Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Crime Youtube

YouTuber Who Deliberately Crashed Plane For Views Is Headed To Federal Prison (yahoo.com) 122

Posted by BeauHD from the nice-try dept.
Trevor Jacob, a daredevil YouTuber who deliberately crashed a plane for views in a moneymaking scheme, has been sentenced to six months in federal prison. Jacob posted a video of himself in 2021 parachuting out of a plane that he claimed had malfunctioned. In reality, the aircraft was purposely abandoned and crashed into the Los Padres National Forest in Southern California. From a report: Jacob pleaded guilty to one felony count of destruction and concealment with the intent to obstruct a federal investigation on June 30. "It appears that (Jacob) exercised exceptionally poor judgment in committing this offense," prosecutors said in the release. "(Jacob) most likely committed this offense to generate social media and news coverage for himself and to obtain financial gain. Nevertheless, this type of 'daredevil' conduct cannot be tolerated."

Jacob received a sponsorship from a company and had agreed to promote the company's wallet in the YouTube video that he would post. [...] The release said Jacob lied to federal investigators when he filed a report that falsely indicated his plane lost full power approximately 35 minutes into the flight. He also lied to a Federal Aviation Administration aviation safety inspector when he said he had parachuted out of the plane when the airplane's engine had quit because he could not identify any safe landing options.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YouTuber Who Deliberately Crashed Plane For Views Is Headed To Federal Prison More

YouTuber Who Deliberately Crashed Plane For Views Is Headed To Federal Prison

Comments Filter:
  • Please tell me this person will never be able to legally fly another aircraft. This guy shouldn't even be able to fly a mini drone.
    • That's a decision for the FAA, not the court.

      • Possibly not if the Supreme Court rules that EVERYONE is allowed their day in court, and not limited to bureaucratic rules.

    • Re:Is he banned from flying too? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Scutter ( 18425 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @08:34PM (#64055049) Journal

      His certificate was revoked in April 2022 with eligibility to reapply after one year, but the Airmen Registry still lists him as having no valid certificate and his medical expired last month.

      • Wow, is there no such thing as a lifetime ban?
    • The FAA pulled his certificate

  • if he caused a fire (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zeiche ( 81782 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @08:35PM (#64055051)

    los padres isn’t exactly overflowing with water. if that asshat caused a fire that destroyed habitat and communities, what would he do? say he’s sorry?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      what would he do? say he’s sorry?

      Many, many, many times, hopefully to deaf ears.

      • Re:if he caused a fire (Score:4, Insightful)

        by christoban ( 3028573 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @09:56PM (#64055247)

        I'll never understand the vindictiveness of some people. He did something super stupid and dangerous, but he also made sure to do it in an area where the chance of hitting something was very low and he's doing 6 months in federal prison, and he will likely never fly again.

        That seriously isn't enough for you?

        • Re:if he caused a fire (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @11:13PM (#64055377)

          This was not a crime of passion; it was very deliberately planned and a cost/benefit analysis was done. It was not the sort of thing where the chances of getting caught are easily dismissed.

          In short, it's exactly the sort of thing that harsh punishments work on when you're trying to stop others from doing similar things. Which you should be interested in, because there are channels you can go through to do things legitimately so we can be reasonably assured no third parties will be killed, injured, or suffer properly losses.

          Should he spend life in prison, no. But six months and then having this dog him for the rest of his life seems about right.

          • Re:if he caused a fire (Score:4, Insightful)

            by christoban ( 3028573 ) on Tuesday December 05, 2023 @12:02AM (#64055447)

            This was not a crime of passion; it was very deliberately plannedand then having this dog him for the rest of his life seems about right.

            Whatever happened to paying your dues, then being left the fuck alone? What else, exactly, should be heaped on him for the "rest of his life?"

            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Baron_Yam ( 643147 )

              >Whatever happened to paying your dues, then being left the fuck alone?

              Crime isn't like buying something and once you pay for it you're done. Unless there are extenuating circumstances, for the rest of your life you're "someone who has proven they will commit crimes like [x]".

              You don't, for instance, murder someone and do your dime and walk out like nothing happened. You're always going to be a murderer. With some work, you might get an asterisk after that with the notation "possibly reformed". You

              • Re:if he caused a fire (Score:5, Insightful)

                by Mr. Dollar Ton ( 5495648 ) on Tuesday December 05, 2023 @01:15AM (#64055529)

                for the rest of your life you're "someone who has proven they will commit crimes like [x]"

                And what do you base this conclusion of yours on?

