|
BEFORE THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
- - - - -X
In the Matter
of:
:
:
LANGHORNE M. BOND,
ADMINISTRATOR,
: Docket Number
FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION,
: SE-4661
Complainant,
:
:
- against - :
:
JAMES RICHARD
CAMPBELL,
:
Respondent. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
- - - - -X
Tuesday, November 18, 1980
26 Federal Plaza, Room 208
New York, New York
The above-entitled matter came up for hearing pursuant to Notice
at 9:15 a.m.
BEFORE: The
HONORABLE JOYCE CAPPS, Administrative Law Judge.
APPEARANCES:
For the Administrator:
SHARON HAUSELT, ESQ.
Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Avenue Southwest
Washington, DC 20591
For the Respondent:
JAMES RICHARD CAMPBELL
41 Stone Fence Road
Oakland, New Jersey
I N D E X
FUR. FUR.
WITNESS
DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT
RECROSS RD. RC.
Sandra
Taylor
33
58
80 82
Thomas
Powers 84
(Cont.)
133
162
181
183 184
Barton
Pakull
187 202
James Campbell
209 224
E X H I B I T S
EXHIBITS
NO.
FOR IDENTIFICATION IN EVIDENCE
Administrator's No.
1 5
Administrator's No.
2
103
103
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE CAPPS: This opens the
hearing in the matter of Langhorne M. Bond,
Administrator, Federal
Aviation Administration, Complainant, versus
James
Richard Campbell,
Respondent, docket number SEÄ4661.
My name is Joyce Capps, the
Judge who's been assigned to hear and
decide
this case.
Will counsel for the
Government represent herself, please.
MS. HAUSELT: Sharon
Hauselt, H-A-U-S-E-L-T, 800 Independence Avenue
Southwest, Washington, DC
20591.
JUDGE CAPPS: Sir, you are
Mr. James Richard Campbell, the Respondent
herein?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, ma'am, I
am.
JUDGE CAPPS: And you have
no counsel?
MR. CAMPBELL: No, ma'am, I
couldn't afford it.
JUDGE CAPPS: all right, the
Government does have the burden of proof in
this case. Do you
wish to give an opening statement?
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
have a couple of preliminary matters and
then I
would give an opening
statement.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
I'll entertain some preliminary matters.
MS. HAUSELT: The first one
is I never received any information from Mr.
Campbell with regard to a
discovery request, so at this time I'd like to
know if he intends to put
any witnesses other than himself.
MR. CAMPBELL: No, I do not.
MS, HAUSELT: Also, Your
Honor, prior to giving my opening statement I
would
like to introduce into
evidence the record so that as I'm speaking, you
could refer to the record.
JUDGE CAPS: All right. Is
this the packet of medical evidence and
applications that are
involved in this particular case?
MS. HAUSELT: Right. I never
certified a true copy of Mr. Campbell's
medical
records which also includes
copies of all his Interim Certificates, and
I
would offer them as
Administrator's Exhibit No. 1.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. Mr.
Campbell, have you seen this document?
MR. CAMPBELL: I believe
I've seen most of them.
MS. HAUSELT: I have a copy
for Mr. Campbell.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
I'll take it and mark it - This is the standard
packet of documents that
comes into every medical case. The reason I ask
you to obtain a copy of it
is usually a copy is furnished to the
Respondent
in the case, and I want to
make sure that was done.
MR. CAMPBELL: I requested
my file sometime ago and I didn't receive it.
I
believe that's all the
information that's been gathered up until this
point.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
(Whereupon, the document described was marked
for
identification as
Administrator's Exhibit No. 1.
JUDGE CAPPS: Are you a
member of the Bar? Are you an attorney?
MR. CAMPBELL: No, ma'am,
I'm not.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. Let
me caution you to this, Mr. Campbell. You
have
no attorney representing
you, but yet I want everything that goes on
during
these proceedings to be
fully understood by you. So, therefore, if
anything
occurs throughout this
proceeding that you don't fully understand, don't
hesitate to ask me to
explain it. I'll be happy to do it. I want to do
it,
because this is your day in
Court, and I want you to fully understand
just
what is occurring as far as
procedure is concerned, because you're not
being a lawyer, you know,
some of these things might be new to you. But
I
want to assure you that
things will be conducted according to the
accepted
modes of procedure around
here, as long as I'm sitting up here.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.
JUDGE CAPPS: Now, don't be
shy about it. You just pipe right up if
you've
got a question. All
right, now, what we're doing now is what
occurs in
every trial. Both sides
have a chance to get up and tell the Court what
their evidence will show;
their theory of the text; they're showing what
evidence they've got to
support the allegations they have made.
You will
have the same opportunity
to explain to me what you will put forth by
way
of evidence to convince me
of your side of the case. Now, this is called
opening statement.
I'm going to hear the opening statement of the
person
having the burden of proof
here, which is the Government.
MS. HAUSELT: Judge Capps,
as I speak, I'm going to refer to the record,
and
I will try to give you the
page numbers because it's quite a long and
lengthy record, and we're
talking about a period of time here, I believe
going back as far as 1974.
First of all, the section
that we're dealing with, as you know, is a
personality disorder which
has been severe enough to have manifested
itself
by repeated overt acts and
by that the term, personality disorder,
you'll
hear testimony from Drs.
Pakull and Dr. Powers indicating that a
personality disorder is a
deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of
behavior.
So, what we're talking
about here is not just an occasional lapse that
any
person might have. We are
talking about a pattern of behavior that has
repeated itself over a
period of time, and it's something which is a
serious mental illness, and
because of that has been found to be a
specifically disqualifying
trait under the Regulations.
Now, there's two parts to
what we have to show. We have to show you that
there's a personality
disorder and, also, that it is of such a nature
that
it's severe enough to have
manifested itself by repeated overt acts, and
we'll be going into quite a
bit of detail of over twenty different
episodes
in time, which we will
offer as the overt acts.
Just speaking to the file
itself, and sort of the chronology of the
events
here -- Mr. Campbell, I
believe, graduated from high school in 1974 and
from information which he
gave Dr. Powers -- Dr. Powers is a
psychiatrist
who saw him at FAA request.
Now, from information that we received from
Dr.
Powers, following high
school Mr. Campbell went out to Colorado, so that
would be sometime in --
sometime in the summer of 1974. He remained
there
for approximately a year
and a half. Having a problem with a personal
relationship which he
related to Dr. Powers, he then returned to his
home
in New York City and lived
with his parents. In November of 1977, Mr.
Campbell attempted to jump
off the World Trade Center in New York.
However,
he was stopped by the
guards at the top of the World Trade Center, and
he
was not able to complete
the jump, and at that time he was arrested. He
was
attempting to parachute
jump, I may add. And that is documented -- the
arrest, itself, is
documented on pages 94 through 101, which includes
his
arrest record in New York
State.
In the Fall of 1978,
approximately the month of October, November and
December, Mr. Campbell
resided in the area of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and at
that
time, and I refer Your
Honor to pages 46 and 47 -- Mr. Campbell
presented
himself to friends and
acquaintances as a doctor, and, in fact, was
giving
friends and acquaintances
drugs, and these people complained to the
authorities and that is how
this problem came to light.
Following that escapade,
the authorities found out about it, and rather
than put him in jail or
arrest him they requested that his family return
him to New Jersey where he
could receive psychiatric care. He
did, in
fact, return to New Jersey
with his father, where he underwent
psychotherapy for about
five months, about January to May of 1979,
receiving treatment from a
Dr. Dorsey, who was recommended to Mr.
Campbell
by his grandfather, who is
a doctor. And Dr. Dorsey's report is
included in
-
JUDGE CAPPS: Dr. who?
MS. HAUSELT: Dorsey,
D-O-R-S-E-Y. And his report is included on page 54.
Mr. Campbell, then, in May
of 1979, went to the area of Atlanta, Georgia
where he was employed by
Brown Aviation, Incorporated, and we have
information in the file on
page 36 from a Mr. Brown indicating that for
the
first two months Mr.
Campbell was an ideal employee and he had no
complaints whatsoever with
him. However, in about the third month of his
employment his mood began
to shift quite frequently and he was -- Mr.
Brown
caught him in a number of
fabrications and stories which were
preposterous
and untrue.
He was subsequently fired
from that position, and at that time, or
shortly
thereafter in September and
October of 1979 Mr. Campbell turned up in
New
Hampshire, and there he
received employment from Nashua Aviation in
Nashua,
New Hampshire and that is
how Inspector Taylor, who will be testifying,
came to meet Mr. Campbell.
While employed by Nashua Aviation, he was
also
temporarily employed by
Daniel Webster College, which is a small college
nearby.
While in New Hampshire, Mr.
Campbell indicated that he was qualified in
a
variety of areas, including
being a stuntman, being a member of the
Screen
Actors Guild, having
formerly taught in the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association Ground School.
All of those claims were subsequently proved
to
be false. He also attempted
to start up a parachute club while up in New
Hampshire, and in
relationship to his employment at the college, and at
that time he indicated he
was qualified as a parachute rigger, which,
under
the Federal Aviation
Regulations is regulated, and you do need a
certificate for that. He
did not have such a certificate.
JUDGE CAPPS: Is he a
parachute -
MS. HAUSELT: Parachute
rigger.
JUDGE CAPPS: Rigger ?
MS. HAUSELT: You have to
pack parachutes.
JUDGE CAPPS: What was his
employment at Webster College ?
MS. HAUSELT: He was
employed to teach, I believe, courses relating to
ground school type courses
-- meteorology and some flying. He was also
doing some flight
instructing at Nashua Aviation . During the
time he was
attempting to set up this
parachute club, he also claimed to be a
certified
jump instructor, which is
something regulated by the U. S. Parachute
Association. He claimed to
be affiliated with them. In fact, he was not
current at the time he was
attempting to set up this program for
parachuting. And a variety
of other problems came to light, including
the
newspaper article which I
referred to on page 46 and 47, which is the
account of his masquerade
as a doctor in Oklahoma.
That article came to light
on the campus at Daniel Webster. His
qualifications were
subsequently brought into question and also due to
that
question, various other
discrepancies in his record turned up in
addition
to those that I have
mentioned with regard to teaching and not being
qualified as a parachute
rigger, and various other claims made to other
people .
About this time the FAA got
wind of a question with regard to Mr.
Campbell's medical
qualifications for a first class, in particular,
medical
certificate, and Dr.
Cahill, who is the Regional Flight Surgeon in New
York, requested some
information from Mr. Campbell, and at that time Mr.
Campbell was -- around this
time Mr. Campbell was fired from Daniel
Webster
and told people in the area
he was leaving to go to Florida.
He subsequently turned up
in California where he managed to get
employment,
again, with Webster &
Piper Sales in Fresno, November of 1979, and
in the
record there's a letter
from Dianne Stuart of Webster & Piper Sale
indicating problems, which
again surfaced with Mr. Campbell's
employment,
concerning false
representations of qualification.
JUDGE CAPPS: When was this
employment?
MS. HAUSELT: This
employment was November of 1979 up through about
January
16th, 1980. Various
claims were made by Mr. Campbell in the area
of stunts
and airman certification
which were untrue. Stories surfaced with
regard to
his past, and a tragedy
having occurred in his past which he claimed,
which
were untrue. There
were problems with his teaching, and he was
also
questioned as far as having
taken certain items from the company, so he
was
fired, again, from Webster
& Piper Sales. And, he then
managed to talk
himself into another job in
Nappa, California, where he was employed in
February -from February 4th
to approximately February 29th, 1980.
And, while there, the FAA
had finally accumulated and traced down all of
these various leads and
stories that had been going on from one side of
the
country to the other, and
at that time his medical certificates were
suspended for failure to
provide, and, subsequently, on receiving more
information from him and
having him evaluated by Dr. Powers, the FAA
issued
an Order of Revocation
which is the subject of this hearing today.
I'd like to point out to
Your Honor that in a case of this type it is
just
virtually impossible for
the FAA to subpoena all of the people who have
indicated that various
stories and lies and behaviors of Mr. Campbell's
were abnormal, but there
are letters from all of these people in the
file,
and I have spoken to them
myself, personally, as has Miss Taylor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Who is Miss
Taylor?
MS. HAUSELT: Miss Taylor is
an Inspector from New Hampshire, GATO
Inspector, and she'll be
testifying for the Administrator.
Your Honor, I would just
caution you at this point that part of the
personality disorder --
part of the problem we're speaking of here is a
very adaptability to lie,
and through the testimony of Dr. Powers, Dr.
Pakull and Miss Taylor I
will attempt to show the variety of
inconsistencies which
appear in this file, and, also, Mr. Campbell is
not
just here because he
fabricates stories. We're talking about some
stories
which have gone beyond the
bounds of just a little white lie. We're
talking
about stories such as
pawning oneself off as being capable of rigging
parachutes for other
people, when one is not qualified, such a claim
being
something which could
severely injure another person.
Also, we're talking about
making a claim of being a doctor when one is
not
qualified, and issuing
drugs and whatnot; offering one's assistance to
people in need of medical
when one is not qualified. So, we're talking
about a situation where a
person consistently puts himself in a
position of
being unable to resist the
impulse to fabricate a story in order to
improve
or to build up a grandiose
self image, and this is not something which
is a
mere personality trait
which can be considered fleeting. This is
something
which is an integral part
of Mr. Campbell's character. By that I mean
it is
a severe personality
disorder, and the various episodes around the
country,
I think, will support the
fact that there have been many overt acts in
this
case.
