Four pilots indicted

No, we just sue them en masse until we reach the back of their teeth. In fact, practically our entire medical experience in this country is colored by what you cite. The idea that it doesn't affect us just isn't true.

How many states will you be felony arrested in if you carry your medical ID on you?

Because lots of states will destroy my life if I were to simply carry one of my pistols there even if I never unholstered it.

And docs screwing up kill TONS more than guns

Flying EMS there were hospitals who were known in the industry as somewhere you REALLY didn’t want to end up, and I’m not going to get into that any further....

Look, I’m responsible for every round that leaves my gun, every thing that happens on my plane and every rule I may break in places like NY, NJ, CA where there are probably more rules than people, I think it’s rather childish for a doctor to think they are above reproach just because they eeked through medical school, and unfair to the artists of their craft to have to pay high dues because of the quacks who make a mess.
 
Do they have the same defense attorneys ? Unusual for federal defendants in paper cases to opt for trial.
Based on information in the case dockets, Asleson and Grant have at least one of their attorneys in common (they both have multiple attorneys). Chrisman has different attorneys, and Beyer is using Federal Public Defenders.

Based on my experience during Operation Safe Pilot, I think the defendants' and their attorneys' calculus is that Northern California jurors will be sympathetic to the defendants who were advised by government counselors to file for disability benefits when they separated from military service. It's pretty clear that the government has convincing evidence that they all violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), but juries get to decide if government counselors persuaded them to claim disability benefits and they were simply taking that advice and are not guilty of the charges.

I think it's a tossup whether they get convicted or not. The thing that really bothers me is the fraud aspect of these cases; the defendants were either flying with disqualifying disabilities or they were stealing taxpayer money. Either is wrong.
 
Based on information in the case dockets, Asleson and Grant have at least one of their attorneys in common (they both have multiple attorneys). Chrisman has different attorneys, and Beyer is using Federal Public Defenders.

Based on my experience during Operation Safe Pilot, I think the defendants' and their attorneys' calculus is that Northern California jurors will be sympathetic to the defendants who were advised by government counselors to file for disability benefits when they separated from military service. It's pretty clear that the government has convincing evidence that they all violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), but juries get to decide if government counselors persuaded them to claim disability benefits and they were simply taking that advice and are not guilty of the charges.

I think it's a tossup whether they get convicted or not. The thing that really bothers me is the fraud aspect of these cases; the defendants were either flying with disqualifying disabilities or they were stealing taxpayer money. Either is wrong.

Operation safe pilot?
 
Operation safe pilot?
Yes. Operation Safe Pilot was a joint "investigation" by the Department of Transportation Inspector General and the Social Security Administration in which the investigation consisted of a database match comparing the social security numbers of SSA Title 2 and Title 16 disability beneficiaries against the FAA medical certificate holders database, which was a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 as amended. It was a pilot program confined to pilots in Northern California. Forty pilots, including yours truly, were indicted on felony charges and prosecuted for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). The DOT-IG said that "hundreds more could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not been constraned."

https://blog.globalair.com/post/2018/10/01/Operation-Safe-Pilot-All-Over-Again
 

Attachments

  • Operation Safe Pilot and the Death of Privacy July 2018.pdf
    3.9 MB · Views: 433
Yes. Operation Safe Pilot was a joint "investigation" by the Department of Transportation Inspector General and the Social Security Administration in which the investigation consisted of a database match comparing the social security numbers of SSA Title 2 and Title 16 disability beneficiaries against the FAA medical certificate holders database, which was a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 as amended. It was a pilot program confined to pilots in Northern California. Forty pilots, including yours truly, were indicted on felony charges and prosecuted for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). The DOT-IG said that "hundreds more could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not been constraned."

https://blog.globalair.com/post/2018/10/01/Operation-Safe-Pilot-All-Over-Again

Damn!

Sorry to hear that.

Also per the pilots in question I still have yet to see evidence they weren’t “safe”. Perhaps they would have picked a better name.
 
Also per the pilots in question I still have yet to see evidence they weren’t “safe”. Perhaps they would have picked a better name.
Please file suggestions and complaints with the clerk at the Ministry of Truth.
 
