First of 4 Pilots indicted for lying on Medical is Sentenced.

[Juan Alicea]

GREGORY JAMES CHRISMAN was sentenced 09/15/2020 to two years probation, lost his pilot certificates and it's unemployed.

Chrisman previously worked as a commercial pilot, and this prosecution arises from false statements that Chrisman made on medical certifications submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). These certifications are known as Form 8500-8s.

In August 2018, Chrisman was charged with two counts of making false statements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), for claims made on his December 10, 2017 and June 24, 2018 Form 8500-8s. ECF No. 1. As relevant here, the indictment alleged that Chrisman falsely certified that he had never received any medical disability benefits on both Form 8500-8s, even though he had been receiving medical disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Chrisman’s Post-Indictment Conduct In December 2018—after being charged—Chrisman visited an AME named Dr. William Brath. Dr. Brath reviewed Chrisman’s Form 8500-8s between at least 2012 and 2017.1 At that time, Chrisman told Dr. Brath that he had been receiving disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. ECF No. 59-2 at 2 (FAA OIG Memorandum of Interview, Dr. William Brath). “Until then, [Dr.] Brath had no idea Chrisman was receiving VA disability benefits.” Id. at 2–3. Despite this lack of knowledge, Chrisman then asked Dr. Brath to write a letter falsely stating that Dr. Brath had already known about the benefits, and also falsely stating that Dr. Brath had advised Chrisman not to report receiving those benefits to the FAA.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

The wonderful way in which the FAA can cast a very wide net with the medical requirements. </sarcasm>

 

[Juan Alicea]

Well I guess the question that they are getting caught is not a relevant question in my opinion because it targets a certaint type of people which are veterans and retirees

 

[weilke]

At the point when he did this, the fact that the FAA cross-checks with other government databases was hardly a secret.

 

[bbchien]

The wonderful way in which the FAA can cast a very wide net with the medical requirements. </sarcasm>

Chrisman is a liar and got what was coming. Then he tried to tamper with testimony. He was very lucky to not end up in club fed,for which the prosecutor argued.

One down, 30 to go. As most of you know I FIRE liars.

Florian, Pres. “O” combined the databases. Big brother has thus become legally competent to catch these guys....

 

[Juan Alicea]

30? There’s only 3 left the others received a 1,200 fine and one year probation

 

[bbchien]

Google “27 pilots indicted”...and get back to us...

 

[Juan Alicea]

From 1988??? That’s the only one with 27 indictments...... 22 years is not news

 

[Juan Alicea]

The last indictments were the four pilots that were using VA benefits and were working as commercial pilots. There’s no more cases. All other cases have been dealt with

 

[midlifeflyer]

Chrisman then asked Dr. Brath to write a letter falsely stating that Dr. Brath had already known about the benefits, and also falsely stating that Dr. Brath had advised Chrisman not to report receiving those benefits to the FAA.

"My AME said it was ok to say 'no'" is rarely a winning defense, even if true.

 

[Fracpilot]

The last indictments were the four pilots that were using VA benefits and were working as commercial pilots. There’s no more cases. All other cases have been dealt with

From what I understand about the cases, it’s not only they lied about receiving VA benefits, but what they were claiming as a VA disability would’ve disqualified them for a first class medical. I believe the Delta pilot was claiming PTSD with meds and getting 100% disability pay. You obviously can’t hold a first class while taking any mental health meds.

This guy was already making plenty of money as a Delta pilot making 6 figures. Why risk it all over an additional $3k a month?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[midlifeflyer]

For anyone interested, the court docket is recreated on this site. Some of the documents require a PACER account but many relevant ones do not. If you scroll down to document #95, you will see the Government's sentencing memorandum and its exhibits exhibits are available for viewing and download. Bear in mind this is only the Government's position for sentencing purposes.

 

[Doc Holliday]

 

[Doc Holliday]

Well I guess the question that they are getting caught is not a relevant question in my opinion because it targets a certaint type of people which are veterans and retirees

No, it targets people lying on federal documents.

 

[PaulS]

Seems like a more than fair sentence. The guy is not the bright bulb in the circuit.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

At the core of it, was Chrisman actually a dangerous pilot? Did he endanger his passengers or his employers business due to a medical deficiency?

 

[DaleB]

Hmmmmm, perhaps not the best illustration to accompany that saying, all things considered.

 

[flyingron]

I've gone and bought the indictment so that will be avaialble at midlifeflyer's link above now.

By the way, I don't see him as having been sentenced. The district attorney has filed a sentencing memorandum, essentially what they are recommending to the judge, but such filings are not binding on the judge (though I'm not sure this judge would go heavier).

