Person jumps from aircraft landing at RDU

While multi-posting is frowned upon, I don't want to repeatedly edit my previous post, so here we are.

Another thought I had was that this whole incident stems from the aircraft being damaged.

So, we have two popular theories here. (the third, accidental, seems to have lost favor)
1) A single individual responds to the damage by deciding to commit suicide. For this plan to succeed you merely need to exit the aircraft. No need for other people to be involved. The only real hurdle is to get to either a door or the ramp and get it open so that you can exit.

2) Another individual responds to the damage by deciding to commit murder. For this plan to reasonably succeed you need to have the other pilot go to the exit ramp / door where you can assure his demise. There are several hurdles here. You have to get the other pilot to willingly go to the exit ramp / door because if you have to force him there are usually signs plus it can backfire. After you get him to the exit ramp / door you have to get him out successfully plus if you do it in person you run the risk of the plan again backfiring and you going out with or instead of him. So the need for more detailed planning is higher here.

Assuming neither pilot predicted the damaging touchdown they both had to start planning at the same time, it would seem to be a whole lot quicker and easier to come up with and implement theory 1 than theory 2.
 
guest user said:
torn clothing, cuts to hands, face, disarranged clothes, something that indicates something is not right. If there were signs of a struggle
Click to expand...

He fell from an airplane. I think it's fair to say any or all of those signs are probably present regardless of it being voluntary or not.
 
Salty said:
He fell from an airplane. I think it's fair to say any or all of those signs are probably present regardless of it being voluntary or not.
Click to expand...

I think he meant those things would be present on the surviving pilot.
 
SkyChaser said:
I think he meant those things would be present on the surviving pilot.
Click to expand...
Lol that makes a little more sense. Do we know if he was met on the scene?
 
Salty said:
He fell from an airplane. I think it's fair to say any or all of those signs are probably present regardless of it being voluntary or not.
Click to expand...

Forgive me for not being clearer. I was talking about the PIC being looked at for those signs.

I would be surprised if the SIC has much to offer the investigation in this case.
 
guest user said:
I would be surprised if the SIC has much to offer the investigation in this case
Click to expand...


Oh, there's probably a tox report.

Drugs could have impaired his flying ability and his judgement and made him terrified of the upcoming investigation.
 
guest user said:
At this point murder would be conducted via abrupt and significant maneuvering through the air. A gentle 5* climb probably isn't going to do the job. Most aircraft, certainly this one, should have ADSB to track these behaviors. Does the ADSB track show an unusual amount of climbing / diving / turning right around the time of the SIC departing the aircraft?
Click to expand...

It might not, a quick push forward on the stick or kick on the rudder, then back to level flight and it might not show up on the flight track. I kinda doubt that's what happened, though.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Since we really don't know anything I hope they're also investigating it as a rape. I mean in that scenario I would go running out the back of an airplane as well so that's probably what happened.
Click to expand...
So, a federal offense? Hate crime? Lotsa possibilities.
 
I can't get to the link, can someone sum it up please?
 
“However, when the two tried to land, the right wheel of the plane came off, causing a hard landing.”

I think it’s the other way around.
 
eman1200 said:
I can't get to the link, can someone sum it up please?
Click to expand...

“Based on the autopsy findings and circumstances surrounding the death, as currently understood, the cause of death is listed as multiple blunt force injuries. The manner of death is classified as accident,” the report states.

No, they don’t add anything new to the discussion.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I'd like to know how the coroner determined the deceased's frame of mind. Or was the report written to help the deceased save face and ease his family's grief?
Click to expand...
What? You mean the self-appointed experts here don't know? Sorry, not bashing you midwestpa24 (you ask a good question) it just kills me that those above are now clearly talking out their rear ends.
BTW, I speak from experience. So the process goes as follows: The ME does not make this determination on his own. His or her determination is done in conjunction with the investigators on the case. I posted the link because unless the ME has gone completely rogue (quite doubtful, especially in this case), it tells you that the investigators are believing this is an accident. The investigators pass along their findings to the ME, he performs an autopsy, and then he rules the death an accident.

Edit: and I should add, pathologists don't base their rulings on sparing family feelings.
 
Last edited:
midwestpa24 said:
I'd like to know how the coroner determined the deceased's frame of mind. Or was the report written to help the deceased save face and ease his family's grief?
Click to expand...

Most likely they interviewed the other pilot in great detail about his actions and demeanor. That is information none of us have.
 
“removed his headset, apologized, and departed the airplane via the aft ramp door.”

If this is indeed a statement made by the other pilot..... well.... Occam's Razor would suggest strongly an intentional act. But who's speculating....
 
robin ardoin said:
“removed his headset, apologized, and departed the airplane via the aft ramp door.”

If this is indeed a statement made by the other pilot..... well.... Occam's Razor would suggest strongly an intentional act. But who's speculating....
Click to expand...
And if its just speculation, or equal weight arguments, a pathologist can rule a case "undetermined"...yet that didn't happen either.
 
robin ardoin said:
“removed his headset, apologized, and departed the airplane via the aft ramp door.”