Truth is a casualty in the current political environment.
Sorry, Stan. Truth is not just a casualty of the current political environment. Truth has been a casualty of pretty much every single political environment, ever. Certainly all since I've been aware enough to notice.
 
Truth is a casualty in the current political environment.


I read your writeup/attachment..

You sir have some major cojones and are a man of honor.
Putting all that VERY personal stuff in the open to expose injustice and backing that up with your own money, that is something to respect.
It's a shame you two both took the plea vs taking it to trial, but I get it you two could have been completely destroyed, sad that is what the gov does to "win", scare people into admitting to something.

It amazes me that even after courts found the government did wrong, the "supreme" court finds zero real damages for you, I'm sorry our country fell short of where she should stand and where many men believe she currently stands.

Most here are not into GoFundMe, but Id wager if you guys started one up and shared this on the aviation groups youd be able to raise some good money. I know Id kick in.
 
Last edited:
I read your writeup/attachment..

You sir have some major cojones and are a man of honor.
Putting all that VERY personal stuff in the open to expose injustice and backing that up with your own money, that is something to respect.
It's a shame you two both took the plea vs taking it to trial, but I get it you two could have been completely destroyed, sad that is what the gov does to "win", scare people into admitting to something.
Thanks, James. I'm writing a book about the whole fiasco. I don't care if nobody reads it, the exercise is cathartic for me and the facts will be out there for anybody interested. Russ spent about $150k on his criminal trial and it wound up in a hung jury; he didn't want to go through it again, and after his trial the idea of spending another $150k myself with an uncertain outcome didn't make sense, so I took the plea agreement knowing I would have standing to sue. The discovery we got during my lawsuit showing the extent to which the government went in covering up their criminality was golden. Talk about lying!
 
How many states will you be felony arrested in if you carry your medical ID on you?

Because lots of states will destroy my life if I were to simply carry one of my pistols there even if I never unholstered it.

And docs screwing up kill TONS more than guns

Flying EMS there were hospitals who were known in the industry as somewhere you REALLY didn’t want to end up, and I’m not going to get into that any further....

Look, I’m responsible for every round that leaves my gun, every thing that happens on my plane and every rule I may break in places like NY, NJ, CA where there are probably more rules than people, I think it’s rather childish for a doctor to think they are above reproach just because they eeked through medical school, and unfair to the artists of their craft to have to pay high dues because of the quacks who make a mess.
How many people engage a physician each day vs. how many people actively engage someone carrying a gun every day? The statistic you quote cites 35,416,020 hospitalizations. How many people do you think would die out of 35,416,020 direct engagements with a gunman? It's a preposterous comparison. Sure sounds good though.
 
How many people engage a physician each day vs. how many people actively engage someone carrying a gun every day? The statistic you quote cites 35,416,020 hospitalizations. How many people do you think would die out of 35,416,020 direct engagements with a gunman? It's a preposterous comparison. Sure sounds good though.
17 million conceal carry licenses in the US. Let’s say one in ten of those actually carries. Each one would only have to meet 20 people a day to exceed 35 million “direct engagements”. Well within the realm of possibility.
 
Vel123 -- sounds like you have some integrity. That's what they used to teach back in the good old days.

You don't "teach" integrity. You either have it or you don't. It's knowing the not so subtle differences between right and wrong...and acting on them.
 
17 million conceal carry licenses in the US. Let’s say one in ten of those actually carries. Each one would only have to meet 20 people a day to exceed 35 million “direct engagements”. Well within the realm of possibility.


Exactly. And that's ignoring the overlap in the Venn diagram created by legally armed physicians. :)
 
Chrisman superseding indictment filed yesterday, October 24, 2019. The government isn't messing around; the indictment now includes witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and contempt of court.
 

Attachments

  • Chrisman Document 42 10-24-2019.pdf
    3 MB · Views: 329
Last edited:
Apparently, the alleged witness tampering charge is related to Chrisman's Senior AME, William Brath, MD, in Los Angeles.

This doesn't look good.
 
It will be interesting to hear the evidence. The first two counts are the lying on the medical form. The others allege behaviors that could be pretty bad behaviors or the defendant trying to defend himself and that being construed in a certain way by the prosecutors.
 
Would be quite interesting. The prosecution’s statement of the facts in the indictment will always be slanted as much in favor of guilt as is possible without appearing utterly ridiculous.