JUDGE CAPPS: Mr. Campbell,
under the normal rules of courtroom
procedure,
you are entitled to give
your opening statement now, or, you can do
what we
call reserve opening
statement. That means let the Government put on
their
case; They've got the
burden of proof; let them put on their case, and
then, when they have
rested, we turn to you and you can give your
opening
statement. It's up to you,
whichever you prefer. Do you wish to give it
now
or to reserve?
MR. CAMPBELL: I will give
mine now.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
MR. CAMPBELL: First of all,
I take -- I personally disagree with quite a
few statements, both
contained on the written record, and exemplified by
Ms. Hauselt. At any rate,
first of all, the history up until, I would
imagine Christmas of '78, I
imagine -- in other words it's up until my
departure from Tulsa,
Oklahoma, is substantially correct except for a
few
factors.
Specifically, number one, I
left Oklahoma of my own free will,
unbeknownst
to me at the time that the
authorities were aware of my activities.
Number two, the authorities
did not alert my parents to the problem.
Excuse
me, my grandfather was
first alerted to the problem by a young lady I
was
familiar with, and at that
point, as a matter of fact, it was the
evening
of Christmas. My
grandfather explained to me what was happening; that
this
was abnormal and aberrant
behavior and that he would like to see
something
done, at which point plans
for my return to Tulsa, Oklahoma were
canceled.
The very next day we found
out that the police were aware of the
activities.
Yes, I did represent
myself, at times, as a physician; at times as a
medical student, and so
forth. To the best of my knowledge I did not
dispense any type of -- I
don't know what the proper word would be -- a
drug that would have to be
prescribed. I did, at one period of time,
give
several Tylenol capsules
marked as Tylenol, in a Tylenol bottle, to a
young
lady at the airport, while
I was learning to fly at the time.
The article from the Tulsa
World, I believe, appeared after,
approximately
two weeks, maybe three
weeks after my departure from Tulsa. My father,
in
an attempt to find out what
had happened and to clear up matters in
Tulsa,
flew to Tulsa, met with
this young lady who had alerted my grandfather
of
the problem; Tulsa met with
a representative of the Tulsa PD, at which
time
it was apparently agreed
upon that they would let matters lie where they
were and I would receive
psychiatric care.
You have to excuse me -
it's a little slow -- it's kind of hard to make
up
as you go along. I really
wasn't prepared for this today. At any rate,
at
that point my father
gathered up a great majority of my possessions,
made
disposition of a few
others, specifically an old car and so forth, and I
left Oklahoma with the
understanding that nothing would be done by
Tulsa PD
as long as I didn't show my
face there again, so to speak, and this was
a
quote from one of the
detectives. Now, the article in the Tulsa World
contained quite a few
inaccuracies, although the basic content is
correct.
Following Tulsa, Oklahoma I
left to go home, stayed at home from
approximately two days
before Christmas to May of, I guess that's '79,
and
received some care from a
Dr. Dorsey of Hopewell Junction, New York.
There
were not a great deal of
sessions. I did gain quite a bit, but frankly I
don't feel that a lot was
done; more my fault than his. Dr. Dorsey is a
rather outstanding
physician -- his qualifications certainly bear that
out.
I received also a great
deal of care, and I think the majority of help
from
my grandfather. My
grandfather is a physician with a rather outstanding
psychiatric background,
although he is not Board certified. He did run a
psychiatric hospital for
the Army during World War II and held several
high
offices with the AMA in New
York State. As a GP, also, I think he had a
rather rare, but vital
insight into the nature of the human mind. I have
continued that consultation
with him throughout the past several years,
and
my opinion has been -- well
has produced the greatest benefit thus far.
In May of 19 -- I don't
think it's '79, but at any rate -- May that year
when I left to go down to
Perry, Georgia, I went first to Opeloca
Airport
in Florida on a package
deal for the CFI and Double I rating; found out
that they had changed their
prices and was in the process of returning
home
because I could not afford
the rates. On the way back I stopped in at
Perry, Georgia. I had
spoken to Mr. Brown on the phone. He had stated
the
fact that he was an
Examiner qualified to designate Certified Flight
Instructor of Airplane
Instrument Multi-Engine. I stopped in. After a
period of time with him,
explaining my difficulties and so forth, he
put me
up in a small trailer there
and volunteered to give me the instruction
necessary for the rating
and to give me the check ride.
A friend of his, who was a
Principal of the local school and a certified
flight instructor, Mr. Bob
McLendon, rendered instruction, as did Mr.
Brown, and Mr. McLendon
recommended me for Certified Flight Instructor
rating. At the time I was
made aware of the fact that Mr. Brown had gone
through quite a large
amount of flight instructors in the previous year
--
I believe at least a half a
dozen. There was a flight instructor there
at
the time, who was also in
the process of leaving. He was part-time,
working
at Warner Robbins Air Force
Base.
Shortly after I came on,
also another flight instructor at the time,
John
Williams, came onto the
staff. Mr. Williams brought me a great deal of
experience and a great deal
of insight into the nature of aviation and
how
the so-called system worked
while I worked there, and for the first
few months things were
fairly good, despite the fact that I did refuse
several flights by Mr.
Brown, considering the fact that his 135
Certificate
was dropped, and these were
of an air-charter nature. I had also found
myself in extreme disfavor
just after July 4th -- I don't know the exact
date -when his daughter
eloped with one of my students. Mr. Brown
accused
me of knowing about the
situation, which was true, but only thirty
minutes
before the actual wedding,
by which time I believe Jim knew. I
really
don't know for sure; I do
know he was aware very shortly, via phone
call,
of his daughter's impending
wedding. Quentin, the gentleman who married
his
daughter, had just received
his private license, as recommended by me
several weeks before. From
that point my situation in regards to Mr.
Brown
went steadily downhill.
Mr. Williams, the other
flight instructor in residence, also had a great
deal of problems concerning
policy, concerning pay, concerning promises
that were not kept and were
not -well, they had made arrangements,
specifically, for a raise
in pay which did not develop until
approximately
a month later, although he
did come through on it, and I believe Mr.
Williams was also asked to
fly a few flights that would come more under
135
than 91, and Mr. Williams
refused. I believe his quote is, "I'm not
giving
my ticket to anybody."
I developed a rather strong
friendship with Mr. Williams. He gave me a
great deal of aid and help
in obtaining my Certified Flight Instructor
Instrument Airplane, and
during the latter part of August I had started
making phone calls,
specifically with the idea and intention of leaving
Brown Aviation. Now, Nashua
Aviation, my employer afterwards, can bear
this
out -- that I did make
contact with them in early and late August. As a
matter of fact, going as
early as June, with the possible intention of
finding employment.
Eventually, I believe, I spoke to Gary Stuart on
both
occasions prior to my
leaving Brown, and he had indicated, "Come on up,
we
need instructors", and, in
fact, when I did arrive there, they were also
still short at the time
with the school semester already starting.
I gave Mr. Brown what I
thought was going to be two weeks notice. He
thereby informed me he did
not want me around. Now, I quit. I have
witnesses to that effect. I
can produce statements. You just have to
give
me time, and this is, I
think, easily verifiable; just a matter of
tracking
the people down.
Also, and this is something
I cannot prove, but I'm going to enter it
anyway -- Mr. Brown
produced additional evidence of the fact that I had
been doing nasty things
behind his back, simply because he had
recordings
of his phone -- excuse me,
of conversations made on his telephone.
JUDGE CAPPS: What type of
conversations? Seeking other employment?
MR. CAMPBELL: Seeking other
employment; conversations with the Pastor
of my
church; conversations with
my parents; conversations with friends; he
had
two lines, and apparently
one of them had a full-time tape recorder on
it.
In fact, he played back a
recording I had with my Pastor which was
rather
shocking. I don't know,
really, how to prove that, because he said that
if
I disappeared and didn't
give him anymore trouble, he was going to
"destroy
them". At any rate -
MS. HAUSELT: I realize that
Mr. Campbell's not a lawyer and doesn't
understand that a lot of
this would be of the nature of testimony
which, I
believe, should be given
under oath, and I would prefer if he could just
summarize and then give the
details of his testimony while he's under
oath.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, that's
true. Except so much has gone on, and this
appears
to be the easiest way for
him to do it. I may be able to ask him, when
he's
under oath, if his
testimony would be the same as the opening
statement, in
narrative form.
MS. HAUSELT: I'd prefer to
have it under oath at some point.
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, okay,
we'll have to go through all of this, then. Do
you
want to shorten it up?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, ma'am,
if that would help the proceeding.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes. Just tell
me, generally, what you're going to show by
way
of proof.
MR. CAMPBELL: Brown
Aviation -- I resigned. He told me to leave
immediately, otherwise he
had threatened me with arrest, and I did, in
fact, leave, by motorcycle
from Perry, Georgia to Nashua, New Hampshire.
I arrived in Nashua, New
Hampshire the first week of September. I
assumed
employment shortly
thereafter, employed both as a flight instructor for
Nashua Aviation and Supply
Company and for Daniel Webster College.
During this period of time
I felt I had represented myself in an honest
and
fair manner, although,
frankly, and things had followed me along from my
background that were very
hard to explain, and frankly I had to go along
with what I had said in the
past, whether or not it was true. These
statements, I felt, were of
a minor nature. Anything else that I thought
was of major nature I
corrected in the best way possible. Frankly, to
save
my stature, and I guess I
really don't know the words -- save my pride,
more likely.
I worked at Nashua Aviation
and Supply Company uneventfully and with a
great deal of support from
my students and from most of the people I
worked
with, for several weeks, at
which time a copy of the article that had
appeared in the Tulsa World
appeared, first, on campus, at Daniel
Webster
College, and then at Nashua
Aviation and Supply Company; the people at
Daniel Webster College had
supplied Nasco with that article. It was
given
to the Chief Flight
Instructor. At a flight instructor meeting
afterwards
he asked, "Is this you?"
and I said, "Yes, it is." I offered what I felt
was my justification at the
time. He said, "Well, until something else
happens, just keep on
going". At the time, they were happy with my work,
and for somebody to keep me
after seeing an article of that nature, I
was
rather flattered that they
had that much confidence.
The situation was extremely
difficult -- the situation was extremely
confusing and culminated,
eventually, in the appearance of the FAA and
two
people, a Ms. Taylor, and
another gentleman who I'm afraid I don't
remember
his name. We did have a
discussion; I presented log books, my side of
the
story and so forth. Several
days later Dr. Cahill from the New England
Region -- I believe he's
the Flight Surgeon, showed up at Nasco with a
letter stating in effect,
and I'm paraphrasing, we find that you may or
may
not be qualified to hold a
medical certificate. This letter also stated
he
had received, on October
10th, the date of this letter, that he had
received information from
Dr. Dorsey. Dr. Dorsey's first communication
to
Dr. Cahill came two days
later -- October 12th. The letter from Dr.
Dorsey
was rather short, rather
sparse, and apparently this was intentional.
Dr.
Dorsey was not aware of how
much information was required.
When Dr. Cahill had
presented himself at Nashua Aviation and supply
Company, he had said to my
Chief Flight Instructor that I am grounded.
He
had said specifically that
this letter grounded me, period. And he told
Steve Rachelson that I was,
in effect, grounded, although this letter
seemed to indicate
differently. It only cast doubt; it was not an actual
suspension or revocation as
far as I can see. I left the Nashua Aviation
and Supply Company. I left
Daniel Webster College, rather upset, greatly
troubled, and specifically
with the idea of finding employment somewhere
else and raising enough
money to get the evaluations and/or the
treatment
anybody felt I needed.
Frankly, at the time, I didn't feel that I did,
and
that situation has since
changed.
I had said to various
people that I was heading south, west, east,
overseas, whatever was the
case, specifically to throw them off the
track.
Specifically I did not want
anybody to know where I was going, because
Tulsa had already followed
me to Nashua and I was going to be damned if
I
was going to let anything
else spoil things while I was trying to
rebuild
what had already crumbled.
I had left for California after receiving a
tip
from a gentleman who had
instructed me for my Multi-Engine Instructor's
Certificate, about Western
Piper and Fresno, California. I spoke to Mr.
Dale Ewell on the phone.
Mr. Ewell said, "Fine, we need an instructor".
Mr. Ewell also said that he
could get me out there by carrying a couple
airplanes from Harrisburg,
which was where they were keeping several
dozen
Tomahawks, to Fresno, and
eventually San Jose. This I did.
JUDGE CAPPS: This is
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania'?
MR. CAMPBELL: That's
correct. That's where the departure was for
California. I eventually
carried two Tomahawks from Harrisburg to
Fresno.
I
arrived in Fresno; was
told I would be getting $1,000 a month, a
minimum
of 100 hours flight time,
various benefits and so forth. This was not
to be
the case. My employment for
Western Piper was rather difficult. I had
some
immediate problems with
another flight instructor, ego problems,
frankly.
We did not get along. At
first I took quite a liking to the secretary,
Dianne Stuart, which later
turned into tolerance, I imagine the word is.
Mrs.
Stuart and I have very
divergent views on morality and so forth. I
did
not get along with her, not
in the slightest. Also, at Western Piper
things
were catching up with me. I
was really running, frankly. Stories were
popping up; some were too
embarrassing to specifically deny, and as a
result I had to agree with
them and say, yeah, yeah, and drop it; not
the
case -- did not work that
way.