                The Communists of Soviet Russia (and all similar regimes, Nazi or otherwise) liked to keep a perpetual tab of "crimes" for everyone, so that anyone could be controlled throughout their lives through fear of punishment.

                In many cases, a the punishment took the form of perpetual denial of opportunities, even based on "crimes" their ancestors "committed" (which, naturally, weren't crimes at the time) was also imposed.

                Sounds like you'd have been right at home over there.

                Incidentally, I don't see your outrage at the sponsor of this behaviour, which is strange. Should you not demand that the company that agreed to pay the bills and the owners and management should be similarly marked?

                • Ah. My fault. I've seen your ID before and I should have remembered you have reading comprehension issues and ignore arguments and simply post what you like as a 'response'.

                  • It is always funny when someone makes a stupid argument and then when called out runs away quoting IDs. What does my ID mean other than that I lost an email account years ago? My first ID here was almost exactly 1/12 of yours. By your logic, your reading comprehension issues are then 12 times larger than mine. Go fix em :)

                    • I'm curious now, are you actually not understanding plain English, or just ignoring it because it doesn't support your rants?

                      Your retort has nothing to do with my post. You're just throwing irrelevant shit hoping it'll stick. You argue like a child.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by mjwx ( 966435 )

                  for the rest of your life you're "someone who has proven they will commit crimes like [x]"

                  And what do you base this conclusion of yours on?

                  The Communists of Soviet Russia (and all similar regimes, Nazi or otherwise) liked to keep a perpetual tab of "crimes" for everyone, so that anyone could be controlled throughout their lives through fear of punishment.

                  In many cases, a the punishment took the form of perpetual denial of opportunities, even based on "crimes" their ancestors "committed" (which, naturally, weren't crimes at the time) was also imposed.

                  Sounds like you'd have been right at home over there.

                  Incidentally, I don't see your outrage at the sponsor of this behaviour, which is strange. Should you not demand that the company that agreed to pay the bills and the owners and management should be similarly marked?

                  Odd, that also describes the US where you have to tell future employers, banks, land lords, et al. whether you've been in prison.

                  • Yep. We have Lexus Nexus.

                    And for that literally anyone can pull criminal history on anyone, anytime, back to 18 years of age. No need for potential employers to ask you.

                    This nation used to be called the "land of second chances." Now you have credit scores that keep people in medical debt from even renting a fucking apartment, and wide open criminal databases that keep you unemployed for decades for stealing a book from the library.

                • "The Communists of Soviet Russia (and all similar regimes, Nazi or otherwise) liked to keep a perpetual tab of "crimes" for everyone" .... "the punishment took the form of perpetual denial of opportunities"

                  Sounds like the US for at least a century. Commit a variety of felonies and it follows you til the day you die. Want to vote, nope. Want a student loan, nope. Want to apply for a processional license, nope. Want to live certain places, nope. Want to get certain jobs, nope. And there's more that I'm not ev

              • Whatever happened to paying your dues, then being left the fuck alone?

                Crime isn't like buying something and once you pay for it you're done.

                As an aside, it is very interesting to me how these two different viewpoints are exemplified by the posters. We often have subconscious values that are so very deeply ingrained that we feel they are universally applicable to all people - but they aren't. Being busy reading The WEIRDest People in the World [wikipedia.org], I am amazed at all these type of differences - having an

              • The truth is between these two places:

                Here in the US, with the fact that any arrest is public, even if one was picked up for mistaken identity, or at the wrong place/wrong time, they now have to deal with that on their arrest record for the rest of their life. Even though they are not convicted, many employers have a philosophy of, "A conviction can be bought, but if a cop thought someone was guilty enough to pull out the handcuffs and book them, they ARE guilty in our eyes, and we are not hiring them."

                Eve

                • i agree with you about most European police being better trained than most US police, but, on the other hand, the punishment is intended to be equivalent to the crime, in some way... that is why there are such a wide latitude for punishments, for example, misdemeanor speeding here where i live, is punishable by UP TO 1 year in prison and/or UP TO $2500 fine. The judge (and jury if allowed) are supposed to look at all the particulars of the crime and your demeanor and such and then make a judgement about wha
              • regrettably, reforming a prisoner is NOT always the goal. in several places in the USA, the goal is punishment. Nothing else.

