but pedestrians have the right of way and I hit the kid. The police will arrest me if they think they should and may even ask the DA to press charges. The DA will look at the evidence and make a choice to bring charges. In this case I don't think Bill was criminal. I have very little doubt that the DA will look at the NTSB and FAA reports and not press charges."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #29 December 1, 2005 QuoteWhy shouldn’t he be held accountable for his actions or at the very least, heavily scrutinized? Because people make mistakes. And as long as they are not criminal they should not be drawn and quartered. He has been held accountable. He had his ticket revoked and then just a suspension. Still its how he makes a living so they took his job for a year. QuoteCould someone please explain to me why Gus's family is supporting the pilots actions? Because they know that Bill would not do anything like that on purpose. Also they recognize that it was an accident."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #30 December 1, 2005 Uh, Dog? QuoteSkydivers who are in freefall and under canopy should have “right of way”. I know the laws are currently written to say that neither party can lay claim to a specified airspace. They do have right of way. The powered aircraft must give right of way to the non-powered. And though the parachute is not an "aircraft" in the US, the operations the pilot was conducting would call for it. Right of way is besides the point though. Pedestrians have right of way over cars, but if someone jumps out in front of you with no time to react, you won't be held responsible for manslaughter. As discussed earlier, there are some spots you just can't see form the plane's cockpit... you don't want to be over the runway under canopy when the plane is on final. QuoteThis is foolish because skydivers don’t have wings. We fall straight down at high speeds and... The jumper was under canopy so unless it was a round, he had a wing. Quote...can’t always “spot” an aircraft if it decides to fly over our dropzone unexpectedly. The plane was the DZ's. It had just released the jumpers. It was expected to land at the DZ in order to take up another load. It didn't fly over the DZ unexpectedly and nobody had to "spot" it... just not be over the runway under canopy. QuoteNow the inevitable has finally happened. This was completely avoidable... by not being over the runway under canopy. QuoteWhy are we so eager to let this pilot walk away from a fatality? Because all signs point to it wasn't his fault. There are people who's job it is to investigate, and decide if we are wrong. QuoteWhy shouldn’t he be held accountable for his actions or at the very least, heavily scrutinized? He is being heavily scrutinized and if he bares responsibility, he will be held accountable. Do you have some info that the FAA, FLA police, DZO, Jumpers involved and posters to DZ.com do not? Please share, if you do. QuoteI’m sick of that “one big happy family” excuse. We are not a big happy family. And just like any other family, you show us that there is a degree of disfunction. That's okay Dog, we love you anyway. lol QuoteCould someone please explain to me why Gus's family is supporting the pilots actions? Well, likely because they don't want to see another life destroyed when it can be prevented. I don't know the family or anyone involved, but they defend the pilot, likely because they knew what Gus did involved a degree of risk, and that he had them aware that they should not lay blame on someone else, should he ever get hurt. Unless of course, there was a degree of gross negligence involved.... I take it they feel there isn't one, as they seem to think the charges are ridiculous. As is wanting blood, without knowing what occurred. Nick Note: My point of view depends on the fact that the pilot was on final, on course with the runway and hadn't veered off of it for some reason. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #31 December 1, 2005 QuoteI'm not saying the pilot isn't a good man, he may be Jesus reborn for all i know BUT he was responsible for flying a plane into a person under a canopy.... if he saw the person its muder/manslaughter or if he didn't see the person its just manslaughter And if it was not criminal then no charges would be filled. QuoteI'd be pretty fucked off if a pilot chopped my legs off under canopy at 600 feet, nomatter how hard he tried to protest he didn't see me. How can he not see a person under canopy? was he flying backwards? Are you a pilot? Do you know how much work there is on landing?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #32 December 1, 2005 QuoteI'd be pretty fucked off if a pilot chopped my legs off under canopy at 600 feet, nomatter how hard he tried to protest he didn't see me. How can he not see a person under canopy? was he flying backwards? Ever landed a plane? When nose-down, you're blind to airspace above and infront of you. You do not want to be over the active runway, under canopy, when the plane is due to land. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #33 December 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteScrewball DeLand PD. There are so many things wrong with what they're doing, I've lost count. Being a little hard on them. Maybe this is too close to home for you. Before people jump my shit, I knew Gus and know Buchmann. Bill was flying a plane that hit a person under canopy. Accident? YES. But a person under canopy has the right of way being that they are less able to get out of the way than a plane. If the police think that the pilot was acting in a reckless manner they ask the DA to bring charges. If the police do not know better they would rather mess up and ask the DA to bring charges than do nothing and maybe let a criminal escape. Not saying Bill is guilty of anything. In fact he is one of the few pilots I trust 100%. Do you really expect a cop who has no interest in skydiving of flying to know all they need to know about flying? Many people on here making comments of how "stupid" the police are are not much more trained or knowledgable in aircraft ops than the police. Most are just knee-jerk reacting and jumping to defend a friend or fellow airman. Yet they claim the cops who are trying to do their job are "stupid". Do I think Bill is guilty of anything? NOPE. Do I think the police are trying to do their job? YEP. Do I think that some people need to relax and trust that if Bill is innocent, he will be found innocent? YEP. The cops are just trying to do their job and knee-jerk reactions yelling the cops are stupid don't help. Good post, Ron. This topic has been missing such objective views. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #34 December 1, 2005 I never thought I would see the day when you were the calm voice of logic and reason in a thread and I would agree with you pretty much 100%. Go figure.......... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #35 December 1, 2005 QuoteI never thought I would see the day when you were the calm voice of logic and reason in a thread and I would agree with you pretty much 100%. Go figure.......... Soon you will agree more and more.....HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Don't worry it only hurts the first time. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #36 December 1, 2005 QuoteI never thought I would see the day when you were the calm voice of logic and reason in a thread and I would agree with you pretty much 100%. Go figure.......... I am right there with you...Never in my life would I have thought I'd agree with Ron of all people. But in this case I believe he is right. The DA is the one who ultimately brings charges...NOT the cops. The police can only bring the evidence they have to the DA to make a choice if it was a criminal act or an accident. Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #37 December 1, 2005 In my opinion, ANYONE who jumps in Deland lands in an area "at risk" given the proximity of the active runway AND how busy that airport is....that's why I chose not to jump there very much...it's the closest to my house in Orlando, but I've never felt good about landing in the middle of THAT mess of aircraft. Last time I jumped there I noticed on the video afterwards...there were 4 aircraft in the air within a few hundred feet of me and there were the same number taxiing as well. Most of the traffic at Deland appears to be (correct me if I'm wrong) student pilots from Embry Riddle in Daytona....low experience pilots to boot... i still think this was simply a tragic accident like the FAA and NTSB appear to have decided - and as a previous post pointed out THEY are the experts in these situations - NOT a small town PD - do they even have ANY type of aircraft???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salsa_John 0 #38 December 1, 2005 I support RL on this. There is a reason he was called Bill "by the book" man. He is one of the best pilots I know and I trust him 100% QuoteQuoteScrewball DeLand PD. There are so many things wrong with what they're doing, I've lost count. Being a little hard on them. Maybe this is too close to home for you. Before people jump my shit, I knew Gus and know Buchmann. Bill was flying a plane that hit a person under canopy. Accident? YES. But a person under canopy has the right of way being that they are less able to get out of the way than a plane. If the police think that the pilot was acting in a reckless manner they ask the DA to bring charges. If the police do not know better they would rather mess up and ask the DA to bring charges than do nothing and maybe let a criminal escape. Not saying Bill is guilty of anything. In fact he is one of the few pilots I trust 100%. Do you really expect a cop who has no interest in skydiving of flying to know all they need to know about flying? Many people on here making comments of how "stupid" the police are are not much more trained or knowledgable in aircraft ops than the police. Most are just knee-jerk reacting and jumping to defend a friend or fellow airman. Yet they claim the cops who are trying to do their job are "stupid". Do I think Bill is guilty of anything? NOPE. Do I think the police are trying to do their job? YEP. Do I think that some people need to relax and trust that if Bill is innocent, he will be found innocent? YEP. The cops are just trying to do their job and knee-jerk reactions yelling the cops are stupid don't help. "You did what?!?!" MUFF #3722, TDSM #72, Orfun #26, Nachos Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #39 December 1, 2005 QuoteI support RL on this. There is a reason he was called Bill "by the book" man. He is one of the best pilots I know and I trust him 100% That still does not change how the police are doing their job and attacking them will not help anyone, but make matters worse. I have known Bill and Gus for almost 10 years. I don't think either was stupid. But accident aside calling the police "Stupid" while claiming they were out to get someone, will not make this situation or the relationship between skydivers and the city better. We have some people on here who think "Prop wash" is a cleaner for propellers and who think "Legal briefs" are what judges wear under their pants making comments about flying and law. They are doing it to defend Bill. Its a normal reaction. But attacking the police is just going to make things worse."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 3 #40 December 2, 2005 QuoteWe have some people on here who thing "Prop wash" is a cleaner for propellers and who think "Legal briefs" are what judges wear under their pants making comments about flying and law. They are doing it to defend Bill. Its a normal reaction. But attacking the police is just going to make things worse. I know quite well what "prop wash" is, and I certainly know what "legal briefs" are. My opinion is not only my own but that of two well-respected local lawyers with whom I've discussed this, one of whom is a pilot, and both of whom know exactly what a joke is this entity we call the DeLand PD. Further, they are out to get him. One of them very plainly said so, recently, in no uncertain terms, i.e., "We're going to get him." The State Attorney's Office is going to hold out until the NTSB report is filed--wait and see--and if nothing comes of that, they have nothing. But the whole thing has been total horse-pucky since the day our brilliant local dimwits got this bright idea to go after Bill. Thank God for John Wing. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #41 December 2, 2005 QuoteMy opinion is not only my own but that of two well-respected local lawyers with whom I've discussed this, one of whom is a pilot, and both of whom know exactly what a joke is this entity we call the DeLand PD. Insulting people never fixes things, it only causes more problems. QuoteFurther, they are out to get him. One of them very plainly said so, recently, in no uncertain terms, i.e., "We're going to get him." Cops often say they are gonna "get" someone. They could say that thinking they have proof of wrong doing...Like I don't know, a rumor that Bill and Gus used to race to the ground? If I were a cop and heard that, I would say I would get the guys involved. QuoteThe State Attorney's Office is going to hold out until the NTSB report is filed--wait and see--and if nothing comes of that, they have nothing Which is 100% what they SHOULD do. QuoteBut the whole thing has been total horse-pucky since the day our brilliant local dimwits got this bright idea to go after Bill. The rumor was they were racing and those "dimwits" looked into it. My whole point was that you coming on here and attacking the DeLand PD is not going to help matters at all. The police are doing the job they are trained and paid to do."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #42 December 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteI support RL on this. There is a reason he was called Bill "by the book" man. He is one of the best pilots I know and I trust him 100% That still does not change how the police are doing their job and attacking them will not help anyone, but make matters worse. I have known Bill and Gus for almost 10 years. I don't think either was stupid. But accident aside calling the police "Stupid" while claiming they were out to get someone, will not make this situation or the relationship between skydivers and the city better. We have some people on here who think "Prop wash" is a cleaner for propellers and who think "Legal briefs" are what judges wear under their pants making comments about flying and law. They are doing it to defend Bill. Its a normal reaction. But attacking the police is just going to make things worse. Your points are measured and balanced. Unfortunately, there is a bit of blind loyalty going on here that prevents some from seeing them and view anything other than a solid defence of Bill as being against him.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 3 #43 December 2, 2005 QuoteUnfortunately, there is a bit of blind loyalty going on here that prevents some from seeing them and view anything other than a solid defence of Bill as being against him. Has the point been lost on some of you what Gus' brother does for a living--he's an FAA Aviation Medical Examiner--and what he has had to say about this whole thing, particularly in his letter to the editor of the Daytona Beach News-Journal? I suppose he's also blindly loyal to Bill. As for the cop, he had much more to say--that was just one quote, sorry--and it was clear from the conversation that there is a vendetta. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #44 December 2, 2005 Ron, I don't see how cops 'doing their job' means a presumption of guilt when all the preliminary findings are pointing the opposite direction. If the PD makes a statement presuming no charges at present, they can still change course later should new findings warrant it. Be a lot better for the pilot too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kflying 0 #45 December 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteBuchmann should still be charged with manslaughter and reckless or careless operation of an aircraft. Wasn't he on final approach for landing? On an active runway, I'm guessing with radio contact? Unless he was operating outside of standard landing config. (airspeed, approach, flaps, etc), I don't see how you could classify his actions as reckless or careless. I can't believe that the Deland PD doesn;t have an FAA liason in on this. How do the cops know what normal flight ops. are? Addtionally, didn't the FAA just reinstate his ticket? When was the last time they did that without an investigation of the accident? The cops need to let this one go. I'm sure there's a half blind, senile senoir citizen making havoc on the roadways out there somewhere that needs attending to. I flew jump planes for many years, IMHO, my responability for the jumpers did not end when they exited the aircraft. I would count canopies while I descended - paid attention to them while juggling airspeed, aircraft avoidance and "observors" on board. Again - it's just MHO - I needed to "see and avoid" the canopies - I was higher and faster. When I was in doubt about "where they were", I'd go burn a few more gallons away from where "they might be." The argument that "he was in a standard landing pattern" simply ignores the responsability the "higher and faster" person has. And to even mention "radio contact" demonstrates a complete ignorance of basic safe operating procedures - was the jumper using a radio to "announce and declare landing intentions"? WHere does the basic safety rule of "see and avoid" enter into the "radio contact" mindset? Landing an airplane is EXACTLY the same as landing a parachute - smart people plan the landing long before the "landing pattern" - maybe I am demonstrating my age when I mention that part of spotting on jump run is planning where a round reserve opening at 1,000 (or lower!) feet will land? A truly competant jump pilot is planning his landing based on not just the "normal airplane landing procedures" but also on where his load is AT ALL TIMES! And yes - that is complicated when multiple jump aircraft are dropping loads. When that is a reality, the pilot's responsabilty extends to the other loads as well. To fall back on the "in the standard landing pattern" argument is as wise as saying, " I was waiting at a red light - it turned green so I went forward without looking left or right and suddenly I was hit." Arrgghh - let's stop making excuses. Lower and slower has the right of way - higher and faster, when it does not yield, is always wrong.A male pilot is a confused soul who talks about women when he's flying, and about flying when he's with a woman. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #46 December 2, 2005 QuoteRon, I don't see how cops 'doing their job' means a presumption of guilt when all the preliminary findings are pointing the opposite direction. He *is* guilty of hitting Gus. The only question left was, "Is it criminal?" The simple fact is there is bad blood between some pilots at DeLand and the DZ. This does extend into the politics of DeLand as well. However, if you were a cop and people you trusted were telling you that these two did dangerous things ALL the time. Betting for beer on who could land first for example. And you had several more people saying the same thing...Well you would believe them over the skydivers who always band together in an accident. And those same skydivers are calling the cops "Stupid" and saying the cops are fucked up. Who would you believe if you were the cop? Remember Skydivers have the image of drunkards, drug users, and partiers. And WE create that image. We make movies with nudity and make big budget movies with skydivers being drug runners. Pilots have a much better image. We create the "wild" image and celebrate it when we want it and then cry when people think it of us when we don't. I'd bet the police have more bad dealings with Skydivers than pilots. Calling the cops stupid does not help."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #47 December 2, 2005 QuoteRegardless who did what and whose fault it was...if anyone's. The fact is i'm sure Gus signed a waiver just like everyone else who skydives. Ultimately this means if you jump and get killed as a result of your skydive....no matter whose fault, you indemnify them for any liabilities for any accident or injury you sustain during skydiving operations. Assuming the pilot didn't "run him down like a dog" the pilot - dz and Agreed... The waiver is the point. Doesn't matter if they did agree to race the waiver is the point.. Doesn't matter if the pilot fucked up "which I think he did" the waiver is the point.. We've all done screwball things that could get us killed.. That's half the fun.. We've all dove with an otter or king air.. Hung from wings.. done crazy shit.. That's what makes this sport so damned fun.. I know what the waiver means and so do we all.. My family has specific instructions not to EVER sue anyone if I die skydiving.. I knowingly and willingly put myself in that position.. As do we all.. Leave the pilot alone.. Stand by the waiver.. Just like WFFC2002 with the helo accident rotor strike.. Doesn't matter if they agreed to the high speed fly by so he could get some cool video.. The waiver stands and should stand... Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 3 #48 December 2, 2005 Ron, you haven't spent enough time in DeLand to know what the situation is between the town and the dropzone. Given that, your comments are without a specific (to DeLand) factual basis. That said, let's talk about who we listen to and who we trust: Letter to the Editor The Daytona Beach News-Journal October 30, 2005 I am responding to recent articles in the media about the tragic death of my brother, who was struck by an aircraft at Skydive DeLand in April. Knowing the particulars of the case, my contention is that there was incomplete police work by investigators inexperienced in aviation accidents, with hasty and self-serving media reporting, creating additional and totally unnecessary heartache for the family. How can they get it so wrong? My brother and Bill Buchmann have been convicted through the media, apparently in response to information released by the DeLand police. I do know I was never contacted, even though I told the DeLand police I might have some insight into the accident. Gus and I had our first parachute jumps together nearly 30 years ago and I am familiar with his pervasive safety consciousness. I am currently an FAA Aviation Medical Examiner and have some knowledge of the pilot community, and I have been the medical officer on numerous investigation boards involving military aircraft fatalities. Now the family reads of alleged behavior so out of character for these two close friends that any conclusions are patently suspect. Gus was no daredevil and Bill is a good pilot. These conclusions are self-evident: Daredevils don't have nearly 30 years of safe skydiving experience; and reckless pilots don't have more than 5,000 safe flights. The animus that exists between Skydive DeLand and some in the local community is apparently a motive in what must be viewed as a dubious investigation. My brother's death was tragic and accidental, and should not be used for activist purposes. John Wing, M.D. Lebanon, Pa.If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #49 December 2, 2005 The waiver has nothing to do with this - waivers only relate to civil lawsuits. This is about whether the DA's office is or is not going to decide to pursue criminal charges. I sure hope they don't. But the police can only recommend; it's the DA that makes the decision. I think the most useful comments in this thread are those counseling everyone to take a deep breath and exercise calm, and restraint. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #50 December 2, 2005 QuoteRon, you haven't spent enough time in DeLand to know what the situation is between the town and the dropzone. Given that, your comments are without a specific (to DeLand) factual basis. Really? I have been jumping in Deland since 1996 on a regular basis. Was on a team FROM there for three years. My ex-wife was a manifestor there, I met her there and got married to her there. I guess almost 10 years of jumping there does not count"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