Through an ad that appeared
in the Fresno Bee, I believe, a daily
newspaper, there was an ad
for flight instructors promising a rather
large
salary at the time for a
flight instructor, in Nappa, California. I
made an
appointment to go up and
speak to the people at the International Air
Service Company. At that
time I went up and was interviewed, I was
given a
flight check with one of
Japan Airlines Captains, and the Chief Flight
Instructor for the
International Air Service Company, and I passed it.
However, the check ride
itself was simply an introductory. I was given
almost not quite a month's
training in addition to the check ride, to
prepare me to be a flight
instructor for Japan Airlines. I left -- I
quit,
actually, about the same
time I was about to be fired from Western
Piper.
There were a great deal of
problems; a great deal of differences; a
great
deal of difficulties.
I also would like to put in
the record one specific point that I told
Mr.
Ewell, at the time I was
hired, that I had had previous psychiatric
consultations with a
physician, and that I had had personality
problems. I
did attempt to downplay
them, and explained that, to me, they were not
all
that serious.
In Nappa, California I
started working for Japan Airlines. I started in
their first several days of
ground school. As a matter of fact, it was
several weeks of ground
school concerning job procedures, the IASCO
procedures, aircraft
systems, teaching, just the gamut -- it was
absolutely
incredible the range of
matter that they had us digest in a very short
period of time, including
memorizing five pages of checklists and so
forth.
It was difficult, very
enjoyable.
I was in the process of
digesting this material when Mr. Ed Scarboro,
the
Chief Flight Instructor
from the International Air Service Company,
showed
up; said these two
gentlemen who would like to speak to you. These two
gentlemen identified
themselves as the FAA and said, "We would like to
see
your certificates", quote,
unquote -- that is all I was told. I said,
"Well, they're in my car,
if you'll follow me out". I had my Torerro in
the
parking lot; we started
walking out and I said, "What's this all
about?" He
said, "Well, we just need
to see your certificate". I went into the
glove
compartment of my car,
turned around, I said, "Well, what's the
problem?"
And they said, "Let's just
see your certificate".
They examined my Pilot's
Certificate, my Flight Instructor's
Certificate,
my Medical Certificate,
handed me back my Pilot's Certificate, my Flight
Instructor's Certificate
and a letter from the FAA indicating
suspension;
in other words, seizing my
Certificate without letting me know first
exactly what was happening.
At that time I became extremely upset,
almost -
JUDGE CAPPS: Which
Certificate did they seize?
MR. CAMPBELL: The First
Class Medical Certificate issued by Dr.
Reynolds of
Fresno, California.
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh, I thought
you said they gave that back to you.
MR. CAMPBELL: No, they gave
me back my Pilot's Certificate, my Flight
Instructor's Certificate,
but not my Medical Certificate, instead
handing
me the letter of
suspension. This was February 7th, I believe the letter
was dated, I believe,
January 29th. I may be incorrect. I became
extremely
upset, almost to the point
of tears; explained the fact that I was in
the
process of trying to raise
funds in order to get the consultation and
get
the evidence I needed to
refute this, and I made exception with items on
the form, and they said,
"Look, there's nothing we can do about this. We
are just here to present
the forms." They accompanied me into Mr.
Scarboro's office where
they explained that the process involved could
be
lengthy, but may, indeed,
be taken care of in a short period of time.
They
also explained what was
needed, specifically evidence to the contrary to
prove that I was qualified
to hold the Certificate. Mr. Scarboro and I
were
both of the impression and
opinion that we could clean this whole
matter up
rather shortly, so he kept
me on the payroll, kept me in flight
training,
at a great deal of expense
to them, and I proceeded for the next month,
to
undertake flight training
and eventually pass a very rigid check ride to
Japan Airlines standards in
order to be a flight instructor for the
Japan
Airlines pilot training
program at the Flight Crew Training Center.
I saw two doctors, a
psychologist and a psychiatrist. The psychologist
gave
me a battery of written
testing, which was submitted to Dr. Sexton, who
told me that wasn't good
enough and that I had to have other tests. I
went
back a second time, at even
more expense, got the tests done,
psychological
written testing and oral
testing, in addition to a bit of discussion.
The
psychologist presenting the
test at the time said, "Frankly, there is
very
little difference between
the tests" and he was rather doubtful about
the
fact that the FAA wanted to
give my Medical Certificate back. He felt
that
I was being stalled.
JUDGE CAPPS: Wait a minute,
we're running out of tape.
MR. CAMPBELL: I also
completed several visits with a psychiatrist. Both
reports were submitted.
After some consideration by the Western Region
Flight Surgeon -- I hope
that's the term, Dr. Sexton -- he said, "I'm
worried about your impulse
control" and explained that he would have an
interview with one of his
doctors. In other words, somebody that they
had
said, now, he said,
frankly, it would be several weeks. The problem, at
the
time, was the fact that I
was nearing the check ride for Japan
Airlines, at
which point I was either
going to pass and/or fail, and if I passed, I
was
going to have to go to
work, or go on inactive list and not draw a
paycheck, which was staring
me in the face, with additional expenses
mounting at the time; I was
getting a little bit terrified.
I made numerous phone calls
to various State and Government agencies
trying
to get some help,
specifically because there was a several-week lapse
between that phone call and
the appointment made with Dr. Powers, all
to no
avail, although the only
concession I got was a gentleman from a
congressman's office in --
I'm trying to remember -- it's a county just
east of Nappa -- excuse me,
west of Nappa -- I'm afraid I don't know,
and I
can find out -- said that
Dr. Sexton had promised, since the appointment
was on a Friday, he would
evaluate it that evening and give me the
results
as soon as possible,
specifically that evening. This gentleman also
offered
to provide a statement to
that effect because, frankly, at that time I
did
not believe it. That
statement was never taken. It was offered. He was
willing to offer a
notarized statement or whatever the proper legal
terminology is.
The appointment did take
place with Dr. Powers. I spoke to him, in the
neighborhood, I believe, of
less than two hours. I'm not quite sure if
it
was more or less. During
this period of time I gave him information as
he
requested, although he
apparently found great fault with the fact that I
did not respond until
questioned about the World Trade Center incident.
Now this incident has been
a matter of FAA record for many, many, many
months.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay, you can
tell me your side of that incident during the
testimony.
MR. CAMPBELL: Okay, fine,
all right. At which point I went home for the
weekend, chewed a couple of
fingernails, waited for a decision and
approximately two o'clock
in the afternoon, Monday, I called Dr. Sexton
for
I think the third time that
day, badgered the poor man, and at which
time
he apologized and said he
was going to have to deny my Certificate.
After I
calmed down, about fifteen
minutes later, I'd gone in to speak to
Scarboro,
told him what had happened,
my parents were in San Francisco that
weekend,
specifically to see me. I
told them, and I made preparations to go home,
specifically because I was
broke, and I had to borrow money to go home.
I went home. I found
employment as an electronics technician. I had been
doing that job for eight
months now. I found employment, I think, four
days
after I got home. I was
helped a great deal by a letter of
recommendation
provided by the
International Air Service Company who had said, at the
time, although that
situation may have changed because of information
they
have received, that they
would be glad to have me back providing
openings
existed. I went home. There
is not a whole lot more to say, except for
the
fact that I have recently
-- first or second week of September --
enrolled
myself in the West Bergen
Mental Health Center and am following the
prescribed program of
treatment.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
when did you enroll there?
MR. CAMPBELL: It was in
September. I don't have an exact date.
JUDGE CAPPS: Of this year?
MR. CAMPBELL: Of this year.
JUDGE CAPPS: And, what's
the name of the --
MR. CAMPBELL: West Bergen
Mental Health Center.
JUDGE CAPPS: Westberg?
MR. CAMPBELL: West Bergen
-- Bergen County.
JUDGE CAPPS: West Bergen --
MR. CAMPBELL: Mental Health
Center. I spoke to one of their staff
workers,
and their psychiatrists who
have lined me up with a specific therapist,
and, matter of fact, I've
got an appointment tomorrow night. The idea
here
is no longer to gain just
Medical Certificate, but specifically to
remove
any doubt from my mind or
anybody else's that I have a problem or will
have
a problem or allow the
problem to grow. The idea here, specifically, is
the
problem has always existed.
It's just a matter of control. I believe my
control's improved. It has
a ways to go yet. I do not feel that I am
dangerous as a pilot. I
think my record bears that out. I've been a
damned
good flight instructor, and
I'm proud of my record.
I also feel that my acts,
well, although I have not felt a great deal of
guilt over a great deal of
them, that have happened recently; I offer no
explanation other than the
fact that I was disturbed up until Tulsa,
Oklahoma, and even, for
instance, afterwards. However, I do believe
that I
am a competent pilot in
command. I do believe I am a competent
flight, and
I do believe I can prove
that. Thank you.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
we'll have a five-minute recess before the first
witness is heard.
(Whereupon, a five-minute
recess was taken.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Miss Hauselt,
you may call your first witness now.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
call Inspector Sandra Taylor.
Whereupon,
SANDRA TAYLOR
having first been duly
sworn by Judge Capps, was examined and testified
as
follows:
JUDGE CAPPS: At this point,
let me give some more of my Law School
instructorship to Mr.
Campbell. What is going to happen now is we've got
a witness on the stand
under oath. This witness has been called by the
Government. The Government
is now going to conduct what we call the
direct
examination. Listen
carefully, because you will have the right to
cross-examine this witness
on any of the testimony brought out during
the
direct examination. Do you
understand?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, ma'am.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. HAUSELT:
Q. Can you state your name
for the record?
A. Yes. My name is Sandra
Ann Taylor.
Q. And what is your
business address?
A. My business address is
the Portland General Aviation District Office,
Portland International
Jetport, Portland, Maine, 04102.
Q: And you're employed by
FAA?
A. Yes,
Q: In what capacity?
A: I am a Aviation Safety
Inspector.
Q: What is your employment
background with regard to aviation?
A. I have worked as a
flight instructor.
Q: For how long?
A: For approximately two
years. I have held a Flight Instructor's
Certificate for about five
years. I have worked as an Air Traffic
Controller for one year,
and my present job for two and a half years.
Q. And could you just give
us what your ratings certificates are?
A. Yes. I hold a Commercial
Pilot's Certificate with an instrument in
Multi-Engine Rating; a
Flight Instructor's Certificate, instrument and
multi-engine.
Q. And you know Mr.
Campbell, who is the Respondent in this case?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. How did you come to know
him?
A. I was called by Steve
Rachelson, who was, at the time, the Chief
Flight
Instructor for Nashua
Aviation. He called and -
JUDGE CAPPS: Wait. He was
Chief Flight Instructor?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: For what?
THE WITNESS: Nashua
Aviation and Supply Company. He called and told me
of
the problem that Daniel
Webster College was having with Mr. Campbell and
asked me if I would call
Oklahoma City and verify that he did have valid
Pilot's Certificate.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. What was the problem
that he described with regard to Mr. Campbell?
A. He told me that Mr.
Campbell was, at the time, working for Nashua
Aviation and Daniel Webster
College as an instructor and he wanted to
form
a parachuting club and he
had approximately two hundred people
interested
in this club, and they
found out through the newspaper article from the
Tulsa Tribune that he had
some past problems, and they were concerned.
Q. Did they question his
qualifications?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you do with
regards to Mr. Rachelson's request?
A. I called Oklahoma City
and found out that the Certificates that he
holds
right now are valid
certificates.
Q. And in the course of
that investigation, did you ascertain whether or
not Mr. Campbell was
qualified as a parachute rigger?
A. I didn't at that point.
Q. But at a later time?
A. I did, yes.
Q. And what was the result
of that? Was he qualified?
A. No, he was not
qualified. Oklahoma City had no record of him having a
Parachute Rigger's
Certificate.
JUDGE CAPPS: Why didn't you
ascertain that at the time you ascertained
the
validity of his current
certificates?
THE WITNESS: Because at the
time that wasn't the problem. That never
entered into it.
JUDGE CAPPS: Nobody told
you anything about parachute rigging
intentions?
THE WITNESS: No. That it
was just to form a parachute club
JUDGE CAPPS: All right, did
that parachute rigging activity or intended
activity subsequently come
to your attention from someone?
THE WITNESS: Yes, from Mr.
Campbell.
JUDGE CAPPS: From Mr.
Campbell, himself.
THE WITNESS: That was the
first time I heard about it.
JUDGE CAPPS: So you had
contacted Mr. Campbell; is that correct?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Getting back to your
initial check on Mr. Campbell's rating -- did
you
make any phone calls to
persons who had given him the tests?
A. Yes, I did. One of the
Certificates that Mr. Campbell held was a
temporary certificate for
flight instructor certificate, which meant
that
he just recently took his
flight instructor flight test, so I contacted
a
James Brown, who was the
examiner, and I talked to Mr. Brown about Mr.
Campbell.
Q. And where does Mr. Brown
reside?
A. I -- Georgia.
Q. And what did Mr. Brown
relate with regard to Mr. Campbell's
employment?
A. Mr. Brown said that Mr.
Campbell worked for him for approximately
three
months. When Mr. Campbell
first came there, he was given the necessary
instruction and the flight
test to get his flight instructor's
certificate,
and then began working for
Mr. Brown, and two out of the three months
that
he was there he was an
ideal employee, and Mr. Brown said the third
month
it was like someone pushed
a button. That's a quote from Mr. Brown. His
personality changed
completely and he had to be fired.
Q.
Okay, did Mr. Brown
relate any other information with regard to Mr.
Campbell?
