Dan Gryder Arrested!

t0r0nad0

t0r0nad0

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
2,078
Location
Houston, TX
Display Name
Display name:
PJ Gustafson
Dan Gryder, the guy who does DC-3 flight training in Georgia (where Steve Tupper, aka Stephen Force got his type rating), got arrested for allegedly trying to hit police with his airplane.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,574345,00.html

Personally, I didn't realize it was a crime to drive your car across a runway at a small private strip, but it sounds like he could have just handled this better by accepting the ticket and fighting it in court. Details are a bit sketchy though, will be interesting to see what comes of this.
 
Last edited:
This has been on the red board for a couple days.

It sounds like it could have been handled better from several sides but the pilot certainly screwed the pooch when he drove the aircraft directly at LEOs.

At least he wasn't totally nuts as evidenced by the fact he refused to depart with insufficient fuel. At least he didn't bend the aircraft or hurt anyone.
 
t0r0nad0 said:
Personally, I didn't realize it was a crime to drive your car across a runway at a small private strip,
Click to expand...
It is at that airport -- the county ordinance regarding that was posted on the Red Board. And I don't think it was a private strip, either. In any event, he's now looking at two felonies and possibly losing his pilot certificate instead of maybe just a fine for the driving violation. Y'gotta be smarter'n a box'o'rocks.
 
I don't frequent the red board, so I never saw it there. First I saw it was today. I agree, he definitely made things worse for himself.
 
t0r0nad0 said:
Dan Gryder, the guy who does DC-3 flight training in Georgia (where Steve Tupper, aka Stephen Force got his type rating), got arrested for allegedly trying to hit police with his airplane.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,574345,00.html

Personally, I didn't realize it was a crime to drive your car across a runway at a small private strip, but it sounds like he could have just handled this better by accepting the ticket and fighting it in court. Details are a bit sketchy though, will be interesting to see what comes of this.
Click to expand...

Not a private strip...the public Griffin Airport.
 
This is disturbing stuff. :frown2:

Obviously, all the details are not out yet (it seems highly unlikely he'd be preparing to take off alone in a DC-3, for example), but it seems he let his temper get the best of him.... and he's gonna pay dearly for it. And this is not going to help the reputation of GA overall, that's for sure.

Sometimes you have to suck it up and "be the bigger man", especially if you're in the flying business.
 
Or possibly a Brain Tumor. The police didn't say he acted intoxicated so it could be something organic that made him act so odd.
 
Clark1961 said:
This has been on the red board for a couple days.
Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance.. but..

Who is the Red board.. who is the Blue board.. who is the purple board..

I'm sure that they are various alphabet org homepages or flying forums.. but.. who has the secret decoder rings to know which is what..

message me privately if its verboten to actually divulge the state secrets in THIS forum..
 
I suspect that the board is now meeting to discuss the fate of der Bockleperson for openly divulging the secrets of the colors. Oh! what will be his end!?!
 
Interesting that he would get a ticket for crossing the runway with his car. At an airport I used to fly out of, one night after 11pm I came in for a landing. As I approached the runway I saw something on it and opted for a low approach to verify that the runway was safe to land on and not blocked. Turns out that what I saw was the local gendarm racing his squad car down the runway.

When he saw me trying to land he vacated the runway. I came around for another landing. He approached the plane but stayed away and then finally left the airport without saying anything.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
So what's it's claim to fame?
Click to expand...

It's *orange*. My eyes now hurt from a few minutes of perusing and it seems there are semi-permanent vertical orange bars in my vision.

Other than the orange part I see nothing particularly remarkable.

SkyHog said:
From perusing, "Ron's House Discussion of Rules and Regulations" makes me laugh and really want to be a member.

Is it invite only?
Click to expand...

No.
 
Clark1961 said:
It's *orange*. My eyes now hurt from a few minutes of perusing and it seems there are semi-permanent vertical orange bars in my vision.

Other than the orange part I see nothing particularly remarkable.
Click to expand...

