Plenty of previous discussion on HN, but IMHO the most interesting one was the early dissection of whether or not the crash was intentional: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29729307
YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
11–20 of 281 posts
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#12For me, the really interesting question is not if he's guilty - I had assumed as much - but if he will come out financially successful. That video had millions of views and a sponsorship deal. Call me a cynic, but it seems that some companies will deliberately break the law and pay the price if it's worth it, so why not independent hustlers.
A federal felony and a 6-month prison sentence, on their own, would almost certainly tip the scales to "not worth it". I wouldn't be surprised if there were also a disgorgement involved.
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#13Critically, he is not going to jail for intentionally crashing the plane. He is being jailed "for obstructing a federal investigation by deliberately destroying the wreckage of an airplane." Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine. Instead he did this: "In the weeks following the plane crash, Jacob lied to investigators that he did not know the wreckage’s location.…
Note, however, that this doesn't mean that he would have gotten away with it if he'd cooperated. It means that the federal prosecutor decided that the act of obstruction would be easier to prove, since the intentional nature of those acts is much more self-evident.
Is there a law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane? Honest question. There isn't a law that prevents you from intentionally crashing other vehicles. Just around property damage and endangering other people.
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#14Critically, he is not going to jail for intentionally crashing the plane. He is being jailed "for obstructing a federal investigation by deliberately destroying the wreckage of an airplane." Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine. Instead he did this: "In the weeks following the plane crash, Jacob lied to investigators that he did not know the wreckage’s location.…
Wow, that's a lot of expensive trouble to go through to cover up. I wonder what the penalties would be otherwise - I'm sure there is some kind of code it broke but it's not obviously illegal. It's like me crashing my car on purpose.
> sure there is some kind of code it broke but it's not obviously illegal
It's very illegal. Part 91 § 91.13 careless or reckless operation [1] and § 91.15 dropping objects [2]. (I'm studying for my pilot's license.)
Also, until SCOTUS rules otherwise, agency rules carry the strength of statute.
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#15Critically, he is not going to jail for intentionally crashing the plane. He is being jailed "for obstructing a federal investigation by deliberately destroying the wreckage of an airplane." Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine. Instead he did this: "In the weeks following the plane crash, Jacob lied to investigators that he did not know the wreckage’s location.…
> Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine.
Reminder of the quotation from Howard Baker (R-TN): “It is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble.”
Though some would disagree:
> There's this old line the wise folks in Washington have that 'it's not the crime, but the cover-up.'
> But only fools believe that. It's always about the crime. The whole point of the cover-up is that a full revelation of the underlying crime is not survivable. Let me repeat that, the whole point of the cover-up is a recognition that a full revelation of the underlying bad act is not survivable. Indeed, the cover-ups are usually successful. And that's why they're tried so often. Just look at this administration [in 2007]. They're the ultimate example of this truth.
* https://web.archive.org/web/20071026022311/https://talkingpo...
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note, however, that this doesn't mean that he would have gotten away with it if he'd cooperated. It means that the federal prosecutor decided that the act of obstruction would be easier to prove, since the intentional nature of those acts is much more self-evident.
Is there a law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane? Honest question. There isn't a law that prevents you from intentionally crashing other vehicles. Just around property damage and endangering other people.
Is there a scenario where intentionally crashing a vehicle on property that you do not have permission to crash a vehicle on isn't reckless endangerment/reckless driving? Except maybe steering away from the oncoming bus into the jersey barrier or something?
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#17For me, the really interesting question is not if he's guilty - I had assumed as much - but if he will come out financially successful. That video had millions of views and a sponsorship deal. Call me a cynic, but it seems that some companies will deliberately break the law and pay the price if it's worth it, so why not independent hustlers.
A federal felony and a 6-month prison sentence, on their own, would almost certainly tip the scales to "not worth it". I wouldn't be surprised if there were also a disgorgement involved.
It’s a big black mark on your reputation, it’s rarely worth it. He could have injured or killed someone for a video.
Crime doesn’t pay
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#18Critically, he is not going to jail for intentionally crashing the plane. He is being jailed "for obstructing a federal investigation by deliberately destroying the wreckage of an airplane." Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine. Instead he did this: "In the weeks following the plane crash, Jacob lied to investigators that he did not know the wreckage’s location.…
> Had he cooperated, it's plausible to see him getting away with a license revocation and fine. Reminder of the quotation from Howard Baker (R-TN): “It is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble.” Though some would disagree: > There's this old line the wise folks in Washington have that 'it's not the crime, but the cover-up.' > But only fools believe that. It's always about the crime. The…
> the whole point of the cover-up is a recognition that a full revelation of the underlying bad act is not survivable
There are numerous counter-examples to this claim. In many cases, it's obvious because the cover-up is of a civil infraction.
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note, however, that this doesn't mean that he would have gotten away with it if he'd cooperated. It means that the federal prosecutor decided that the act of obstruction would be easier to prove, since the intentional nature of those acts is much more self-evident.
Is there a law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane? Honest question. There isn't a law that prevents you from intentionally crashing other vehicles. Just around property damage and endangering other people.
> law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane?
No. We do crash tests from time to time [1]. But at a minimum, you must control--not even just own--the terrain you're crashing into. (It's also not solely a Part 91/FAA matter. The EPA, for example, would also want to have a say.)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Boeing_727_crash_experime...
Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note, however, that this doesn't mean that he would have gotten away with it if he'd cooperated. It means that the federal prosecutor decided that the act of obstruction would be easier to prove, since the intentional nature of those acts is much more self-evident.
Is there a law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane? Honest question. There isn't a law that prevents you from intentionally crashing other vehicles. Just around property damage and endangering other people.
It probably falls under Careless or reckless[1] at the very least 14 CFR 91.13.
EDIT: Looks like user JumpCrisscross beat me to it.
1: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...