The sentencing hearing is scheduled for October 19.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I've gone and bought the indictment so that will be avaialble at midlifeflyer's link above now.

By the way, I don't see him as having been sentenced. The district attorney has filed a sentencing memorandum, essentially what they are recommending to the judge, but such filings are not binding on the judge (though I'm not sure this judge would go heavier).

The sentencing hearing is scheduled for October 19.

That's right. He has not been sentenced. Sentencing is currently set for 10/19.
Minor nit: United States Attorney (US Attorney for short), not district attorney. They'd be insulted

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

That's right. He has not been sentenced. Sentencing is currently set for 10/19.
Minor nit: United States Attorney (US Attorney for short), not district attorney. They'd be insulted

Yes, they tend to have a very high and mighty opinion of themselves.

 

[flyingron]

By the way, the three added counts were dismissed. While it was alleged that Chrisman contacted the AME in the matter, that doesn't constitute a crime under the laws that were invoked in those counts (or at least that was the sense that the judge seemed to be heading in one of the hearing transcripts anyhow).

 

[Cap'n Jack]

At the core of it, was Chrisman actually a dangerous pilot? Did he endanger his passengers or his employers business due to a medical deficiency?

Yes, he was a dangerous pilot. He had a medical deficiency which endangered his passengers, for which he was receiving VA benefits.

 

[midlifeflyer]

By the way, the three added counts were dismissed. While it was alleged that Chrisman contacted the AME in the matter, that doesn't constitute a crime under the laws that were invoked in those counts (or at least that was the sense that the judge seemed to be heading in one of the hearing transcripts anyhow).

Not sure if you are reading something different - where did you see the judge heading somewhere?

The motion to dismiss was filed by the US Attorney to dismiss the three original counts. The judge just signed what the US Attorney filed. No hearing or arguments. It was part of the plea deal. In most state courts, there's just a plea to something lesser or different. In federal criminal proceedings, unless the deal involves a plea to an existing charge, there is often a superseding Indictment or information (a non-indictment charging document) to list the charge or charges being pled to, coupled with a formal dismissal of the ones which are not being pled to as part of the deal.

Edit: But that's not what happened here.

 

[weilke]

At the core of it, was Chrisman actually a dangerous pilot? Did he endanger his passengers or his employers business due to a medical deficiency?

He was either a liar and stealing from the government in the form of a VA disability payment he did not deserve OR he was working as an airline pilot with a disability that the FAA considers disqualifying.

The fact that he was able to successfully cope with the demands of an airline pilot lifestyle for many years suggests to me that whatever level of PTSD he had may not have been disabling to a degree that warranted a pension payment. I would rather see him fly and the VA inspector general claw back every dollar he falsely received (and make it available for those veterans who need it).

 

[flyingron]

It is in the transcript of the 10/29/2019 hearing.

There's not really a plea "deal" here. Chrisman chose to plead guilty to (part of) counts one and two without a agreement that the US would dismiss 3, 4, and 5. In fact, just the opposite. He intended (and did) plead guilty before the other counts were dismissed (and there's nothing that prevents them from being refiled). The judge made all that clear when he accepted the guilty plea and the defense counsel filed motions to supress the guilty pleas on the trial of counts 3,4 and 5 that were still going forward.

Mostly the guilty plea saved Chrisman a lot of time and money on counts he wasn't going to win (the falsification charges) without conceding anything on the obstruction/contempt charges.

I've paid for the two hearing transcripts so you can read them now. Note, the transcripts are entered in reverse order (the earlier transcript comes second).

 

[Boone]

The VA disability program is in itself dishonest.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

He was either a liar and stealing from the government in the form of a VA disability payment he did not deserve OR he was working as an airline pilot with a disability that the FAA considers disqualifying.

The fact that he was able to successfully cope with the demands of an airline pilot lifestyle for many years suggests to me that whatever level of PTSD he had may not have been disabling to a degree that warranted a pension payment. I would rather see him fly and the VA inspector general claw back every dollar he falsely received (and make it available for those veterans who need it).

I suspect this is correct in that he likely was not actually a dangerous pilot, dealing with that lifestyle for years. So I would be curious to hear of any further information regarding the actual level of his disability and if it resulted in any known dangerous errors while flying.

 

[Velocity173]

At the core of it, was Chrisman actually a dangerous pilot? Did he endanger his passengers or his employers business due to a medical deficiency?

The indictment has nothing to do with his ability to pilot. His actions of making false statements on an FAA medical and quite possibly VA disability fraud, warrant punishment.

I know of a guy who just got hired on with the airlines this year and less than a week later got arrested for child pornography. While I’m sure he would’ve been a safe pilot, the whole “be of good moral character” applies.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

The indictment has nothing to do with his ability to pilot.

