I am not even certain he was found guilty. When found guilty people are sentenced to serve jail time or pay a fine. He was ordered on probation and to pay an assessment. This sounds like pre trial diversion.
As a condition of his probation, Cruise cannot own, operate, act as a consultant, be employed in, or participate in any manner in any aviation-related concern So does that mean he can never fly again?
Sounds like just for his probation term. I wonder if some good boy FAA narc ratted him out or the FAA discovered this on their own by looking for certain ads like he had posted.
Honestly, this guy was trying to run a true commercial operation on only a private license. He wasn't even close to being legal, just thought he was creative enough to BS his way out of it. I say good riddance.
"aviation related concern" means a business. He can fly privately. If you split $200 up across 150 flights, that's $1.33 a flight? Ok, tack that on as a service fee and it's a wash. We'll need a separate bill to figure out how much to add on for the lawyer's service fee though.
sightseeing is usually a part 91 op but yeah, still can't do it on a private cert nor without authorization
No. He got away on the criminal case with a guilty plea, a federal felony conviction, 3 years probation (including government access to all financial information special condition), and a $200 penalty assessment . In addition, his pilot certificates were revoked and the FAA is in the process of seeking an approximate $13,000 civil penalty.
Why do you think not? A federal statute specifically provides for it. As I reported above, He was found guilty, given probation, and had to pay a $200 "assessment."
Sure they do. Calling it an assessment is mostly semantics. Many times a sentence will include both fines and assessments. An assessment is more of a fee to defray court costs, and is charged at the same amount to everyone who is sentenced regardless of the offense.
Actually, the money collected appears to go to the victims: those that paid for a commercial pilot to fly them, when if fact it was a lowly private pilot. I'd figure it would be $200 per flight.
"Restitution" goes to the defendant's victims. The "special assessment" is a standard fixed fee per charge based on the level of the offense (misdemeanor or felony) and whether the defendant is a individual or an entity. In this case, Cruise was convicted of two felonies; the assessment for an individual is $100 per felony. It goes into a general crime victims fund which provides grants to (mostly) state crime victim of violent crime compensation programs.
So fill me in. I haven't been following this story. Is the guy qualified to fly the plane, does he have a multi-engine rating, IFR rating, Type rating, hours in type? If so, the only thing he is missing is a piece of paper, mandated by the FAA, to give him permission to do what he was doing. I'm not horrified or offended by really good pilots without papers doing what really good pilots can do. I am horrified and offended by really bad pilots with papers doing what really bad pilots do, because some agency gave them permission.
As I mentioned, they did. I don't know the sequence, but the revocation was probably done well before the FAA referred the case to the DOJ for criminal prosecution.
He's already proven that he's willing to fly without the proper license. Do you think that he will quit flying just because they pulled his privates. (Gee, that sounds bad but it's not.)
I was going to say he couldn't still fly legally, but then again he was already flying illegally. lol.
Typically has to wait a year after revocation to apply. It can be negotiated, but that's doubtful in a case like this. Once there, it's not only the checkrides. Also the knowledge tests. But yes, the hours count, although he still will need the 3 hours before the checkride.
In the workings of a federal courthouse, this seems rather small potatoes. The assistant associate deputy assistant US attorney who got that folder on his desk had to dispose of it in the cheapest and least involved way possible so he could move on to folder below it with the next federal crime of the century. Probably 'fishing for pelagic fish with a non-pelagic fish permit' or 'cutting the tag off a comforter prior to sale'.
One of the grounds for revocation is a 709 failure, but it is hardly the only one. Revocation is a penalty for a number of violations, most of which involve serious deviations such as fraudulent entries in applications or repeated violations. There are also mandatory revocations for a few things such as drug offenses.
The CFI I referenced in my pilot deviation story had all his tickets yanked.. He managed to get tehm all back and is now flying 121 flights.