If this is indeed a statement made by the other pilot..... well.... Occam's Razor would suggest strongly an intentional act. But who's speculating....
Click to expand...

That is the NTSB summation of events in the initial report, not a direct quote from the pilot.
 
Country Flier said:
What? You mean the self-appointed experts here don't know? Sorry, not bashing you midwestpa24 (you ask a good question) it just kills me that those above are now clearly talking out their rear ends.
BTW, I speak from experience. So the process goes as follows: The ME does not make this determination on his own. His or her determination is done in conjunction with the investigators on the case. I posted the link because unless the ME has gone completely rogue (quite doubtful, especially in this case), it tells you that the investigators are believing this is an accident. The investigators pass along their findings to the ME, he performs an autopsy, and then he rules the death an accident.

Edit: and I should add, pathologists don't base their rulings on sparing family feelings.
Click to expand...

Ed Haywood said:
Most likely they interviewed the other pilot in great detail about his actions and demeanor. That is information none of us have.
Click to expand...

robin ardoin said:
“removed his headset, apologized, and departed the airplane via the aft ramp door.”

If this is indeed a statement made by the other pilot..... well.... Occam's Razor would suggest strongly an intentional act. But who's speculating....
Click to expand...

I take no offense, but based on the information released to the public early on, including statements from the other pilot, I don't see how either determination can be conclusively reached. The ME report that he died from blunt force trauma, is both factual and easy to determine. I don't think anyone suspected he died due to cancer. Surmising the how is easy, but the why is harder, and in this case maybe impossible. He either fell accidentally or intentionally, and without him being here to tell us which, is anyone's guess.

Granted each person could take what was said by the other pilot, and deduce a separate conclusion based on personal thoughts or experience, even projecting their own mindset onto the deceased. Perhaps it was what was said, but how it was said, which can't be determined by a quote on the internet.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I take no offense, but based on the information released to the public early on, including statements from the other pilot, I don't see how either determination can be conclusively reached. The ME report that he died from blunt force trauma, is both factual and easy to determine. I don't think anyone suspected he died due to cancer. Surmising the how is easy, but the why is harder, and in this case maybe impossible. He either fell accidentally or intentionally, and without him being here to tell us which, is anyone's guess.

Granted each person could take what was said by the other pilot, and deduce a separate conclusion based on personal thoughts or experience, even projecting their own mindset onto the deceased. Perhaps it was what was said, but how it was said, which can't be determined by a quote on the internet.
Click to expand...
A simple example: if you go up on your roof to put up Christmas lights, and later, your family finds you at the bottom of your ladder with a broken neck, how can we possibly say this isn't suicide? Or murder? There is zero evidence of suicide or murder, but still can we say conclusively...? And later the news reports that when you went up on your roof, you were stressed about work, and also your car was stolen last week. The public will say, "See! Suicide! He was stressed at work and over his car!" But is that evidence of suicide? They might say, "He was a recent victim of a crime...I bet the criminal came back, afraid he would make a police report, and murdered him!" But is that evidence of murder?
Lack of evidence, at times, is telling. In my example, if there was no witness, yet no evidence of suicide or murder, the case wouldn't be ruled "undetermined" based upon rumor or feelings. It would be ruled "accident" based upon facts, and to some degree, lack of other facts. Could it be wrong? Sure! But most likely, no.
 
Well, in an unrelated case in today's news, a man was found in a ditch dead of a gunshot wound to the head and the sheriff's office said it was "not suspicious"...
 
Dana said:
Well, in an unrelated case in today's news, a man was found in a ditch dead of a gunshot wound to the head and the sheriff's office said it was "not suspicious"...
Click to expand...
Its human nature to try to fill in details. I assume you believe that its suspicious? One of my cases had mountains of evidence that it was suicide, yet has a cult following of people (with their own website) that say it wasn't suicide. The family and police did not release details other than "not believed to be foul play". People tried to fill in details that weren't there.
 
Last edited:
Country Flier said:
….Lack of evidence, at times, is telling. In my example, if there was no witness, yet no evidence of suicide or murder, the case wouldn't be ruled "undetermined" based upon rumor or feelings. It would be ruled "accident" based upon facts, and to some degree, lack of other facts. Could it be wrong? Sure! But most likely, no.
Click to expand...

Why is it so hard to accept undetermined based on evidence or lack thereof?
 
TCABM said:
Why is it so hard to accept undetermined based on evidence or lack thereof?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're asking...undetermined is used often, when the case does not clearly fall into the other categories. There are 5 total official rulings for manner of death: natural, accident, homicide, suicide, and undetermined. Undetermined is used regularly, so its not "hard to accept".
 
Country Flier said:
I'm not sure what you're asking...undetermined is used often, when the case does not clearly fall into the other categories. There are 5 total official rulings for manner of death: natural, accident, homicide, suicide, and undetermined. Undetermined is used regularly, so its not "hard to accept".
Click to expand...

Your example didn’t go into that detail, thank you for expanding.
 