A. Yes, he told me that one
of the reasons he had to be fired was
because
Mr. Campbell was telling
his students stories about his parachuting
while
they were supposed to be
getting flight instruction, and his students
were
beginning to complain that
they weren't receiving the flight instruction
that they were paying for.
Q. At that time Mr. Brown
did not relate anything with regard to -- I
refer
you to page 36 -- do you
have a copy -- at that first phone call that
you
had with Mr. Brown, he did
not relate anything with regard to Mr.
Campbell's conversation
with a minister on the telephone which is
embodied
in the second to the last
paragraph, that letter on page 36?
A. Not my first
conversation, no.
Q. At a subsequent time,
did you speak with Mr. Brown?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And at that time did he
relate anything with regard to this story?
A. Yes, he told me the
story that is written in his letter here.
Q. Okay, could you just
relate what that was?
A. Okay. He said that a
friend -- a girl -- from Alabama had come up to
Georgia to visit a friend
out there, and while she was there, the girl
and
Mr. Campbell met and they
went out a couple of times. One day Mr.
Campbell
came in to speak to James
Brown, and he said that the girl had to go
home
immediately because her
house had burned down the night before, and so
he
made sure that she got on a
bus, home to Alabama. He discovered shortly
afterwards that that never
occurred. She did go home on the bus, but she
went home because her stay
was over. She was just going home; that was
all.
Her house had never burned
down. Later Mr. Campbell said that on the
way to
Alabama the bus that the
girl was taking had an accident and the girl
was
in critical condition in
the hospital, and Mr. Campbell went to see her
a
couple of times in Alabama.
One afternoon Mr. Campbell
was talking to the minister on the telephone,
and he was in Mr. Brown's
office or building there in Georgia, and Mr.
Brown went to make a phone
call, and he didn't realize that Mr. Campbell
was on the phone, and he
picked up the telephone and overheard Mr.
Campbell
telling the minister about
the girl in the accident, and he said,
frankly,
he just decided to continue
listening rather than put the phone back
down
again, and he heard Mr.
Campbell tell the minister that he was there in
Alabama with his girlfriend
and she was right down the hall from him
and he
proceeded to tell the
minister of the injuries, the head injuries and
she
was in critical condition;
I can't recall all the injuries that he said.
Q: Well, at the time he was
telling the minister he was in Alabama, he
was
sitting in his office in
Georgia?
A. Yes.
Q. Did Mr. Brown, in either
conversation you had with him, relate any
other
information with regard to
Mr. Campbell?
A. I don't believe so.
Q. Okay.
JUDGE CAPPS: Let me ask you
this. Was the girl, in fact, ever involved
in a
bus accident?
THE WITNESS: No.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. Go
ahead.
BY MS. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. Getting back to the
problems at Nashua and Daniel Webster College,
after
you checked out Mr.
Campbell's ratings and spoke with Mr. Brown, what
did
you do at that time?
A. I arranged to have a
meeting with Mr. Campbell and myself and another
inspector in the office,
Mr. David Greensbach. We went to Nashua
Aviation
and met with Mr. Campbell
and Steve Rachelson.
Q. And
during the course of
that conversation, what did Mr. Campbell
relate
to you?
A. Okay. The first thing
that we did was to tell him why we were here
and
of the problems with Daniel
Webster College. And, immediately Mr.
Campbell
says that what Daniel
Webster College is doing to him was a felony and
he
currently engaged an
attorney in Nashua and had a lawsuit against Daniel
Webster College. He also
said that he had a student rally in the
auditorium
of Daniel Webster College,
with approximately two hundred people there
and
it made the faculty look
foolish because the students were on Mr.
Campbell's side. He was
questioned about the newspaper article, about
the
doctor in Tulsa, and Mr.
Campbell said that that did happen; however, it
happened at a time in his
life when he was not himself, and the reason
for
it was because he had lost
his wife and his child in a car accident.
Q. That's what he told you
was the reason for this behavior in Oklahoma?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you ever able to
ascertain whether or not Mr. Campbell had been
married?
A. No, I wasn't.
JUDGE CAPPS: You were not
able to ascertain that?
THE WITNESS: No.
BY MS. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. You could not find any
proof that he had been married; is that
correct?
A. Right, that's correct.
Q. In the course of your
investigation, did you ascertain whether or not
Mr. Campbell had related
the story of his wife and child being killed to
other people?
A. Repeat that question.
Q. In the course of your
investigation, did you ascertain whether or not
Mr. Campbell had told this
story of his wife and child being killed to
anyone other than yourself
during the course of your interviewing?
A. Yes, he told that to
very many people.
Q. And, in fact, he told
that to the Dean of the College; did he not?
A. Yes.
Q. And that information is
set forth in the file, Your Honor, pages 16
to
33, which is a compilation
of information from the Dean of Daniel
Webster
College. Did you, at
anytime, speak with Dean Schultz of Daniel Webster
College?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And, what did he relate
to you with regard to Mr. Campbell's
problems at
the school?
A. DR Schultz had told me
that he had hired Mr. Campbell to teach a
meteorology and a private
pilot ground school course there at the
College,
and during the course of
his teaching he became concerned because he was
receiving some complaints
that Mr. Campbell was spending the time
talking
about parachuting rather
than teaching the course. And, about the same
time
Dr. Schultz said that a
Howard White, and I cannot recall his title --
New
England Conference of some
kind, I can't remember -
Q. Would it be the New
England Conference Coordinator for the US
Parachute
Association?
A. Yes. He came in to see
Dr. Schultz and he told him there were
a couple
of things that he should
know about Mr. Campbell, and that is
when the
problem started.
Q. And this information is
set forth in Dr. Schultz' report on
pages 27
through 33. What did Mr.
White indicate was the problem with Mr.
Campbell's
parachuting; his
certificates?
A. Mr. White did not say
anything that I recall, at least
Q. Okay, you spoke to Mr.
King?
A. Yes.
Q. It was Mr. White that
first brought the problem to Dr. Schultz'
attention?
A Yes.
Q. And in the course of
your investigation, you, yourself, did not
speak to
Mr. White -- you spoke to
Mr. King?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is Mr. King?
A. I cannot remember
without looking it up.
Q. Okay, go ahead and take
a look at your notes.
A. He is the Executive
Director for the United States Parachuting
Association.
Q. And,
in your
conversation with Mr. King, what did he tell you
concerning
Mr. Campbell's affiliation
with the U.S. Parachuting Association?
A. Mr. King told me that
Mr. Campbell did belong to the U.S.P.A., the
United States Parachuting
Association, at one time, but he was currently
suspended from it for
various reasons. The first reason is because he
tried
to parachute off the top of
the World Trade Center. The second reason
was
Mr. Campbell was using the
U.S.P.A., insasfar as saying he was a current
U.S.P.A., instructor, and
he was not. He had also rented several films
from
the U.S.P.A. which Mr. King
could not get Mr. Campbell to return. So,
for
these reasons he was
suspended.
Q. At the time you began --
you were investigating this part of the case
and the parachuting aspects
of the case, did you ascertain at this time
whether or not Mr. Campbell
had a Parachute Rigger's Certificate?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And, what was the result
of that search?
A. Oklahoma City has no
record of Mr. Campbell ever having a Parachute
Rigger's Certificate.
JUDGE CAPPS: Had he ever
applied for one?
THE WITNESS: They have no
record of him ever doing that in any respect.
BY MR. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. I want to refer you to
pages 39 and 40 in the record, and Miss
Taylor,
could you tell us what
those pages are?
A. These are the
application for employment which Mr. Campbell filled
out
before he started to work
for Nashua Aviation.
Q. And, at the bottom of
page 39, what did he indicate with regard to
his
parachuting skills?
A. He put down that he was
an FAA Senior Parachute Rigger, an instructor
certified in parachutes.
Q. And as a result of your
investigation, you ascertained that neither
of
those claims were correct?
A. Yes.
Q.
Also, referring to this
application, on page 40, at the top of the
page,
Mr. Campbell indicated
there that he was employed by the Screen Actor's
Guild in Burbank,
California. Did you make any inquiries with regard to
that?
A. Yes, I did, and they
have no record of him ever belonging to the
Screen
Actor's Guild.
Q. And, as a result of your
investigation, did you ascertain whether or
not
Mr. Campbell had indicated
to people that he had been a stuntman in
various
James Bond movies and
different television series such as Charlie's
Angels?
A. Yes, he has.
Q. And that information was
also encompassed in Dean Schultz' report on
pages 16 through 33O
Did Dr. Schultz indicate to
you that those types of claims had been
made to
him?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And did Dr. Schultz
indicate whether or not he, himself, had
attempted
to verify whether or not
Mr. Campbell was employed by the Screen Actor's
Guild?
A. Yes, he, himself, called
and got the same answer as I did.
Q. Did
Dr. Schultz indicate
that Mr. Campbell had made any other claims
with regard to his teaching
in the past?
A. Yes. Dr. Schultz said
that Mr. Campbell had told him that he was an
instructor for the Aircraft
Owner's and Pilots Association, a ground
school
instructor.
O And did Dr. Schultz
attempt to verify that information?
A: Yes, he did.
Q. And what was the result
of that search?
A. The AOPA does not have
any record of Mr. Campbell ever working for
them?
JUDGE CAPPS: What's the
name of that company?
THE WITNESS: Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association.
BY MS. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. Did you, yourself, make
any efforts to verify whether he was
employed by
the Aircraft Owners and
Pilots Association?
A. Yes, I called, also.
Q. And what did they tell
you?
A. He was never employed.
Q. As a result of your
investigation, what action did the FAA
take?
A. After my investigation,
I wrote a memo to Dr. Cahill, the
Regional
Flight Surgeon, and Dr.
Cahill wrote a letter to Mr. Campbell
requesting
further medical records
from him
Q. About this time Mr.
Campbell was also fired from Daniel Webster
College;
was he not?
A. Yes, he was fired from
Daniel Webster College, and he was suspended
from
Nashua Aviation from
teaching until this matter was cleared up.
Q. And eventually what was
the result of his teaching position at Daniel
Webster? What happened with
regard to the teaching position? Did he keep
it?
A. No. No, he lost that.
Q. Then he was fired by the
College?
A. Yes.
Q. When he left the area,
where did he indicate that he was going?
A. He indicated that he was
going to fly for Air South in Florida.
Q. And was he ever traced
to their company in Florida?
A. No.
Q. And this was about the
same time that he was told that he was under
investigation by the FAA?
A. Yes.
Q. I just want to ask you
-- concerning your interview with Mr.
Campbell,
the interview that you had
-- questioning him about the certificate --
what
was your first impression
of him when you met him?
A. My first impression of
Mr. Campbell was that he was very convincing,
and
I believed everything that
he was telling me, and I did believe that he
was
a victim of other people's
prejudices.
Q. And he told you about
his wife and child and you believed that part
of
the story?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And as a result of your
investigation -- strike that - what did your
later investigations reveal
about what Mr. Campbell had told you during
the
interview?
A. My later investigation
as to what he told me revealed that nothing
that
he told me was correct or
undistorted. It was basically untrue.
Q. With the exception of
the fact that he did have, to the best of our
knowledge, valid FAA
Certificates, except for his medical?
A. Yes.
Q. After Mr. Campbell left
the area and went to California, in the
course
of preparation for this
hearing and your investigation, did you speak
with
anyone at Western and Piper
Sales in Fresno?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. What was their title?
A. I spoke with the
bookkeeper at Western.
Q. And that is someone
other than Dianne Stuart?
A. Yes.
Q. Dianne Stuart's letter
appears on pages 34 and 35. What did the
bookkeeper at Western and
Piper Sales tell you with regard to the
employment of Mr. Campbell
with Western and Piper?
A. She told me that Mr.
Campbell worked with them for approximately two
to
three months and he was
fired, eventually, for several reasons. The
first
reason was he was suspected
of taking money from the petty cash drawer.
Another reason was his wild
stories and she related only one of those to
me.
Q. What was the story that
she related to you?
A. She told me that Mr. Campbell
was asked to shave
off his beard. It is part
of the dress code
for Western Air, and Mr.
Campbell said he would rather not
because while he
was in Vietnam he got a
shrapnel wound in the jaw, and the
beard was hiding that.
Q. How old was Mr. Campbell
at that time?
A. He was approximately
seventeen.
Q. During the Vietnam War?
A. Approximately seventeen.
Q. What else did the
bookkeeper at Western and Piper tell you, if
anything?
A. Yes, she did. She had
also said that Mr. Campbell started to give
away
their instructional
supplies and books to his friends as Christmas gifts
around Christmas time. She
also told me that Mr. Campbell made
approximately $200 worth of
long distance telephone calls, and when
later
confronted with it for
payment, he denied that he ever made the calls.
Q. I want to refer you to
page 34 and 35, which is the letter from
Dianne
Stuart at Western and
Piper, and ask you, what does she -- in that
letter,
is there any indication
that Mr. Campbell has ever had a problem in
flying,
actually in flying
situations?
A. Yes. Mr. Campbell would
claim that he had more than one malfunction
in
the aircraft which forced
him to make emergency landings on more than
one
occasion, and when
inspected by the mechanics and the FAA, they could
find
nothing wrong with the
airplane.
Q. And this happened on
more than one occasion?
A. Yes.
Q. And did Mrs. Stuart
indicate that Mr. Campbell also related the
story of
his wife and child being
killed in a car accident to people at Western
and
Piper, on page 34?