If I have this right, the Purple Board was started because of some (somewhat egregious, in my opinion) moderation decisions on the AOPA forum, and the Orange Board started in reaction to moderation on the Purple Board. While we won't run out of colors any time soon, I am not looking forward to the fuchsia board.
 
steingar said:
If I have this right, the Purple Board was started because of some (somewhat egregious, in my opinion) moderation decisions on the AOPA forum, and the Orange Board started in reaction to moderation on the Purple Board. While we won't run out of colors any time soon, I am not looking forward to the fuchsia board.
Click to expand...
The Blue board, interestingly enough, started because the old AOPA board (yellow board) was not regulated enough and was shut down.
 
tdager said:
Not a private strip...the public Griffin Airport.
Click to expand...

My bad.

rottydaddy said:
This is disturbing stuff. :frown2:

Obviously, all the details are not out yet (it seems highly unlikely he'd be preparing to take off alone in a DC-3, for example), but it seems he let his temper get the best of him.... and he's gonna pay dearly for it. And this is not going to help the reputation of GA overall, that's for sure.

Sometimes you have to suck it up and "be the bigger man", especially if you're in the flying business.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Now Delta has suspended him pending the conclusion of the investigation. Meanwhile, he still sits in jail, to be arraigned today. If the reports are true, I hope they throw the book at him - he made us all look bad and threw away his career because of a temper-tantrum. However, I really hope that the reports are grossly inaccurate.

http://www.ajc.com/search/content//printedition/2009/11/13/printpilot1113.html

smigaldi said:
Interesting that he would get a ticket for crossing the runway with his car. At an airport I used to fly out of, one night after 11pm I came in for a landing. As I approached the runway I saw something on it and opted for a low approach to verify that the runway was safe to land on and not blocked. Turns out that what I saw was the local gendarm racing his squad car down the runway.

When he saw me trying to land he vacated the runway. I came around for another landing. He approached the plane but stayed away and then finally left the airport without saying anything.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was curious about that too. He actually uses his car to drive around the taxiways/ramp as part of his DC-3 training program to simulate the traffic pattern and getting the trainees used to making the appropriate call-outs at the appropriate times.

Here's the blog post and link to the podcast episode where Stephen Force went through his program to get the DC-3 SIC type rating.

http://airspeedonline.blogspot.com/2008/06/dc-3-type-rating-summary.html
 
We don't know the mindset of the guy. Granted it's bad, but I read an account where he owed the FBO for fuel for like a month, he called up to request the fuel truck and he was denied. In this economy lots of people are hurting for cash, having to adjust their lifestyle (or not and suffering the consequences) and this guy was probably suffering from so much stress and something was the last straw and he broke into temporary insanity. :mad2:


The Purpleboard was begun because of big pilot hearts and a bicycle.
 
Let's hold off pitchforks and torches, eh?

Due process, innocent until proven guilty, right to trial by jury of peers, you know, all that boring stuff.


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
Let's hold off pitchforks and torches, eh?

Due process, innocent until proven guilty, right to trial by jury of peers, you know, all that boring stuff.
Click to expand...

You know it doesn't work that way around here. See Wagstaff, Patty, 1 each.

The know-it-alls fully realize that accused = guilty. :rolleyes: And there are never any extenuating circumstances. Ever. At least the courts know better on occasion...
 
t0r0nad0 said:
Indeed. Now Delta has suspended him pending the conclusion of the investigation. Meanwhile, he still sits in jail, to be arraigned today.
Click to expand...
In that case, he may be better off suspended -- that way he doesn't risk being fired for failing to show for an assignment.
 
Clark1961 said:
You know it doesn't work that way around here. See Wagstaff, Patty, 1 each.

The know-it-alls fully realize that accused = guilty. :rolleyes: And there are never any extenuating circumstances. Ever. At least the courts know better on occasion...
Click to expand...
But she was guilty -- by her own plea in court (at least to part of the charges). She's probably fortunate to have dealt her way down to what she eventually plead guilty rather than be tried and likely convicted on the more serious charges.
 
Clark1961 said:
You know it doesn't work that way around here. See Wagstaff, Patty, 1 each.