TCABM said:
Your example didn’t go into that detail, thank you for expanding.
Click to expand...
Ah I see, ok. On that note, that fact that the pathologist didn't rule "undetermined" in this case is telling. That was the point of my posting the article in the first place.
 
Country Flier said:
…There are 5 total official rulings for manner of death: natural, accident, homicide, suicide, and undetermined. Undetermined is used regularly, so its not "hard to accept".
Click to expand...

In that old movie where the guy rides the nuke down like a cowboy, what would that be classified as?

Or how ‘bout Bruce Willis in Armageddon?
 
Country Flier said:
Its human nature to try to fill in details. I assume you believe that its suspicious? One of my cases had mountains of evidence that it was suicide, yet has a cult following of people (with their own website) that say it wasn't suicide. The family and police did not release details other than "not believed to be foul play". People tried to fill in details that weren't there.
Click to expand...

In the case of the gunshot guy, suicide is almost certain based on the other facts of the story. It just seemed incongruous that a gunshot death is "not suspicious", but I guess suicide isn't considered "suspicious".
 
The pilot said there was turbulence on the way to the final airport. (That's consistent with the co-pilot-was-airsick hypothesis. The only way to get that info was to interview the pilot, and I don't think that info was reported previously.)

Here's another news story, which has a longer quote from the coroner's report
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/d...ding-was-an-accident-autopsy-says/ar-AA14KD90


“They were flying at approximately 3500 feet with the rear ramp open for ventilation. The aircraft encountered moderate turbulence,” the report said. “At some point, the decedent (copilot) opened a cockpit window for ventilation and possibly to vomit. Sometime after, he told the pilot that he felt he was going to be sick and apologized. He then departed the cockpit towards the open rear ramp; at some point, the pilot realized that he had apparently fallen from the aircraft.”

That makes it sound like the rear ramp was already open for ventilation, whereas the other local news account sounds like the co-pilot it opened it just before the incident.
 
Last edited:
I have parachuted out of a CASA several times. The floor is not level at slower airspeeds. It slopes towards the back, to the point where you kinda feel like you are going to slide down the floor and fall out. Freaked me out the first time I jumped it. I would not get anywhere near the ramp hinge without a monkey strap or chute. I can absolutely see someone going to the ramp to barf, hitting bumpy air, and falling out. Very plausible.

As for evidence, WE have none. We have 3rd hand news accounts of what the pilot may or may not have said to some unknown party in the immediate aftermath of the incident. I think the term "excited utterance" applies there.

OTOH the coroner has actually interviewed the pilot, and had the opportunity to question him to clarify his statements.
 
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie said:
Since we really don't know anything I hope they're also investigating it as a rape. I mean in that scenario I would go running out the back of an airplane as well so that's probably what happened.
Click to expand...

Why not? This thread has already devolved into ridiculous speculation driven by abject stupidity.
 
I trust the coroner's report far more than the media coverage. If he says accident, I believe it.
 
squincher said:
I trust the coroner's report far more than the media coverage.
Click to expand...

Media coverage is all we've got, actually, as far as the coroner's report goes. That report hasn't been released publicly, as far as I know. I haven't seen it. The only accounts of what's in the coroner's report are in the media coverage. After the report was completed, a couple of reporters obtained a copy, and they wrote stories about it, and that's what we've got.
 
NoHeat said:
Media coverage is all we've got, actually, as far as the coroner's report goes. That report hasn't been released publicly, as far as I know. I haven't seen it. The only accounts of what's in the coroner's report are in the media coverage. After the report was completed, a couple of reporters obtained a copy, and they wrote stories about it, and that's what we've got.
Click to expand...

You've got the ruling. Unless the media is lying or screwed it up, I suppose.
 
The coroner's report has little value in settling the debate.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001318.htm
The determination of suicide requires that the death be established as both self-inflicted and intentional. For most certifiers, establishing intentionality is the most difficult criterion. A coroner or medical examiner who suspects suicide may be reluctant to impose social stigma, guilt, and loss of insurance benefits on the victim's family. Since many certifiers lack explicit criteria for assessing suicidal intent, they might search for a narrower range of evidence concerning intent (10). Thus, a certifier might conclude that a death was not a suicide because information proving intent was not collected. However, absence of evidence of intent is not evidence of absence of intent. Some certifiers require a suicide note to certify a death as suicide.
 
dmspilot said:
The coroner's report has little value in settling the debate.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001318.htm
The determination of suicide requires that the death be established as both self-inflicted and intentional. For most certifiers, establishing intentionality is the most difficult criterion. A coroner or medical examiner who suspects suicide may be reluctant to impose social stigma, guilt, and loss of insurance benefits on the victim's family. Since many certifiers lack explicit criteria for assessing suicidal intent, they might search for a narrower range of evidence concerning intent (10). Thus, a certifier might conclude that a death was not a suicide because information proving intent was not collected. However, absence of evidence of intent is not evidence of absence of intent. Some certifiers require a suicide note to certify a death as suicide.
Click to expand...
Yeah, decades ago a cop friend told me that "gun cleaning accident" was code for suicide, so that families could collect insurance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top