A. She did.
Q. And, on page 35, does
she also indicate that Mr. Campbell had a
problem
with regard to some friends
being killed while skydiving?
A. Yes.
Q. And what was that?
A. Mr. Campbell had told
her that five of his friends were killed in a
skydiving accident, and he
was quite upset about that.
Q. And what did the
investigation by local authorities come up with?
A. The skydiving accident
happened several years earlier.
Q. And does Mrs. Stuart
also indicate that Mr. Campbell represented
himself
as a parachute rigger out
at Western and Piper?
A. Yes, she did.
Q. And, with regard to Mr.
Campbell's attempt to jump off the World
Trade
Center, what did he tell
people out in Western Piper Sales concerning
his
jump?
A. He told people at
Western Air that he did jump off the World Trade
Center.
Q. And he had the article
referrals to back it up?
A. Yes.
Q. When you spoke to the
bookkeeper at Western Piper, what did she
indicate
were some of the problems
that students had with Mr. Campbell as an
instructor?
A. One problem in
particular the students had was a lot of students had
complained that they did
not want to get into the same airplane with Mr.
Campbell because of his
grooming.
JUDGE CAPPS: That is very
general. Did she get more specific?
THE WITNESS: Yes, she did.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay, I'd like
to hear it.
THE WITNESS: She said that
the students did not want to get into the
same
airplane with Mr. Campbell
because of his odor.
BY MS. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. And did they attempt to
verify where he was residing at that time?
A. Yes, they did.
Q. And were they able to?
A. No, they weren't able to
find out.
Q. And, what did she relate
-- did she indicate whether or not she knew
whether he had a place to
live?
A. She indicated to me that
she did not know, but she had suspected
that he
did not have a place to
live.
Q: Did she give you any
opinion with regard to Mr. Campbell's behavior?
A. Yes, she had told me
that, as an example, when Mr. Campbell was
confronted with the
telephone calls, he became very angry, and -
JUDGE CAPPS: Confronted
with what telephone calls?
THE WITNESS: The telephone
calls that he made all over the country and
charged to the company.
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh, I see; the
long distance calls.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay.
THE WITNESS: Mr. Campbell
became very angry, and it was her opinion and
other people's opinion that
he could become very violent, and they were
actually afraid of him
going out to the flight line and deliberately
breaking and smashing
airplanes on the front line.
BY MS. HAUSELT (Resuming):
Q. At the time he made all
these phone calls, was there any effort made
to
trace the phone calls?
A. Yes, there was. The
telephone company, themselves, traced the phone
calls and did find out that
Mr. Campbell did make the phone calls.
Q. So, it was verified by
the phone company, through the people who
received the phone calls
that Mr. Campbell had made them?
A. Yes.
Q. And when he was
confronted with this, he denied it?
A. Yes, he denied it.
Q. Did the bookkeeper
relate any other information, or did she give you
an
opinion as to -- did she
give you her opinion as to Mr. Campbell's
behavior?
A. Yes, she did.
JUDGE CAPPS: Now, the
bookkeeper is not Mrs. Stuart?
THE WITNESS: No, she's not.
JUDGE CAPPS: all right, now
we're back on the bookkeeper. This other
stuff,
Mrs. Stuart told you?
THE WITNESS: No, no, no.
The bookkeeper told me. I have never spoken
with
Mrs. Stuart.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay.
MS. HAUSELT: The references
to what Mrs. Stuart said are in a letter on
page 34 and 35.
JUDGE CAPPS: I've got that
down, yes.
MS HAUSELT: Conversation
that I had with Mrs. Stuart.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Okay, you can continue.
A. It was her opinion that
Mr. Campbell could not take care of himself.
Q. In the course of your
investigation, did you ascertain where --
JUDGE CAPPS: Wait -- I'll
need some more explanation along those lines.
THE WITNESS: That's all she
said. I didn't pursue | it any further.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Did she make any comment
with regard to his medical state?
A. Not that I -
Q. Did
she make any
comments as to whether she thought Mr. Campbell was
mentally stable or unstable?
A. Yes, she did. She said
-- not her exact words, but she did say that
she
thought Mr. Campbell was
not stable.
Q. I think, for the
purposes of the Judge, you should tell the Judge, to
the best of your knowledge,
or the best of your recollection, what words
she used.
A. Exact words?
Q. Yes.
A. Okay. She said Mr.
Campbell was looney tunes.
Q. In the course of your
investigation, did you find out where Mr.
Campbell
went after he left Western
Piper in Fresno?
A. Yes. He went up to work
for IASCO.
Q. And, did you speak to -
JUDGE CAPPS: What is IASCO?
THE WITNESS: I'll have to
look that up, too.
JUDGE CAPPS: Is that
International --
THE WITNESS: Air Service
Corporation.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. And they are affiliated
with Japan Airlines?
A. Yes.
Q. And what -- did you
speak to anyone at IASCO?
A. Yes. I spoke to a Mr.
Scarboro.
Q. And he's the Chief
Flight Instructor?
A. Yes, he is.
Q. And, what did he relate
were Mr. Campbell's duties at the time?
A. Mr. Campbell was
assigned to teaching single engine airplane
students,
primary students.
Q. And at anytime was Mr.
Campbell involved in operating Boeing 747's or
any other air carrier jets?
A. No, he wasn't.
Q. And Mr. Scarboro's
statement is summarized in a letter, Your Honor,
on
page 7. After Mr.
Campbell's Medical Certificate was suspended,
he then
returned to his home; is
that correct? To the best of your knowledge?
A: He returned to Nashua.
Q. Did you receive any
information from people in Nashua?
JUDGE CAPPS: Now, is Nashua
-- is that New Hampshire?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. That they had seen Mr.
Campbell?
A. Yes. Mr. Campbell had
talked to several people who I did get
statements
from. Mr. Campbell was at
both the campus of Daniel Webster
College and
Nashua Aviation School in a
Japan Airlines uniform, and was telling
people
that he was either captain
or co-pilot. He has used both terms -- on a
Falcon Jet, and was flying
from California to Boston to England to
Japan,
and he was, at that time,
in Boston, overnight at a layover.
Q. And those letters -- are
those letters the letters that we find in
the
file on pages 11 through 15?
A. Yes, they are.
Q. And did you speak with
any of the people who wrote these letters,
personally?
A. Yes, I spoke to two of
them.
Q. Who were they?
A. A Robert Swift, who is
now the Chief Flight Instructor for Nashua
Aviation.
Q. And Mr. Campbell related
to him that he was the captain of a Falcon
20
and the co-pilot on a 747?
A. Yes.
Q. And he was wearing his
Japan Airlines uniform?
A. Yes.
Q. Who else did you speak
to?
A. I also spoke to a flight
instructor there, Don Conlon.
Q. And what did he relate
with regard to Mr. Campbell?
A. He said that Mr.
Campbell told him he was a captain on a Falcon Jet
and
he was going to school to
become co-pilot on a 747.
Q. And at that time he was
wearing his uniform?
A. Yes, he was.
Q. When you spoke to Mr.
Scarboro from IASCO, did he indicate whether or
not Mr. Campbell properly
retained his uniform when he left?
A. He never returned the
uniform when he left.
Q. But he was asked to
return it?
A. Yes, he was asked to
return it then, and also afterwards.
Q. And, in fact, on page 8,
which is a letter of Mr. Campbell, he
indicates
to Mr. Scarboro that he
would send the uniform back, did he not?
A. Yes.
MS HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
have no further questions.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right, you
may cross-examine the witness.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. CAMPBELL:
Q. It seems we have quite a
bit of material here to cover. I'm going to
have to start, I guess, in
order, with the documents presented and as
the
information presents
itself, as questions occur. Specifically, the first
question I have in
reference to your investigation, under what right of
what legal process were you
entitled to make this investigation?
A. There was some question
as to whether you were able, legally, to
hold a
Medical Certificate, and it
was our concern and the FAA, when it was
brought up, that you were
going to teach two hundred people how to
parachute, whether you had
the proper certificate and/or ratings
necessary
to do it.
Q. What does the FAA
require for parachuting instructor?
A. Nothing, but we do for a
rigger.
Q. There is no license,
whatsoever, actually required for the
instructor of
parachuting?
A. Not by the FAA, no.
Q. Under any legal
jurisdiction that you know of, is a parachuting
instructor certificate
required?
A. No, not that I know of.
Q. Was it your
understanding that I, at one time, had passed an
instructor's certification
course and held, at one point, a valid
parachuting instructor's
certificate?
A. No, you didn't.
Q. At no time did I hold a
valid parachuting instructor's certificate;
is
that -
A. There is no such thing.
Q. As issued by the United
States Parachute Association.
A. Okay, yes, at one time
you did.
Q. And, that -- strike that
-- okay, going back to Daniel Webster
College,
at that point in time you
started investigation by calling some people I
had worked for. I would
like to specifically go back to Mr. Brown's
letter,
which is rather important.
Mr. Brown did state to you that no fire -- I
repeat, no fire had
occurred in the home of the young lady I was seeing?
A. What page are you on?
Q. I believe that's 36.
A. That is what Mr. Brown
told me last week.
Q. All right. Did Mr. Brown
indicate at any time any problems with any
other instructor?
A. No.
Q. And Mr. Brown stated --
what did Mr. Brown state in reference to how
I
left employment?
A. He said you were fired.
Q. He said I was fired?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Did he give
any rationale whatsoever for the sudden
change in
behavior that he described?
A. No, and I didn't ask him
for it either.
Q. Did he, at any time,
expound on any other incidents, specifically
involving his daughter?
A. No; I had never heard of
that before.
Q. Now, he had stated that
he was listening in on the phone during a
conversation with my pastor
when, supposedly I was in Alabama; is that
correct?
A. Yes, but he said he did
that accidentally, at first.
Q. Accidentally, at first.
He made no mention of any other phone calls?
A. No, not to my knowledge.
I did not question him very thoroughly.
JUDGE CAPPS: And he did not
volunteer any other instance of overhearing
telephone conversations?
THE WITNESS: No, he really
didn't volunteer anything. I had to
specifically
ask him for everything, as
I did with all the witnesses.
BY MR. CAMPBELL (Resuming)
Q. By any chance did you
investigate Mr. Brown's background?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. To your knowledge, has
Mr. Brown ever had any problems with the
Federal
Aviation Administration or
any law enforcement agency?
A. As far as -- the only
thing that I had asked about Mr. Brown was
when I
called the local Federal
Aviation office down there, to get a telephone
number for Mr. Brown, and I
did ask whether or not he was considered a
good
examiner, and they said,
yes, we have no problems with him.
Q. I have some questions
about the application for employment. I do not
take issue with statements
concerning parachute rigging and so forth;
however, I would like to
know under what circumstances was this document
reproduced?
A. Under what circumstances?
Q. Who reproduced it and
how? I do take exception to something on here
that
I know I didn't put down.
A. Steve Rachelson
reproduced it while you were there watching him do
it,
while you were there for
the interview.
Q. I don't recall. Did you
see me watching him reproduce this thing?
A. No, I don't remember
that. We reproduced your application and your
Pilot's Certificate.
Q. In your conversations
with the United States Parachute Association,
did
they bring up a letter from
Oklahoma from a Mr. Ken Hills in regards to
a
rigger problem on a Rigger
Certificate?
A. Yes, they did.
Q. Let me ask you something
-- what is the -- under what circumstances,
under what FAA
jurisdiction, how does the FAA control parachute rigging?
What parachutes are
required to be packed, supervised or inspected by a
certified rigger?
A. The FAA -- okay -- a
person cannot pack someone else's parachute or
his
own reserve emergency chute
without a rigger's certificate.
Q: All right
A: You may pack your own,
but you cannot pack your own reserve chute.
Q. Let me ask you this --
page 43, 44, 45 -- it is my understanding that
the removal or tampering
with any piece of equipment directly covered or
directly controlled by the
Federal Aviation Administration is a
violation;
is that correct?
A. I don't really know what
you're referring to.
Q. This is packing card, a
packing data card, called PC
A. On page what?
Q. Page 44 and 45 -- would
removal of such a certificate from a pack
reserve constitute a
violation?
A. I don't know.
Q. It was my understanding
that it is.
Page 44 -- would you please
take a look at the owner' name and address
and
please state.
A. The owner's name is Jim
Campbell. There is no address.
Q. All right. Now, the
configuration this is rigged in - let me ask you
this -- I realize that
you're expertise not being parachuting, but I'm
just
going to have to try this
same tack because there's a problem here, and
I'd
like to bring it out. In
what's called a cutaway rig, a rig containing a
total of three parachutes,
only the actual reserve, the one used for
emergency purposes, would
be covered by the FAR's; is that correct?
A. No.
Q. What other parachute
would be covered?
A. Well, maybe I did not
understand your question. It isn't that a
reserve
chute is covered by the
Regulations. The Regulations deal with what a
person can do and cannot do
with or without a certificate.
Q. But that's not the
question here. The question - may I expound on
this a
little bit?
A. Certainly.
Q. Basically, this -- this
rig is part of what's called an intentional
cutaway rig used for air
shows, three parachutes. What happened was I
attached an extra set of D
rings to the front end of what's called a
piggyback rig, where the
main and reserve are in tandem on the back.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
I'll object. Mr. Campbell is not under oath.
JUDGE CAPPS: He's
establishing a premise right now to his question that
will be coming up. I think
he's trying to make the import of his
question
clearer to the witness, and
that's why I'm going to allow this premise
to
be established in the
question.