Adding a bunch of charges is of course a way to try and put on pressure to induce settlement.

The lack of detail regarding the other charges is also interesting here and may reveal a weakness in those charges.
 
Would be quite interesting. The prosecution’s statement of the facts in the indictment will always be slanted as much in favor of guilt as is possible without appearing utterly ridiculous.

Adding a bunch of charges is of course a way to try and put on pressure to induce settlement.

The lack of detail regarding the other charges is also interesting here and may reveal a weakness in those charges.
Peter, there is a lot of detail in Chrisman's 54 page "Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence and Communications with Defendant Chrisman's Doctors and the Fruits Thereof." Judge Chhabria denied the motion.

I agree, it will be interesting to see how this turns out. It's the first of the four cases scheduled for trial, and the outcome may influence the remaining three cases.
 
There is a huge disconnect somewhere though. How is it possible to have all these charges against you and yet STILL have a Class 1 medical which is current? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Chrisman could still be flying around in a B737. That, to me, seems a little troubling.
 
There is a huge disconnect somewhere though. How is it possible to have all these charges against you and yet STILL have a Class 1 medical which is current? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Chrisman could still be flying around in a B737. That, to me, seems a little troubling.
From a safety point of view, I think it would depend on whether he really had the conditions that he told the VA he had, and if so, were they serious enough to be disqualifying.
 
There is a huge disconnect somewhere though. How is it possible to have all these charges against you and yet STILL have a Class 1 medical which is current? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Chrisman could still be flying around in a B737. That, to me, seems a little troubling.

Easy. He faked it on the VA entrance exam and what he told the AME is 'the truth'.
 
Easy. He faked it on the VA entrance exam and what he told the AME is 'the truth'.

Why do we not assume it to be the other way around though? We don't really have enough evidence to make an assessment. One is to conclude that he certainly lied somewhere along the line. Was he taking medication for his condition? What does his RX record look like? is there evidence of regular counseling for PTSD/depression?

It's all about damage control now. Suddenly the lies cease and he becomes forthcoming? I'm not sure his behavior/response shows a man who has remorse. No judgement, just making an commentary.
 
Peter, there is a lot of detail in Chrisman's 54 page "Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence and Communications with Defendant Chrisman's Doctors and the Fruits Thereof."

Most of the docket for this case is available for free now at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7740830/united-states-v-chrisman/ . Dkt #33 and its attachments do contain a fair amount of detail.

From what I can see there, the "witness tampering" may have consisted of asking Dr. Brath (acting as therapist) to write a letter that Dr. Brath already knew about the disability benefits which Chrisman was receiving. Dr. Brath did not do so. (Always dangerous to have any contact with the investigators or parties during an ongoing case and investigation. See for example the Martha Stewart case.)

The motions to suppress are interesting. Chrisman argued that the information on 8500-8 is compelled under threat of job loss in the case of professional pilots and that precedent in a prior case Garrity argues that such evidence is therefore immunized from use in a criminal proceeding as it is essentially compelled testimony in violation of the fifth amendment. The government argued that the AME is an agent of the government so HIPAA privacy does not apply and that the principles in Garrity only apply to employment of government employees. The motion to suppress was denied in the hearing and there is a transcript request for that hearing pending. I can see a possible appeal developing from this.
 
Last edited:
Appears from that evidence that Chrisman had suffered from alcoholism and was receiving disability for PTSD from the VA. At the same time failed to disclose such on the FAA aeromedical form or to the AMEs.

Like most psychiatric diagnoses, PTSD can be a fairly soft call. Dr. Brath thought he was not suffering from it at the last exam.

My speculation would be that Chrisman may have suffered from PTSD more severely earlier and just let the VA disability payments continue after it subsided and failed to disclose this to the AMEs or on the form. The facts at trial will be more informative.
 
Why do we not assume it to be the other way around though? We don't really have enough evidence to make an assessment. One is to conclude that he certainly lied somewhere along the line. Was he taking medication for his condition? What does his RX record look like? is there evidence of regular counseling for PTSD/depression?