Sort of my original point. The FAA’s medical authority is interpreted so broadly now that it allows them to drag in all sorts of other behavior that at its core has nothing to do with the safety of flight.

 

[Velocity173]

Sort of my original point. The FAA’s medical authority is interpreted so broadly now that it allows them to drag in all sorts of other behavior that at its core has nothing to do with the safety of flight.

So are you saying a pilot’s criminal behavior outside of work should have no bearing on their employment?

 

[PaulS]

Sort of my original point. The FAA’s medical authority is interpreted so broadly now that it allows them to drag in all sorts of other behavior that at its core has nothing to do with the safety of flight.

Peter, you can't lie on faa forms. This guy usurped the process to determine if he was medically competent to fly by not disclosing his disability. He should not be flying for hire, he isn't trustworthy and probably medically disqualified.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

So are you saying a pilot’s criminal behavior outside of work should have no bearing on their employment?

No, I am not. I think his employers should pay very close attention to such things. Probably more careful attention than the FAA does.

But that is a voluntary interaction between him and his employers. And employers can decide what level of scrutiny is appropriate in collaboration with their insurers, subject to market forces.

I believe this would improve safety of flight for passengers and third parties to a greater degree than having a bureaucracy involved.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Peter, you can't lie on faa forms. This guy usurped the process to determine if he was medically competent to fly by not disclosing his disability. He should not be flying for hire, he isn't trustworthy and probably medically disqualified.

Well, of course you “can” lie on FAA forms but it not likely to result in a good outcome!

Unclear from the facts I have seen so far in this case if he was just lying on the form or was actually a risk to flight safety. Still hoping to see more data on that.

 

[flyingron]

This prosecution has nothing to do with aviation safety. The FAA has plenty of non-criminal ways to handle that.

 

[midlifeflyer]

It is in the transcript of the 10/29/2019 hearing.

There's not really a plea "deal" here. Chrisman chose to plead guilty to (part of) counts one and two without a agreement that the US would dismiss 3, 4, and 5. In fact, just the opposite. He intended (and did) plead guilty before the other counts were dismissed (and there's nothing that prevents them from being refiled). The judge made all that clear when he accepted the guilty plea and the defense counsel filed motions to supress the guilty pleas on the trial of counts 3,4 and 5 that were still going forward.

Mostly the guilty plea saved Chrisman a lot of time and money on counts he wasn't going to win (the falsification charges) without conceding anything on the obstruction/contempt charges.

I've paid for the two hearing transcripts so you can read them now. Note, the transcripts are entered in reverse order (the earlier transcript comes second).

Yep. I see what you mean. Interesting procedurally.

For those who are interested but don't want to read all that stuff...

The superseding indictment in October 2019 added witness tampering, obstruction of justice and contempt of court to the original indictment which charged only two counts of lying to the FAA. Not much detail in the new charges, but most likely about what the prosecution describes in the sentencing memorandum (the first document I linked above) under the Chrisman's Post-Indictment Conduct heading. Chrisman wanted to plead guilty to the original two charges but not to the three new ones. As you said, Ron, there was no deal at that point. It's not a common strategy, but I can guess what the defense lawyer had in mind.

At the 11/14/2019 hearing on Chrisman's request to accept a partial plea, the judge expressed concerns over whether the new language of the new charges was specific enough. The Assistant US Attorney handling the case acknowledged the problem. Attorneys for both prosecution and defense indicated the prosecution had not yet made a decision whether to try to correct the problem, so it was a subject of continuing discussions between them. Ultimately, the US Attorney decided not to go forward with the three new charges. Whether that was a part of an agreement, the goodness of their heart, a realization that the evidence was insufficient to prove anything, just not worth the bother, or some combination of those and other reasons, is something which would not be found in the court records.

 

[Kristin]

This is seriously ironic considering he got off for killing his second wife though the evidence against him was pretty damning.

 

[Doc Holliday]

This is seriously ironic considering he got off for killing his second wife though the evidence against him was pretty damning.

So in our judicial system, do we have “guilty”, “not guilty” and “he got off”?

 

[Salty]

So in our judicial system, do we have “guilty”, “not guilty” and “he got off”?

I think it’s guilty, not guilty, and Orenthal.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

So in our judicial system, do we have “guilty”, “not guilty” and “he got off”?

In reality... yes. You don’t think so?

 

[Kristin]

So in our judicial system, do we have “guilty”, “not guilty” and “he got off”?

People are wrongfully convicted and people are wrongfully acquitted. In this case, Blake was found responsible in a civil court, just like O.J, even though he was acquitted by the jury.