MS. HAUSELT: The premise.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, that's
right. I'm not taking that as any sort of
statement.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. Okay, we're talking
about an intentional cutaway rig, specifically
contains three parachutes,
two mounted on the back of which
construction,
in my opinion and as far as
I know, really do not matter, and the actual
emergency parachute being
carried on the chest mount. Now, the -- under
the circumstances the main
is released, the reserve is deployed,
possibly
released, and the third
parachute, the chest mount, becomes the actual
reserve. Would it be
correct to state that the reserve, the chest mount,
would be the only one that
would need to be covered under Federal
Aviation
Administration Regulations?
A. I don't believe I have
enough knowledge to say yes or no to that
question The only thing
that I am going by is what the Regulations say.
JUDGE CAPPS: But the
Regulations do say that if you pack another's
parachute or a reserve
parachute, it requires the FAA Certificate.
THE WITNESS: Right, it does.
JUDGE CAPPS: So, the import
of his question - is one of these three-part
parachutes is characterized
as a reserve. Would that require -- even if
it's his own parachute --
the fact that it's a reserve, would that
require?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it would.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. In that case, if I am
jumping with three reserve type manufactured
parachutes, all three would
require certification and inspection and
packing by a certified
rigger?
A. I don't know.
Q. Okay, let me expand a
little on the premise The rig was used as an
intentional cutaway rig.
The first, the main was a square-type canopy,
the
second was a reserve -
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
object. I think that we understand that what
he's saying is he had one
main chute and he had one or more "reserve"
chutes. The question is, do
those reserve chutes have to be packed by a
parachute rigger. That's a
legal question. I have a copy of the
Regulations. I'll look it
up, but whether or not Miss Taylor can answer
that detailed a question
about how the Regulation is interpreted, I
don't
know, and I believe she's
indicated that she doesn't. But what the
Regulation says is that you
can't pack a reserve chute, and I'll look it
up, but I assume any -- a
reserve chute is a reserve chute, whether you
have one or two.
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, the
issue before me is really not his qualification
for
an FAA Rigger Parachute
Certificate. What I am concerned with is this is
one of many instances of
certain statements made by the Respondent as to
his qualifications which,
in fact, checking with Oklahoma City records
indicates an application
was never made for -- that's the only point I
have
to decide here. It's not
really, technically, what you would need this
thing for anything. She
explained that that's how the FAA got involved
in
this in the first place.
That's all.
MR. CAMPBELL: Okay, well,
my premise here is simply that this reserve
did
not need a rigger to pack
it. I packed it. I signed it, specifically
because it was set up as a
reserve and I was curious to see how it would
work. It was also
specifically marked as an intentional cutaway rig;
this
card was removed at some
time. I don't even remember losing it, to be
frank, because I lose them
rather easily, and my supposition is this --
that this rig did not need
a rigger to be packed.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
that is not really one of the allegations being
made, that you rigged a
parachute in violation of an FAA requirement
that
you have a certificate
before you did that. The thing that's before me
is
that you have stated you
were an FAA certified parachute rigger, when,
in
fact, you were not. That's
all.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
believe that the card, and I will take this
up
on re-direct, there is a
question as to whether or not Mr. Campbell did
sign his own reserve chute
when he was not qualified to do so, and I'll
bring that up on re-direct.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. I'm just going to have
to leave that because it's rather
complex. 46,
47, the newspaper article
-- let me ask this from your point of
view or
from the FAA's point of
view, as far as you are concerned, what part did
this newspaper article play
in the investigation and conclusions on the
part of Dr. Cahill and your
report to Dr. Cahill?
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
I'll object. She's not qualified to speak.
She's
not a medical doctor. She's
only here to give what her investigation
revealed. She can't say how
this medical determination was made in Mr.
Campbell's case. That's
what we have the FAA doctor for.
JUDGE CAPPS: Sustained.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. Let me ask you this --
what was your impression of the newspaper
article?
A. I'm sorry, I didn't hear
the question.
Q. What was your impression
of the newspaper article?
A. As with any newspaper
article, take it with a grain of salt.
Q. Did you make any attempt
to verify any of the statements or speak to
anybody in Oklahoma
concerning the article itself?
A. No, I did not. The only
person that I talked to about it was you.
Q. Did you speak to Dr.
Dorsey at all?
A. No, I never did.
Q. Let's go back a moment.
In your conversations with Dr. Schultz, Dr.
Schultz said that one time
or another his words were, "instructed for
the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association Ground School"?
A. Yes, he told me you told
him that you worked for the Aircraft Owners
and
Pilots Association on those
weekend ground school courses.
Q. I had worked on, not
taken one?
A. You had taught one.
Q. Okay, I had physically
taught one. Was there any verification of
that in
the form of a written
resume'?
A. From the AOPA?
Q. No, from me to Dr.
Schultz, saying, for one thing, for one reason or
another, that I had taught
for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association?
A. Not that I know of, but
I do not know --
Q. In your investigation of
the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Associations,
were you able to ascertain
whether I had taken any of their clinics?
A. No, I never asked that.
That wasn't the issue.
Q. It can be an issue,
dismissing the standards. Now, Dr.
Schultz, did he
indicate during the period
of time that this was being questioned,
during
the time that I was still
in the area, did he indicate any desire to
quickly get the matter over
with or to resolve the matter in a quiet
disposition or take care of
it as -- or on the QT, I guess would be --
A. No, I don't recall him
making those statements.
Q. Are you aware of any
other problems he's had with any other faculty?
A. Yes.
Q. By any chance, could you
repeat what you know of that?
A. Problems that he has
with his faculty have been recent problems, the
past six to eight months,
with instructors quitting and leaving.
Q. What about any problem
where an instructor of the College was let go
or
fired?
A. No, I don't know about
that.
Q. In your investigation,
did you check with -- strike that -- I have an
excuse, not being -- this
is difficult - what I'd like to do is just --
we've talked quite a bit of
Steve Rachelson, and as a matter of fact, I
think you've known him for
quite some time.
A. Yes, he's also a friend
of mine.
Q. Yes, he talked about you
before.
What was Steve's general
attitude toward my employment? At the time he
called me, what was his
general attitude toward my employment and his
judgment of the job I had
done?
A. He did not say what his
opinion of your performance was. The only
thing
-
Q. He'd never say that I
did a good job, a bad job, mediocre?
A. No, he never did; not
that I remember. He was willing to keep you
there
until matters could be
cleared up.
Q. Okay, about the last
thing I have here is -- now, this is going to be
very important, I think --
we have a situation where I was at Nashua in
the
past several months, well,
actually, going backwards, but several months
after I originally left,
and apparently a statement said that I had
showed
up in uniform and so forth;
what time did this occur? What day?
A. April 18th and 19th,
1980.
Q. April 18th and 19th.
A. Yes.
Q. You're absolutely sure
of this? There's no doubt in your mind?
A. No doubt.
Q. Absolutely? All right.
And, also, there is a statement from one
person
here -
JUDGE CAPPS: April 18 and
19 what year?
THE WITNESS: 1980.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. Okay, there's a
statement here from Richard T. Sweet. Did you speak
to
him, specifically?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. If I may repeat it -- "
I am writing by request of Robert Smith, who
is
my flight instructor,
concerning Mr. James Campbell; I'm not sure what
the
date was exactly at the
time he had been around. In his exact words, he
told me that he flew for
Japan Airlines over the route that went from
California to Japan and
England. He also said he was in 747 training for
one week a month and that
he flew Falcons the other three weeks. Who is
Richard Sweet?
A. I believe he was just a
student there.
Q. I don't know the
gentleman. That's why I'm asking. Let me ask you who
Jimmy Cotes was?
A. I believe he's also a
student. I would have to double check.
JUDGE CAPPS: Did you speak
to him?
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. A
student at Nashua or at Daniel Webster?
THE WITNESS: No, Nashua
Aviation.
JUDGE CAPPS: And, the same
Ray Cote and Sweet?
THE WITNESS: No, all the
statements are from Nashua Aviation.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay.
MR. CAMPBELL: I have a
question for the Judge. Do I have a right
to
question Miss Taylor in the
future or is this my only opportunity?
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, this is
your only opportunity to question her, unless
there is re-direct, and
then you'd have a chance at re-cross.
MR. CAMPBELL: I see.
JUDGE CAPPS: Do you want to
recess to enable you to look through some of
that stuff and get your
thoughts in mind?
MR. CAMPBELL: I was not
aware that Miss Taylor would be here. The
possibility apparently had
existed, although some doubt was cast on
that.
JUDGE CAPPS: Do you want a
ten-minute recess to --
MR. CAMPBELL: I'd
appreciate five or ten minutes. I really would.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
we'll take a ten-minute
(Whereupon, a ten-minute
recess was taken.)
JUDGE CAPPS: You may
continue your cross-examination.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you
very much.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. In reference to your
conversations with Western Piper personnel,
specifically the bookkeeper
and whatever knowledge you may have
concerning
Mrs. Stuart, number one,
the bookkeeper who rendered various opinions,
for
instance, by any chance is
she a psychologist or a psychiatrist?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. Does she have any type
of medical training which would enable her to
make such a judgment?
A. No, not that I know.
Q. What about Mrs. Stuart?
A. Not that I know.
Q. By any chance, did
Western Piper indicate to you any of the problems
I
had with them concerning
their maintenance procedures?
A. No.
Q. Now, specifically the
statement from Mrs. Stuart concerning a landing
that I had to make in a
Tomahawk on a highway during a period of
inclement
weather in November last
year, in fact, about this time last year if I
remember correctly. There
is a statement here that said that -- just a
moment and I'll read it
back -- "Mr. Campbell arrived at that location
by
ferrying a Tomahawk from
our factory in Pennsylvania, which provided him
with free transportation
from his home on the East Coast to our place of
business in central
California. Then inflight a sort of emergency arose,
forcing him to set the
aircraft down on a Maryland interstate highway.
Investigation by the FAA
and the aircraft factory representatives could
find no cause for the
incident." Are you aware of any investigation?
A. No, just what I read
here.
Q. Would any investigation
of this nature be brought to your attention?
A. No, there's no reason
for it to be.
Q. Would something like
this be easily verified?
A. No, it would be very
difficult to verify it.
Q. All right. Okay. She
also stated, producing newspaper articles and
photos, - Well, In
reference to World Trade Center escapade; I guess
that's
the best word for it --
"Producing newspaper articles and photos to
back up
his claim". Specifically,
the only newspaper articles I'm aware of were
published in this area. Did
she state anything about the content of
those
newspaper articles?
A. No, she didn't. You are
referring to Mrs. Stuart?
Q. Mrs. Stuart, that's
right.
A. I did not talk to Mrs.
Stuart, personally.
Q. Okay. In your
conversation with the bookkeeper, was any reference
made
to any such article?
A. No, this was never
brought up at all.
Q. Okay.
A. Oh, I'm sorry, yes, it
was.
Q. All right. Specifically
what?
A. She had told me that you
did tell her and others that you did
parachute
off the World Trade Center.
Q. All right. Did she
mention anything about producing newspaper
articles
and so forth?
A. No, it wasn't mentioned.
Q. In reference to the
International Air Service Company, and I take a
great deal of interest in
this, for two reasons. One, because I hope to
resume employment there
someday, which may or may not be possible.
Exactly, during your
request of information from the International Air
Service Company, what
information did you give them concerning my
situation?
A. Are you referring to a
page in particular?
Q. There is a letter from
the International Air Service Company, right
here, page 7, and here is
some other documentation that goes with it,
from
Ed Scarboro concerning my
employment with the International Air Service
Company, my
responsibilities and my performance. In order to get this
information, I'm sure you
had to make a request. What information was
given
to Mr. Scarboro during this
request?
A. I did not make the
request for this particular letter.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
would state for the record that I made the
request and I made the
initial contact with Mr. Scarboro.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, the
letter is addressed to Ms. Hauselt.
MR. CAMPBELL: My mistake,
I'm sorry.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. In other words, you had
nothing to do with the International Air
Service
Company, then?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. You did? Did he
characterize my performance during my brief time at
International Air Service
Company?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Specifically what did he
say?
A. He said you a very good
employee.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
would state that I would object. This is
irrelevant. We do not claim
that Mr. Campbell is not a technically
qualified pilot. What we
were after is his judgment that goes to his
personality.
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, she has
testified, though, about conversations -- a
conversation with Mr.
Scarboro, so I'm going to allow him to go into
this.
I think you were in the
process of his characterization of the
Respondent's
performance while he was
employed by International Air Service Company,
and
what was that
characterization?
THE WITNESS: Mr. Scarboro
had no problems with Mr. Campbell. He said he
was
a very good employee, and a
good pilot.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. Just for a point I'll be
bringing up later, could you please tell me
protocol involved in the
seizure of that Medical Certificate?
A. Say that again.
Q. What is the protocol
involved in the seizure of the Certificate?
A. I couldn't answer that.
I don't know.
Q. Going back to Mr. Brown
-- did you make any attempt to verify any of
the
statements in that letter,
specifically did you check with the young
lady
involved concerning her
situation and her plight?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. And, in reference to a
statement by the United States Parachute
Association, did they or
did they not state that they suspended my
instructor privileges in
relation to the United States Parachute
Association?
A. All they said was you
had been suspended from the U.S.P.A. by them.
Q. I had been suspended
from the U.S.P.A.?
A. Yes.
Q. When did they say they
did this? This is very important.
A. I talked to them last
week.