                • in several places in the USA

                  Understatement of the century. There are fucktards everywhere. Lots right here on this comment section.

                  • well, I was trying to not be too negative. It actually costs less to to reform a prisoner than it does not to, I mean, in the long run, it would reduce recidivism, which would save a ton of money. But "Fucktards" as you say only want to punish people and complain about the high cost of incarcerating them.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Sounds like Baron_Yam would prefer for him to be poor and unable to rebuild his life, but not so poor that he feels he has no choice but to rob Baron_Yam's house or end up in prison again where Baron_Yam's taxes get to pay for his accommodation.

              If we can't reform criminals and give them the opportunity to become productive, tax paying members of society again, we have to accept that we are creating a criminal underclass and have to pay the associated cost.

              • >Sounds like Baron_Yam would prefer for him to be poor and unable to rebuild his life, but not so poor that he feels he has no choice but to rob Baron_Yam's house or end up in prison again where Baron_Yam's taxes get to pay for his accommodation.

                You seem to have no ability to understand there is a large potential continuum of outcomes between 'not quite destitute enough to die / be forced into crime' and 'same as everyone else'.

                I've also found that people who are so keen on reform as a magic reset button

              • He’s rich and he risked it all for a big payoff. I say leave him penniless so he has to sleep under a bridge (and get eaten by a troll)

              • 100%. If a former criminal can not find work because they forever wear the brand of 'felon', then one should EXPECT that, in order to feed themselves/their family, they will continue being a criminal. I used to volunteer in a prison and counsel prisoners. MANY can not find work once they leave, because of that brand they wear.

                • I know that, as a software developer, every job does a background check. I even had a bank turn me down for unpaid parking tickets in Denver. There isn't an employer I've ever met that would hire a felon. Not for any remotely decent job.

                  My brother had a felony at age 19 and every single job since then, to this very day, he's absolutely terrified they'll go past the customary 7 years.

                  We need a constitutional amendment to end these vindictive and cruel practices.

                  • Of all the prisoners I counseled I know of ONE that got a job at an HVAC place, they gave her a chance because she was up front about her incarceration and agreed to start at a lower rate... that was 8 years ago, now she is office manager at a second location that they opened up because of her hard work and diligence. the other girls I counseled, well, not so lucky as that.

            • I'm not asking them to force the sale of his kidneys. Flying is definitely a luxury item, not a right, and if he loses that luxury for life I see that as a justified punishment given the responsibility of those who fly airplanes and how callously he shirked it.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by taustin ( 171655 )

              Some crimes require paying your dues for the rest of your life.

              Especially when you conclusively prove you're so broken that you can deliberately, in a cold blooded manner, plan something as dangerous as crashing an airplane on purpose in the middle of a forest. This guy can never be trusted to not endanger other people's lives.

            • in the USA once you are a felon, there are many things that follow you around for the rest of your life, for examplle, you are not allowed to purchase a firearm legally as a felon (yes, you can petition the governor of your state for that right to be reinstated, but the governor is under no compulsion to reinstate it), i am pretty sure there are other rights you lose as well. Unfortunately, the concept of paying your debt to society and starting over with a clean slate no longer exists as a matter of course

          • I think actually demonstrating that people get caught is enough to deter others.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by taustin ( 171655 )

          If you'd bothered to read what I replied it, it wasn't about what actually happened, it was about what might have happened. So, if his stunt had caused a fire, no, the punishment for not causing a fire would not have been good enough for me.

          Dumbass.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          I'll never understand the vindictiveness of some people. He did something super stupid and dangerous, but he also made sure to do it in an area where the chance of hitting something was very low and he's doing 6 months in federal prison, and he will likely never fly again.

          That seriously isn't enough for you?

          He also did it on purpose. It's the difference between murder and manslaughter - the latter is when you kill someone (by accident or otherwise). Murder is when you actually intended to kill someone. Ther

        • He's not in the most trouble for his stunt.

          He's in the most trouble for attempting to conceal evidence of his stunt.

          If he had done it and owned up to it he would have probably just lost his license and paid a fine.

          Concealing evidence costs us all money. Fuck that guy.

