Trent Palmer appeal

[PeterNSteinmetz]

As a general rule, the Federal agency will almost always win in its administrative courts, until the matter goes to a real judge in a real court.

And of course regulatory agencies will nearly always try and expand their turf. Bigger turf means more employees, higher salaries, and larger pensions.

'Except when necessary'

Trent Palmer, a pilot who created a popular YouTube channel to showcase his adventures, may soon head to federal appeals court, challenging the FAA interpretation of the minimum altitude and distance regulation in a case with broader implications.

www.aopa.org

 

[Bob Noel]

and occassionaly pilots do stupid things...

 

[rotorwrench]

As they say, there is always two sides to a story. The NTSB March 2023 docket submission points to a little more than explained in the article and other places. The fact the owner of the property he was checking out stated the runway ran east-west yet he flew north-south over the property says a lot. And lets not forget this is not his 1st infraction with the rules. Seems a lot going on for only a 900 pilot. Regardless, its rare for cases like this to make it this far in the system. 90% are settled earlier in my experience. But to each their own.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

So I had a look at the decision which contains a significant amount of factual material. Seems like the people he flew over were seriously disturbed by this.

Agreed that these things are usually settled and I am a bit surprised he is continuing to pursue this. I imagine he wants to make a point. And it is a close call of whether this was actually hazardous operation. I will look forward to seeing what an actual judge says in a non-administrative court has to say. In general, if the wording is vague, it is construed in favor of the defendant.

 

[rotorwrench]

I am a bit surprised he is continuing to pursue this.

Either someone (AOPA) is footing his legal bills or his youtube subscribers/paetreons are. Cost some coin at the NTSB appeal level. He still can go into the Federal court system but that gets real expensive. Regardless, I think he has a chip and suffers from the "look at me" syndrome of todays generation. No professional aviator would ever take this tack in similar circumstances.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

He can get into the Federal courts if he preserves all the issues in just the right way. It is actually sort of hard to do.

I agree on the look at me syndrome and that maybe views are helping to fund all this. In any case, I personally look forward to the case. I do think he should try and be more careful and courteous as a pilot though. This attitude may not end well for him.

 

[rotorwrench]

He can get into the Federal courts if he preserves all the issues in just the right way. It is actually sort of hard to do.

But it is his right per the FAA/NTSB process which can go all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Have you been involved in or read any cases where they try to get into the appeals court? I have read a few and my understanding is the issues have to be preserved in just the right way. Otherwise the appeals court will not take it.

 

[PilotDave]

I’m not very happy about how the FAA went about this but Palmer is not being honest. He buzzed that guys house under the guise of an inspection pass. I support action against him but I think the FAA people were being lazy.

 

[rotorwrench]

Have you been involved in or read any cases where they try to get into the appeals court?

I've only seen things at the ALJ level and only once. I believe there is a listing of appeal cases that went to the federal level on the FAA Chief Counsel website. But as I recall they are rare and the cases are not always accepted by the court. Even ALJ cases that are appealed to the full NTSB board are not that common. Seems in this case he's spending a lot of time and money on something with a worse case scenario of having your certificate revoked for only a year. Definitely more going on with this one especially since he's not even a pro pilot.

but Palmer is not being honest.

If he would have been honest from the get go this would have been over at the FSDO level.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

I’m not very happy about how the FAA went about this but Palmer is not being honest. He buzzed that guys house under the guise of an inspection pass. I support action against him but I think the FAA people were being lazy.

Any insight into why he wanted to buzz that particular person's house?

 

[tawood]

I’m not very happy about how the FAA went about this but Palmer is not being honest. He buzzed that guys house under the guise of an inspection pass. I support action against him but I think the FAA people were being lazy.

^^^This^^^

I could only guess as to the “why” he buzzed, but it could be just a friend in a somewhat sparse desert area as a way to hotdog a little…or more nefarious that it could be to stir up and aggravate the neighbor, since there does seem to be an on-going neighbor dispute between the complainant and his friend.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Well, it is usually people who have other reasons to fight these things that push back the boundaries of the regulatory state.