Q. Okay. Did they
specifically say when they had done that?
A. No, they did not.
Q. And, just as a point
here -- Miss Taylor has some qualifications that
will be of use to me, a
great deal, and I have a question which has
nothing
to do with the testimony.
It's an aircraft problem. I would like, if
possible, for her to
venture an opinion.
JUDGE CAPPS: Off the
record.
(Whereupon, an off the
record discussion was held.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. Western Piper made
statements concerning some problems with aircraft
when they were not able to
find "problems". In reference to one of those
problems which involved a
Seminole, let me ask you, in your opinion what
would be the result -- the
Seminole -- this was a '79 Mott Turbo -- it's
not fuel injected or
anything to that extent, with an overly rich
engine in
combination with
intermittent carb heat control which kept the
carburetor
heat on -- could that or
couldn't that not result in a very rough
engine?
A. Yes, it could.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you
very much. That's all I have to ask.
JUDGE CAPPS: Any re-direct?
MS. HAUSELT: Yes, Your
Honor.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY
MS. HAUSELT:
Q. When you spoke to Mr.
King of the U.S. Parachute Association, did he
indicate whether or not Mr.
Campbell was using the U.S.P.A. name?
A. Yes, he said he was.
Q. And, at the time he was
using that name, was he current?
A. No, he was not.
Q. I want to refer you to
page 43, 44 and 45. This is the parachute log
of
Mr. Campbell that was
forwarded to the FAA by Mr. Hill, who is the
President, I believe, of a
parachute group out in Talequa, Oklahoma.
Specifically, you're
referring to page 45 -- did Mr. Campbell sign for
his
reserve chute on page 45?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And, the column marked,
"remarks" -- it says emergency there?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Now, under the heading
of "Single" there is the initials JRC and also
JRC again. Of what
significance would those be in ascertaining whether
or
not Mr. Campbell was
qualified?
A. The symbol was a three
letter identification symbol. Whether it is
issued by the FAA or the
U.S.P.A. I cannot remember. However
Q. It's FAA.
A. It's FAA, okay --
however, checking with the U S P A. and also a
parachute rigger in my
office, I have learned that the three letter
symbol
is never the person's own
initials.
Q. So, in this case we have
a card indicating that Mr. Campbell signed
his
own emergency chute?
A. Yes.
Q. And he did not have a
parachute rigger's certificate from the FAA
which
would be necessary to do so
at that time?
A. Correct.
Q. With regard to the
article printed in the Tulsa Tribune, as appears
on
pages 46 and 47, did you
ever speak to anyone from the Tulsa Tribune
about
that article?
A. Yes, I did. I spoke to
the City Editor.
Q. And did they verify that
the article was published in their paper?
A. Yes, they did.
Q. At the time you spoke to
Mr. Campbell in your interview with him,
did he
indicate to you that he had
taken any action against the Tulsa Tribune?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. What did he say?
A. He said he currently had
a lawsuit against the Tulsa Tribune.
Q. And, from the letter of
Dr. Schultz; He apparently told the same
thing
to Dr. Schultz, is that
correct?
A. Yes
Q. And when you spoke to
the City Editor, did he indicate whether not
Mr.
Campbell had ever filed an
official lawsuit?
A. Yes, he said Mr.
Campbell never did.
MS. HAUSELT: I have no
further questions.
JUDGE CAPPS: Do you have
any re-cross?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: Just limit it
to her -
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, just
limit it to her re-direct.
JUDGE CAPPS: -- redirect,
all right.
RE-CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR.
CAMPBELL:
Q. With reference to the
United States Parachute Association, they
stated
that I was using their
name. Now, did they say in what fashion and what
occasions did I use them?
A. They did not say what
occasions. They said using their name in saying
that you were a U.S.P.A.
parachute instructor.
Q. Did they say U.S.P.A.
parachute instructor or U.S.P.A. certified
parachute instructor
A. Well, I don't remember
that.
Q. All right. And, in
reference to the Tulsa Tribune
JUDGE CAPPS: You don't
remember that -- it could have been either way
that
they stated it?
MISS TAYLOR: Yes, it
could've been either way.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
BY MR. CAMPBELL: (Resuming)
Q. In reference to the
Tulsa Tribune, first of all, did they state where
they got their information?
A. No, they didn't.
Q. And, the City Editor
stated that he had no knowledge of any legal
action?
A. Right, he said -
Q. Specifically, he did not
speak of a phone call between my father's
attorney and the Tulsa
Tribune?
A. No, he did not. The only
thing he did say was that you, yourself,
called
and said that you were
going to sue them, but it never happened.
Q. I called them?
A. Yes.
MR. CAMPBELL: That's the
last of my questions.
JUDGE CAPPS: You may call
your next witness.
MS. HAUSELT: The
Administrator will call Dr. Thomas Powers.
Whereupon,
THOMAS ROBERT POWERS having been first duly sworn by
the Administrative Law
Judge, was examined and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. HAUSELT:
Q. Would you state your
name, for the record?
A. My name is Thomas Robert
Powers.
Q. And what is your
business address?
A. I have - my principal
business is now at 680 Bancroft in San
Leandro. I
have an office also at 350
Parnassas in San Francisco.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. I am a psychiatrist.
Q. Could you briefly
summarize what your education was in the medical
field?
A. I had taken my
undergraduate and medical school training at
Northwestern
University in Evanston and
in Chicago, Illinois. I graduated in 1966.
Following that I did an
internship in straight medicine at the
Northwestern
University Medical School
at various hospitals. After that period of
time,
I was taken into the United
States Public Health Service where I was
detailed to the Peace
Corps. I served for two years in Malowi which is
in
Africa doing volunteer help
and public health work for that country. I
then
returned to spend about a
year and a half as the Chief Medical Officer
of
the Peace Corps program in
Washington, DC During that time I did some
volunteer work as a
physician with the Georgetown Free Clinic. On
leaving
Washington I went to a
small town in Colorado where I was in general
practice, setting up a
private health clinic. Following that I went to
California where I entered
the University of California residency in
psychiatry at London
Quarter which is in San Francisco. During that
time,
also, I obtained a masters
degree in public health from the University
of
California School of Public
Health at Berkeley.
Since that time I've been
engaged in the practice of psychiatry. For the
first three years I was in
a part-time private practice. I was between
three-fourths and
two-thirds time a faculty member at the University of
California Medical School
in the Department of Psychiatry. Since that
time
I functioned as a faculty
member for about three years, then went into
full-time private practice
of psychiatry and I've been in full-time
private
practice of psychiatry
since that time. Presently I continue to
maintain a
faculty position at the
University of California Medical Center in San
Francisco, where I'm an
Assistant Clinical Professor. I'm also presently
Chief of Psychiatry at Eden
Hospital in Casper Valley, California.
Q. And you still have a
private practice?
A. Yes, and also full-time
private practice.
Q. And are you Board
certified in any others?
A. I'm Board certified in
psychiatry.
Q. Did you ever meet Mr.
Campbell?
A. Yes. I met Mr. Campbell
on the occasion of his coming to my office
after
he had scheduled an
appointment to be seen at the request of the FAA.
That
was in March 1980 and I
believe the specific date was the 3rd. No, I'm
sorry - March 7th, 1980.
Q. Okay, before we get into
the substance of your interview with Mr.
Campbell, I want to ask you
a few preliminary questions. Could you
briefly
explain as best you can, in
layman's terms, what is meant by a
personality
disorder?
A. Yes, well, I think,
first of all, it would be important to define
what
is meant by personality
because we have a general understanding of
personality which we're
all, more or less, familiar with. But, then
there's
the more specific
definition of personality that we use in clinical
psychiatry. Personality is
that complex of deeply ingrained patterns of
behavior which include the
way that one perceives and thinks about the
entire outside world and
one's environment and oneself. Then,
there are
also personality traits,
and these are the more prominent aspects of
personality, and do not in
themselves imply any kind of psychopathology.
We all have personality
traits that are identifiable.
Personality disorder,
however, implies an inflexible and maladaptive
pattern or patterns of
sufficient severity because significant
impairment
in adaptive functioning or
subjective distress on the part of the
individual, and it's only
when the personality traits become so rigid
and
maladaptive as to cause
significant impairment in social or occupational
functioning that is
adaptive functioning, that they can be considered to
constitute a personality
disorder.
Q. Okay. As a result of
your interview with Mr. Campbell, did you come
to a
conclusion as to whether or
not he suffered from a personality disorder?
A. I did.
Q. And -
A. And, he does have a
personality disorder.
Q. I'd like to refer Your
Honor to pages 48 through 53 which is Dr.
Powers
report of his interview
with Mr. Campbell, and I would like to ask Dr.
Powers to relate, in his
own words, the substance of his interview with
Mr.
Campbell, pointing out what
occurred which was of clinical significance
to
him in the course of the
interview.
A. As I indicated, Mr.
Campbell was seen in my office in San Francisco
on
March 7th. He was seen for
an extended period of time, which was
necessary
to do a reasonable job of
thorough or complete psychiatric evaluation.
We
had to pause about midway
through the session. We were there about two
and
a half hours. During that
time it was my objective to obtain as
complete a
psychiatric history,
including family history, history of childhood,
early
development, occupational
history, mental history and so forth, as well
as
history of the immediate
problem for which he was seeking this
evaluation.
During that time, also, I
collected information pertaining to his own
personal psychiatric
history, medical history and also did a mental
status
examination. Now, let me
just review, I think, the essentials of that
exam
so that I can convey to the
Court what my impression was at the time. He
came in for the appointment
He was on time.
JUDGE CAPPS: Wait, let me
-- before you go into that -- how many times
did
you see him?
THE WITNESS: I saw him on
one occasion, on day only.
JUDGE CAPPS: Just this one
time?
THE WITNESS: One time only
for approximately two and a half hours.
JUDGE CAPPS: all right, go
ahead.
THE WITNESS: Mr. Campbell
identified himself as a twenty-three year old
single Caucasian male who
was presently employed as a private flight
instructor for the
International Air Service Company in Nappa,
California,
Japan Airlines Flight
Department. He indicated that he was seeing me at
the request of the FAA
because he had received an emergency Order of
Suspension of his second
class Airman's Certificate, and that that had
previously been granted by
the FAA.
JUDGE CAPPS: Let me
interrupt here. Isn't it an Order of Revocation?
MS. HAUSELT: Originally
there was an Order of Suspension which required
further information because
Mr. Campbell could not provide medical
information. Then, once he
submitted to the interview and more data was
obtained, it was subsequent
that the Order of Revocation was issued.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
that is what is before me now, the Order of
Revocation.
MS. HAUSELT: That's correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
continue, doctor.
THE WITNESS: Mr. Campbell
described his present problem as dating back,
approximately a year and a
half prior to that time. He stated at that
time,
"I had a problem which I
dealt with in a socially unacceptable manner."
He
then gave extensive
background for that event. He also gave a family
history and indicating he
was the oldest member of a large family from
the
metropolitan New York City
area. He described himself, his early
childhood
as being a socially
isolated student in high school and at that time
becoming interested in
flying, largely through participating in the
Aviation Explorers. It was
in that connection in the summer of '72, he
attended a meeting of that
organization at which he met a young girl,
Ellen, to whom he became
romantically attached.
Now, on completing high
school, he decided to move to Colorado to pursue
this relationship with the
girlfriend and to attempt to find work. He
did
so. He found a job working
as a Jack-of-all-trades in an airport in
Colorado, and then
developed a working relationship with a Rocky
Mountain
Para-center as an
instructor and demonstrator of parachutes. He
described
the relationship with the
girlfriend in some detail, in particular that
it
was very close, they were
very much in love and that this was an
extremely
important relationship to
him; in fact, had been the most serious
relationship in his life up
to that time. He also described that the
relationship ended rather
abruptly in June of '76 which Mr. Campbell
attributed primarily to
interpersonal problems between himself and the
girl's father, and of that
broken relationship he said at that time, "I
was frankly shattered. To
this day I don't understand what happened.
At that time he returned
home to live with his parents, continued his
parachute jumping, was
trying to save money to go to flight school, did
some odd jobs in
electronics and security work and line work at an
airport.
He states that during this
period of time he was emotionally upset,
largely
due, he felt, to the
breakup of his romance and the unexpected deaths of
several friends who were
killed while skydiving. And, during that time
he
began to date a female
student at the Naval Academy, whom he states was
killed in a motorcycle
accident while home on leave in Texas. Another
friend was lost about that
time in a hang gliding accident. He states
that
at this time he was quite
depressed, began talking with his own mother
about dying, but strongly
denied any suicidal ideation at this time. He
also denied hallucinations,
unusual thoughts, excessive use of alcohol
or
any drugs. Then, a short
time later he became a job prospect at
Talakoff,
Oklahoma, which offered him
the opportunity to fly and work as an
instructor. During that
time he describes a very active social life with
much dating and partying
and an abundance of female companionship. He
did
not chemical abuse at that
time or at any other time, except occasional
beers and that being on
social occasions.
At
about that time he
decided to visit his girlfriend back in Colorado
and
he described driving, I
think, straight through overnight to visit this
girlfriend, and he was
quite shocked and dismayed to find that she had
undergone what he estimated
as being a personality change and that her
opinions had become quite
negative towards him; she was very bitter and
really was a quite
different person, and this left him feeling very bad.
Next, he decided to move to
Tulsa, Oklahoma, feeling, again, very
depressed
and guilty for everything
that had happened to Ellen and in this
relationship, and then he
said that after moving to Tulsa, in an
attempt to
deal with these, he had
increasing feelings of social isolation. He
stated
he began to feel a closer
identification with his grandfather who is a
M.D.