I have no idea which one is the truth, I am just pointing out how a conflict between receiving a pension for a disqualifying condition and holding a first class medical can be logically resolved. The motions seem to indicate that its the other way around and that he doesn't actually suffer from the condition. There is a third possibility. He does have PTSD but it has none of the features that disqualify him from flying. The statements from the AME in the record indicate that he withdrew his approval of Chrismans medical after he learned about the PTSD diagnosis but that 'the FAA would allow him to fly for the time being and that he has 90 days to reply'. As it is now more than 90 days and the FAA has issued him several first class medicals since, they dont seem to think that his PTSD is disqualifying from flying an aircraft.

It'll be interesting to see whether what he discloses in the current proceedings will be used by the VA to claw back the pension benefits he received. Considering that all the interviews in the record were performed jointly by agents from OIG-DOT and OIG-VA, they are certainly familiar with the facts. We had a pretty egregious case of benefits fraud locally and sometimes they do decide to go after those pension abusers:
https://www.thebaynet.com/articles/...rged-with-stealing-820000-in-va-benefits.html
Given the political hullaboo around PTSD, they may just be reluctant to go after him on that issue as it would not be a question about whether he had the disease, only about the degree to which it was disabling.




These filings shine an interesting light on the oddities of the HIMS system. Some of Chrismans suppression argument hinges on Brath not only acting as a FAA AME but also as his personal psychotherapist. It should be a bit of a warning to those who use their personal physician as their AME (or vice versa). By signing the 8500, you pretty much allow the FAA to sit in on your doctors visit, you can't turn around afterwards and say 'but this part, this is is excluded'.

On the HIPAA issue and how the government interviewed those medical providers: As part of my work, I occasionally get involved as a witness for the government in criminal cases. It typically revolves around assault and child abuse. Before I say a word, I insist on receiving a court order signed by the judge compelling me to disclose protected health information. There have been disagreements between myself and the the young prosecutors who just want to move their case along, but without that judges signature and a specific direction to disclose PHI, all you get out of me is 'name, rank, number' (and no missy, that's not 'obstruction of justice' ;-) ).
 
Last edited:
Note that nobody has determined (at least not publicly) whether these guys are not fit to fly. All they have is a "failure to disclose" beef at its face.
 
Note that nobody has determined (at least not publicly) whether these guys are not fit to fly. All they have is a "failure to disclose" beef at its face.

I know that I for one don't ever want to get on a flight with this guy in the left or right seat. Sure, let him fly on a class 3 medical but I don't believe he has any business flying a commercial airplane, although the FAA disagree and that's all that really matters!
 
Note that nobody has determined (at least not publicly) whether these guys are not fit to fly. All they have is a "failure to disclose" beef at its face.

Just like the system of 'voluntary' taxation, the process relies on the pilots being honest. If the .gov finds out that someone subverts the process, they make an example of the offenders so the rest of us stay in line.
 
You’ll never be able to determine whether or not these guys were lying or not unless they fess up. That ain’t gonna happen.

They were smart in that they claimed things that are virtually impossible to disprove. Tinnitus, joint pain, depression, PTSD. These ailments / illnesses are easy to fake. I once saw a guy at work trying to convince himself he had tinnitus just after he was coerced by the VA rep to claim it. “Well I guess if you sit in a quiet room you can hear a ringing. Like in the audiology test.”

This is how easy it is to get 100 % disability.

 
And for every faker, there are 10 legit veterans who have to fight the VA at every turn to get the services or the level of disability they deserve. The fakers know exactly what form to file and how to get the letters from their doc worded to up their level of disability while the truly disabled just try to make it through another day.
 
I've got fairly profound tinnitus and have for years. It wasn't ever an issue on my medical until after I got my hearing aids. Frankly, I likely could have passed the medical if I hadn't disclosed I had the aids (my hearing is almost normal on the left), but the "Must use amplification" is about the most inane and trivial restriction you can get on a medical. I've not flown without an intercom in years. Radios always have amplification.
 
I've got fairly profound tinnitus and have for years. It wasn't ever an issue on my medical until after I got my hearing aids. Frankly, I likely could have passed the medical if I hadn't disclosed I had the aids (my hearing is almost normal on the left), but the "Must use amplification" is about the most inane and trivial restriction you can get on a medical. I've not flown without an intercom in years. Radios always have amplification.
I hope the FAA counts a headset as amplification.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top