 

[tawood]

...If he would have been honest from the get go this would have been over at the FSDO level.

And I think that's were the perception of the FAA "being lazy" comes in. As a former investigator myself ( not FAA investigator btw), I could see where the FAA investigators at first thought this whole affair could be handled at the FSDO level....when it became clear through push back or bad attitude or whatever by Palmer or otherwise that it couldn't, evidence had been lost.

 

[rotorwrench]

And I think that's were the perception of the FAA "being lazy" comes in. As a former investigator myself ( not FAA investigator btw), I could see where the FAA investigators at first thought this whole affair could be handled at the FSDO level....when it became clear through push back or bad attitude or whatever by Palmer or otherwise that it couldn't, evidence had been lost.

Don't think it was laziness as there are specific policies (orders) that are followed and there was no mention the orders were not followed. Per the docket, only the native video copy was not retained but other copies were so the judge disallowed any testimony based on any of the video evidence. But it didn't matter as he still lost on both accounts without the use of the video. Regardless, Palmer admitted he flew low and hasn't provided any legit reasons to why he shouldn't be violated. And with losing his last appeal even got his suspension increased back to the 120 days. I'm not an investigator but have been involved in a number of enforcement actions and this one makes zero sense based on that experience. In my opinion, Palmer's tack both in court and online points to a different objective than just keeping his certificate valid and a route most would have avoided given the circumstances.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

In my opinion, Palmer's tack both in court and online points to a different objective than just keeping his certificate valid and a route most would have avoided given the circumstances.

Yes, something else is important to him. Perhaps either the views and publicity or maybe he just doesn't like the FAA trying to use more expansive definitions. In a normal contract, ambiguities are construed against the drafter. And vagueness of the statute is also a defense in a criminal case.

 

[RandomDroneGuy]

Yes, something else is important to him. Perhaps either the views and publicity or maybe he just doesn't like the FAA trying to use more expansive definitions. In a normal contract, ambiguities are construed against the drafter. And vagueness of the statute is also a defense in a criminal case.

That's my guess. Views are views, ads are ads, and revenue is revenue.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

That's my guess. Views are views, ads are ads, and revenue is revenue.

It would be kind of neat if someone has actually figured out how to make money off FAA enforcement actions.

 

[RandomDroneGuy]

It would be kind of neat if someone has actually figured out how to make money off FAA enforcement actions.

I figure that'll happen after September 16, when FAA starts enforcing the Remote ID requirements for sUAV and adding those violations to the mix when they open enforcement actions against non-certificated drone pilots who make YouTube videos on monetized channels.

Right now they get them on the certificate violation and usually VLOS violations, initially seeking only that they become compliant. This is the kinder, gentler FAA, after all. But the more-obstinate violators, like this guy, have drawn some pretty significant fines. Then they go on their YouTube channels and other social media outlets to bitch and whine about it to their followers and fans.

I'm not a big fan of Remote ID, by the way. I think it's a solution in search of a problem; and that like most regulations, it will be ignored by the very people it targets. Those who comply will be those who already are disinclined from engaging in illegal or unsafe operations. But that's hardly a new phenomenon. Laws and regulations in general are more punitive than preventative.

 

[rotorwrench]

It would be kind of neat if someone has actually figured out how to make money off FAA enforcement actions.

I've already made a bit of coin off enforcement actions. Nothing to it.

I'm not a big fan of Remote ID, by the way. I think it's a solution in search of a problem;

FYI: you’ll find the concept of “Remote ID” for UAM has been around for quite some time after the first ADSB trials were performed in the mid-90s. So its nothing new. What I do understand is eventually every aircraft/vehicle operating in the NAS will be tracked regardless of type or purpose as it’s the only way to manage the projected density levels. Unfortunately, the explosive growth of recreational drones along with a number of nefarious drone actions highlighted a different tracking need outside just simple airspace management. So they simply took what was planned and implemented it.