          • 100%, and lying to a federal investigator is itself a huge thing. Trying to conceal evidence as well? well, now you know just how much of a criminal he is, not just some guy who had a huge insurance policy on his aircraft and decided to crash it to cash out, but a guy who did that, then lied about it as he was trying to conceal/destroy the evidence

    • los padres isn’t exactly overflowing with water. if that asshat caused a fire that destroyed habitat and communities, what would he do? say he’s sorry?

      Jacob received a sponsorship from a company and had agreed to promote the company's wallet...

      Dunno. Maybe we should ask the asshats who literally sponsored this asshattery. Wasn't done just for the shits and clicks.

  • "It appears that (Jacob) exercised exceptionally poor judgment in committing this offense," prosecutors said in the release. "(Jacob) most likely committed this offense to generate social media and news coverage for himself and to obtain financial gain. Nevertheless, this type of 'daredevil' conduct cannot be tolerated."

    I'm glad the prosecutors didn't let Jacob's noble goals cloud their judgement.

  • It was the lying that got him (Score:5, Interesting)

    by deepthought90 ( 937992 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @09:07PM (#64055111)
    Look at what he was convicted of. Crashing the plane deliberately wasn't all that bad. He got in some trouble with his license being taken away/suspended, but it was in the middle of nowhere where there wasn't a big threat to persons or property. The hazarding argument only had so much bite. What really got him was lying to government officials and destroying the plane before the NTSB could examine it.

    • Re: It was the lying that got him (Score:4, Interesting)

      by LindleyF ( 9395567 ) on Monday December 04, 2023 @10:22PM (#64055293)
      Mythbusters crashed a 727 a few years ago. That was legal. It was also much more authorized.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by mjwx ( 966435 )

        Mythbusters crashed a 727 a few years ago. That was legal. It was also much more authorized.

        I suspect that if had of been authorised and "staged" (I mean staged properly) then it wouldn't have gotten all the likes and views he wanted.

        TV shows do this kind of stuff all the time, In series 2 of Top Gear they launched a car from the catapult of a RN aircraft carrier and that wasn't even the start of it (including dropping a beetle from mile up to see if it could hit the ground faster than a 911 could do a standing mile. They'd be sued out of existence if this wasn't authorised.

        Also I suspect th

      • Mythbusters crashed a 727 a few years ago. That was legal. It was also much more authorized.

        Not Mythbusters, it was a different Discovery Channel show, and they crashed it in Mexico because the FAA would not approve it.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Boeing_727_crash_experiment

    • Karma demands that he should have roman candled his way to the ground as part of his stupid stunt.

      For the unaware ... roman candling your parachute, or whatever you call that bad situation, is definitely A BAD THING to have happen to you.

    • It remains to be seen if he is convicted of other charges as he was convicted of obstruction. There are still possible federal charges for crashing and removing a plane in a National Park. However part of his plea deal was to admit his actions so another charge is far easier.

    • " the middle of nowhere" still has people and property. If someone is letting something the size if an airplane randomly drift to crash on properly THAT ISN'T theirs, I want the government to do whatever they can to prevent and deter that. Honestly, many people have gone to jail for longer than 6 months for a DUI that didn't result in bodily harm or damages. He got off easy.

  • Good. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Chas ( 5144 )

    This kind of stupid clout-chasing needs to die in a fire, after having all its limbs broken and being forcibly emasculated with a dull spoon.

  • I never understand light sentences for crap like this. I'd throw him the can for years.
  • Especially Youtube! (and all other social media like sites)

  • Felonyâ¦ouch (Score:3)

    by sonoronos ( 610381 ) on Tuesday December 05, 2023 @01:46AM (#64055579)

    Six months in a Federal Prison isnâ(TM)t as bad as six months in a state pen. Even as far as misdemeanors go, six months is a short sentence. The felony conviction, however, will probably stop copycatters.

    • Six months in a Federal Prison isnâ(TM)t as bad as six months in a state pen. Even as far as misdemeanors go, six months is a short sentence. The felony conviction, however, will probably stop copycatters.

      It seems sufficient to me. They don't really need to destroy this guy's life -- though they probably could if they had stacked up all of the charges available, rather than settling for the easiest-to-prove charge, obstruction -- they just need to make sure the world knows that this sort of thing is really not acceptable. They just needed the headlines "YouTuber who deliberately crashed plane going to prison for felony". Mission accomplished.

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close