YouTuber admits deliberately wrecking aircraft for 'views'
Thread Starter
YouTuber admits deliberately wrecking aircraft for 'views'
American Trevor Jacob has pleaded guilty to faking an engine failure and abandoning his aircraft over Los Padres National Park in California. His video was almost immediately debunked at the time, ironically mainly by YouTubers...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65567519
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65567519
It’s not that he crashed his plane that got him in trouble but that he interfered with the investigation. He told the Feds he didn’t know where the plane was but had been to the crash site just after impact and removed cameras and got a helicopter to remove the wreckage a few days later.
It’s not that he crashed his plane that got him in trouble but that he interfered with the investigation. He told the Feds he didn’t know where the plane was but had been to the crash site just after impact and removed cameras and got a helicopter to remove the wreckage a few days later.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr...e-video-admits
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-co...-agreement.pdf
Reading the plea agreement, it seems they are looking for 18-24 months, followed by a period of probation.
Somewhat less than the 20 years demanded by the punters in the other thread.
Intentional plane crash?
Somewhat less than the 20 years demanded by the punters in the other thread.
Intentional plane crash?
20 years seams stupid. It is not just about the rules you break, it should be about the damage you cause too. I'm okay with him being banned from flying&youtube,paying for any damages, and spending some time to think about it, but 20 years should be for those who really harm others.
20 years was the maximum allowable under the laws he broke - no one was saying he necessarily deserved that long a period. Had his plane injured or killed people on the ground or set fire I think that the upper limit would be in the government offering.
Also, what happened was neither an accident or a close call - he planned and executed an intentional plane crash in a National Park.
I see no benefit to the world to allowing him a private pilot's license. I suppose that leaves ultralights and powered parachutes if he wants a motor to go with him.
Also, what happened was neither an accident or a close call - he planned and executed an intentional plane crash in a National Park.
I see no benefit to the world to allowing him a private pilot's license. I suppose that leaves ultralights and powered parachutes if he wants a motor to go with him.
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: Seattle
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would argue that these two did something very similar for likes and views:
Clues; multiple camera angles for a routine flying lesson, zero startle effect with a long and coherent Mayday call, a “thank you Jesus” for the audience back home, the RPM gauge is pixelated out or obscured aaaand the engine never failed! They taxied to maintenance under normal power
What do others think?
Clues; multiple camera angles for a routine flying lesson, zero startle effect with a long and coherent Mayday call, a “thank you Jesus” for the audience back home, the RPM gauge is pixelated out or obscured aaaand the engine never failed! They taxied to maintenance under normal power
What do others think?
Moderator
What do others think?
For myself, I deliberately avoid watching any aviation YouTube videos which have a "watch me!" entry point to the video. My first clue will be dramatic sounding text diagonally across the title page....
What do others think that we pilots do our part to take the oxygen out of their room, and not watch?
20 years seams stupid. It is not just about the rules you break, it should be about the damage you cause too. I'm okay with him being banned from flying&youtube,paying for any damages, and spending some time to think about it, but 20 years should be for those who really harm others..
Clues; multiple camera angles for a routine flying lesson, zero startle effect with a long and coherent Mayday call, a “thank you Jesus” for the audience back home, the RPM gauge is pixelated out or obscured aaaand the engine never failed! They taxied to maintenance under normal power
What do others think?
What do others think?
I don’t think this video has any similarities to the Trevor Jacobs’ stunt.
The courts have long held that you cannot profit from crime, so I expect a fine big enough to negate anything he may have earned from the stunt to date, de-monetisation etc.
See https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/f...cing_Table.pdf for sentencing guidelines.
He has plead guilty as per a plea agreement. The penalty for the crime of obstructing a federal investigation is part of the plea agreement. However this must be approved by the federal judge before he is formally sentenced. The judge has some latitude within the sentencing guidelines and the plea agreement appears to fall within the lower part of the range for the crime committed. Lying to or deceiving treasury agents, the internal revenue service or the securities and exchange commission has gotten plenty of people a similar sentence of 18-24 months plus probation. He's getting what other people have gotten for a similar severity of crime.
Personally, I feel that a year or so (if he earns early release) in club fed, post incarceration probation and the FAA enforcement action to revoke his pilot certificate is a fitting set of penalties for what he has done. He was careless and reckless with regard to the safety of others. He allowed his plane to crash in a fire-prone National forest (not park) Then he lied to investigators, destroyed and disposed of evidence in an effort to hide his culpability. That displays a criminal intent and criminality calls for punishment. In addition to the above, he will also be a convicted felon for the rest of life. So in a very real way, he will be living with the consequences his behavior for the remainder of his life. As do we all.
Some felons are able to learn and change their life for the better. Many re-offend. It's up to him how he chooses to proceed with what's left of his life. Some people do better than others.
Personally, I feel that a year or so (if he earns early release) in club fed, post incarceration probation and the FAA enforcement action to revoke his pilot certificate is a fitting set of penalties for what he has done. He was careless and reckless with regard to the safety of others. He allowed his plane to crash in a fire-prone National forest (not park) Then he lied to investigators, destroyed and disposed of evidence in an effort to hide his culpability. That displays a criminal intent and criminality calls for punishment. In addition to the above, he will also be a convicted felon for the rest of life. So in a very real way, he will be living with the consequences his behavior for the remainder of his life. As do we all.
Some felons are able to learn and change their life for the better. Many re-offend. It's up to him how he chooses to proceed with what's left of his life. Some people do better than others.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,635
Received 300 Likes
on
168 Posts
He just released a YT clip with title "I Got My Pilots License Back! But Going To Prison...". 
Don't go find the clip & click on it, like I did. I stopped after a few minutes, although apparently realizing it was "a bad example for kids", at the same time still defending his actions: "I knew I was not going to hurt somebody"....
Don't go find the clip & click on it, like I did. I stopped after a few minutes, although apparently realizing it was "a bad example for kids", at the same time still defending his actions: "I knew I was not going to hurt somebody"....
There is a screenshot from that new video in this PetaPixel article: https://petapixel.com/2023/12/06/you...ing-his-plane/
In my view having an unrestrained dog in your lap, even as a passenger, is a safety issue. I guess he hasn't learned all his lessons yet.
In my view having an unrestrained dog in your lap, even as a passenger, is a safety issue. I guess he hasn't learned all his lessons yet.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
That would mean that approx. 25% of business jet flights would have a safety issue (at least in my statistics). As per our operating manual, there are designated "pet areas" for takeoff and landing, but during cruise passengers are free to have their dogs around them just like at home. Being able to carry on's pet along without much hassle is a strong selling point for private aircraft, as written in this article from a Textron customer journal: https://txtav.com/en/journey/article...ivate-aircraft