The know-it-alls fully realize that accused = guilty. :rolleyes: And there are never any extenuating circumstances. Ever. At least the courts know better on occasion...
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe not a great example for your point :frown2: :redface:
 
Ron Levy said:
But she was guilty -- by her own plea in court (at least to part of the charges). She's probably fortunate to have dealt her way down to what she eventually plead guilty rather than be tried and likely convicted on the more serious charges.
Click to expand...

alaskaflyer said:
Yeah, maybe not a great example for your point :frown2: :redface:
Click to expand...

It is clear that you two don't get it. I'll leave it at that.
 
Clark1961 said:
If you meant abstruse, no it isn't difficult to understand innocent until *proven* guilty.
Click to expand...

But Wagstaff pled guilty, no? Thus undermining the example? I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you here. Let me help you out with a better example:

Richard Jewell.

Discuss.
 
Clark1961 said:
If you meant abstruse,
Click to expand...
Yes, I did.
no it isn't difficult to understand innocent until *proven* guilty.
Click to expand...
One should keep in mind that the standards of proof vary widely between criminal cases, civil/administrative cases, and employment actions. However, even if one views the information presented in a light most favorable to Mr. Gryder, he appears guilty of extremely bad judgement even if he is eventually acquitted on the criminal charges against him. And even if that happens, he may still face suspension or revocation of his pilot certificate for violation of the FAR's.
 
Ron Levy said:
One should keep in mind that the standards of proof vary widely between criminal cases, civil/administrative cases, and employment actions. However, even if one views the information presented in a light most favorable to Mr. Gryder, he appears guilty of extremely bad judgement even if he is eventually acquitted on the criminal charges against him. And even if that happens, he may still face suspension or revocation of his pilot certificate for violation of the FAR's.
Click to expand...

Pretty hard to argue with that. It looks bad for him. Only time and the justice system will tell.
 
Ron Levy said:
Yes, I did.
One should keep in mind that the standards of proof vary widely between criminal cases, civil/administrative cases, and employment actions. However, even if one views the information presented in a light most favorable to Mr. Gryder, he appears guilty of extremely bad judgement even if he is eventually acquitted on the criminal charges against him. And even if that happens, he may still face suspension or revocation of his pilot certificate for violation of the FAR's.
Click to expand...

I never made a statement regarding the *appearance* of guilt or innocence. I merely pointed out the some folks in this forum did not embrace the concept that one is innocent until *proven* guilty. That is all I wrote. If you wish to turn it into something else then by all means, attack in that direction. I'm sure it will work out well for you. However, that attack will never address my point.
 
BTW - I think everyone should grab a pen and a piece of paper and take the following sentence down:

"A criminal is only innocent until proven guilty in a court of LAW."

I'm not a lawyer or a juror at the moment (nor was I when Patty Wagstaff went joyriding after drinking too much), so I get to say such things like "Patty Wagstaff is guilty."

The origin of the statement was never intended to be used on individuals. The court of public opinion is not a real court.

Thank you for your time.
 
SkyHog said:
BTW - I think everyone should grab a pen and a piece of paper and take the following sentence down:

"A criminal is only innocent until proven guilty in a court of LAW."

I'm not a lawyer or a juror at the moment (nor was I when Patty Wagstaff went joyriding after drinking too much), so I get to say such things like "Patty Wagstaff is guilty."

The origin of the statement was never intended to be used on individuals. The court of public opinion is not a real court.

Thank you for your time.
Click to expand...

Gee Nick it's not often I see something posted by you that I wished I had written myself :rofl: :cheerswine:
 
SkyHog said:
BTW - I think everyone should grab a pen and a piece of paper and take the following sentence down:

"A criminal is only innocent until proven guilty in a court of LAW."

I'm not a lawyer or a juror at the moment (nor was I when Patty Wagstaff went joyriding after drinking too much), so I get to say such things like "Patty Wagstaff is guilty."

The origin of the statement was never intended to be used on individuals. The court of public opinion is not a real court.

Thank you for your time.
Click to expand...

Well said Nick. My thoughts exactly!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top