That's when the masquerade
thing started, and that's a direct quote. Mr.
Campbell said that at that
time, "I first began to describe myself as a
medical student. Then I was
a resident, and then, finally, I was Dr.
Campbell. I had a coat and
an I.D. tag that I got from my grandfather's
clinic, and I just did it
to get social recognition. I really didn't
think
about it."
In explaining this
masquerade, Mr. Campbell stated that, "My grandfather
has been my ultimate model
in life. He's been a G.P. for many years. He
goes down to the Caribbean
one weekend a month, or did so in the past,
to
take care of poor people. I
wanted to be like my grandfather, and then
the
whole thing blew up in my
face. Two weeks later it got published in the
papers, but the article was
full of a lot of garbage." By this I think
he
meant that the statements
in the article were untrue. "I then went home,
and my grandfather referred
me to Dr. Dorsey, a psychiatrist. From
January
to April of that year I
went to see Dr. Dorsey." Mr. Campbell feels
that he
made considerable progress
in therapy during that time, resolving
whatever
psychiatric problems he had.
Next he found employment in
Georgia with a charter airlines, which he
described as a shaky
operation. Initially he was quite enthusiastic
about
this job and the man he
worked for, whom he referred to as "Jim".
After a
few months, though, because
he suddenly changed his feelings about this
man
and his flight school or
the airlines, he quit the job and then went to
New
England to take another
position at a flight school as an instructor in
meteorology and instrument
ground school. At that point he stated he was
feeling very good. "I was
ecstatic", he said, and I quote. "I flew forty
nine point seven hours in
one week. I felt very much in control of
things.
Then one day this article
hit the campus, and to quote an old
expression,
the fit hit the shan." He
then went on to describe a situation in which
he
was the center of a
turmoil, apparently about whether or not he should
be
suspended, fired or some
other official action taken.
Specifically, at that time,
his adequacy as a teacher was in question.
He
stated that, "Some of my
methods may have been a bit theatrical, but
then
when some of these hundreds
of articles hit the campus, there was an
attempt to get rid of me.
The President of the college was running for
governor that year. Then
the FAA got ahold of it, and that's why I'm
here
now." The patient, at that
time, apparently was instructed by the FAA
Regional Office to supply
additional medical information. Mr. Campbell
states he complied with
this order, however, "The information wasn't
what
they wanted. Of course,
they didn't bother to tell me that."
Mr. Campbell then went on
to indicate that the above described events
were,
in his estimation, the only
reason that his Medical Certificate had been
called to closer scrutiny
by the FAA. However, on closer questioning,
and
this was in the later part
of the interview, just in kind of going
through
the review of systems and
hitting on some points that I thought I
wanted to
have, for sure, clarified,
in asking him about a history of arrests, he
suddenly recalled that he
had omitted mentioning an event which, on
reconsideration, he thought
would perhaps be of some significance. While
this appeared at the time
to be a blatant prevarication, he
apologetically
indicated that he simply
forgot to mention the item as he didn't think
it
would be of much
consequence. He then described the event for which he
was
arrested in New York City
on November -- in November of 1977, for
attempting to jump off the
World Trade Center Building in downtown
Manhattan with a parachute.
He attempted to downplay the event as
simply a
technical challenge, but he
then went on to quickly explain how he had
spent six months
researching the project and had written several hundred
pages of notes and had also
surveyed the site by having friends flying
around the tower in a
helicopter and dropping smoke bombs to assess the
wind directions and
currents.
He attempted to further
explain his own reasons for attempting this
jump by
stating that a friend of
his, by the name of Owen, whom he referred to
as a
hero, had successfully
jumped from the other of the two towers of the
World
Trade Center. He stated
further, he was going to be a real big gag, and
that's a quote. Continuing
his quotation, "I was looking for a peak
experience. When I landed,
I was going to disappear and leave a note,
'The
phantom of the World Trade
Center was here'." He stated he was
apprehended
by the security police at
the top of the building just as he was about
to
jump. He stated he was then
charged with trespassing, resisting arrest
and
disorderly conduct. He was
taken to the police station, booked and held
in
a jail cell. He went on, in
quotation, "I got stuck in this clink with a
group of homosexuals,
murderers and petty thieves. One transvestite
said,
"and parenthetically he
added, "And this was really funny; see that guy
there -- he's crazy, he
tried to jump off the World Trade Center
building."
Mr. Campbell indicated that
these charges were later dropped.
When I asked him about the
comment that his cellmate had made, whether
he
thought that this behavior
might seem crazy, he responded by saying, "It
wasn't crazy; it was just
against the law." He went on to say that, you
know, he had this whole
thing carefully planned; he was going to do a
five
second delay, which would
give him plenty of time to get clear of the
building and get his chute
open, and he went on then to describe in his
own
terms, similar events that
had been attempted by various dare devils.
For
example, a man by the name
of Philip Critique who he said had walked
across
between the two towers on a
tight wire in 1974. Mr. Campbell said to me
at
the time, "Now, he's
crazy." Then he said, "There was a guy who climbed
up
the side of the building
with some devices which he designed which
worked
very well. He wasn't
crazy." I just point this out to the Court
because
I'll refer back to this
later on.
In getting a more complete
past psychiatric history, Mr. Campbell stated
that he had seen a
psychiatrist, a Dr. Dorsey, in early 1979, which I
had
referred to earlier, after
he returned from Oklahoma to his home in New
Jersey. In addition, I had
a copy of a letter at that time, from the FAA
which indicated that Mr.
Campbell had been treated with psychotherapy
from
January to May of 1979 and
that, basically, what was indicated in that
letter was a bare bones
description of a personality disorder.
BY MS HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Excuse me, doctor, that
was in the letter of Dr. Dorsey which
appears in
the file?
A. Yes; I'll refer back to
that also later on.
JUDGE CAPPS: What number is
that; page number?
MS. HAUSELT: That would be
page 54, Your Honor.
THE WITNESS: In addition,
there was some history of a possible subdural
hematoma which was some
significance and importance to evaluate. That
had
been sustained while
parachute jumping. At the time Mr. Campbell
indicated
that he was rendered
unconscious and taken to a hospital and that there
was
a pretty thorough
evaluation of that injury and no indication at the
time
of any brain damage of
consequence.
He, also, in giving a
history of whom he had seen, for whatever reasons
psychiatrically, indicated
he had seen a psychiatrist and a psychologist
recently, a Dr. McKnight,
who is a psychiatrist, and a Richard Landine,
who
is a psychologist, for
psychiatric and psychological evaluation. Past
medical history at that
time, Mr. Campbell stated that he had had a
diagnosis of duodenal ulcer
and it became irritative, for which he was
hospitalized when he was in
the fourth grade. He also stated that he had
sustained a broken nose
approximately five years ago, and he referred
again
to the head injury which
took place in '76, and he said that at that
time
he could not recall any
other illnesses or injuries.
Asking about medications,
Mr. Campbell told me that he occasionally
takes
Chlortrimeton which is an
antihistamine, for a problem with his nose
which
had developed subsequent to
the time of his fracture which he sustained
in
high school.
Asking about personal
habits, Mr. Campbell indicated that he does not
use
any type of street drugs;
his alcohol use was described as limited to
two
or three beers a week, and
that he'd only been intoxicated once in his
life.
Asking about social,
educational and military history, Mr. Campbell
indicated that the only
other time he had been arrested or cited for
traffic regulations was six
years ago when he received a speeding
ticket.
His formal education
included completion of high school, as well as some
considerable training in
flying and parachuting skills. Mr. Campbell
indicated he spent time in
the Air Force, about which a detailed history
was not obtained.
Under personal habits he
mentioned sky diving and scuba diving.
Family history, he gave
some more details there, indicating both his
parents were forty-five
years old and had been in good health. His
father
is a representative for a
pharmaceutical company, and he said his
mother's
pursuing a Ph.D. in
psychology. He indicated he had six siblings
ranging in
age from twenty-one to ten
years of age, all of whom he thought to be
in a
good state of physical
health and he told me one of the siblings had had
any kind of psychological
history and had been seeing a child
psychologist,
so basically there was no
family history of any kind of mental illness.
Developmental history was
taken, and he indicated he was a product of a
normal pregnancy and
delivery and that there were no particular
problems in
his early childhood or
during the school years, with the exception that
in
high school he had some
problems with his father. He described a pretty
much normal sexual
developmental history.
In the review of central
nervous system symptoms, which is always
relevant
to a psychiatric history,
Mr. Campbell indicated that he was sleeping
normally; he had had no
fluctuations in weight; and his sex drive was
normal, and he had no
particular problems of a sensory nature or
anything
that might suggest a,
either an organic brain problem or a psychosis.
Mental status examination
-- this is gathered throughout the entire
course
of the interview and also
by asking whatever necessary specific
questions.
Mr. Campbell presented
himself in an outgoing, and I think, grandiose
manner, with a kind of
quality of seriousness that he was in a lot of
difficulty, he wanted very
much for me to understand and believe him,
and I
felt, initially, that I
really should believe him, but then, and that I
wanted to believe him, but
then, as the interview went on I began to
question myself, and I
found myself asking, well, just why is it that
you
feel you want to believe
this man. That question continued in one
corner of
my mind as we went along.
There was only minimal anxiety noted in the
course of the exam, which
was somewhat discrepant with the
circumstances.
His vocabulary was average.
His speech, on one or two occasions, seemed
to
me to be pressured.
JUDGE CAPPS: What do you
mean by pressured?
THE WITNESS: Well, that
means that he was really intent upon getting a
point across, so much so
that it was hard to interrupt his flow of
speech,
and that's an important
clinical sign when we're looking for certain
types
of feeling disorders.
JUDGE CAPPS: But does it
show compulsion or something on that part, or
what
does it signify to you, as
a psychiatrist?
THE WITNESS: It shows that
a certain possibility of an affective
disorder
or, also, a number of other
things, but the particular significance is
that
it sometimes, and, in fact,
typically is frequent in the presence of
affective disorder, which
is a primary disorder of mood. There was,
however, no looseness of
associations; no blocking or idiosyncratic
thinking present. He denied
hallucinations, and there was no delusional
material present at the
time of this examination.
His recent and remote
memory were intact. He was oriented in three
spheres;
able to extract
appropriately in the ordinary context of conversation.
His
defense mechanisms employed
included excessive use of denial and
rationalization, the mood
although somewhat anxious
MS HAUSELT: Could I just
stop you for a second?
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. When you make comments
concerning delusional material,
hallucinations,
in that part of your exam,
what type of disorder are you focusing on,
when
you discuss that?
A. Well, here, again, would
be an effort to confirm the presence at that
time or historically of a
psychotic process. As I say, he employed
defense
mechanisms extensively,
particularly excessive use of denial and
rationalization. The mood,
although somewhat anxious, the affect was
fairly
mobile, however, at times
depressed.
At one
point he became
outwardly angry and furious, demanding, and this
was
near the end of the exam,
that the examiner was supposed to phone the
FAA
to give an oral report to
the physician who'd requested this evaluation.
When I pointed out that the
hour was late -- it was just a few minutes
to
five o'clock, he stated
that he had in his possession a notarized
statement
from a Congressional aide
who had assured him that immediate action
would
be taken following
completion of my evaluation. When I asked him to
produce
the document, he just kind
of suddenly shifted the topic and quickly
cooling his rage, and
implying that, well, he had enlisted the support
of
the offices of several
Congressmen or two Congressmen in the area and a
Senator, and that they had
promised him that they would help him obtain
a
speedy resolution of this
bureaucratic snafu which had caused his
Medical
Certificate to be suspended.
Q. So he never produced the
notarized statement from this party?
A. No, he did not. It was
my observation that his insight was markedly
impaired and that his
judgment was extremely limited. Well, basically,
then, my diagnosis was that
of a personality disorder, a mixed type with
predominantly narcissistic
and borderline features and I thought it also
important to consider a bit
further, perhaps, the possibility of a
primary
affective disorder which I
had mentioned before.
Q. Let's just stop right
there a minute. At this time I'd like to have
marked a copy of - Doctor,
let me first ask you -- your diagnosis is
based
on criteria set forth in
the DSM-3; is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. And what is a DSM-3?
A. Well, a DSM-3 is the
most recent edition of the official diagnostic
and
statistical nomenclature
for psychiatric diagnosis that is published by
the
American Psychiatric
Association and it's the official nomenclature or
diagnostic nomenclature
that's in use in the clinical practice of
psychiatry in this country
today. The DSM-3 just came out; it's a
further
refinement of DSM-2, but
basically it's the same nomenclature and there
are
only minor differences
between the two.
MS HAUSELT: Okay, Your
Honor, at this time I would have marked as
Administrator's Exhibit
Number 2 pertinent pages from DSM-3 for the
criteria as set forth for a
mixed personality disorder with borderline
and
narcissistic features, and
offer that into evidence. I have a copy for
Mr.
Campbell.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right,
I'll note that -- I'm familiar with this
publication from other
cases I've heard. It is received in evidence as
Exhibit A2.
(Whereupon, the document
described was marked for identification as
Administrator's Exhibit
A-2, and received in evidence.)
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
excuse me for a minute - we're looking for a
copy
so that Dr. Powers can
refer to it.
THE WITNESS: I think I have
a copy here. I've got the most relevant
materials here in my notes.
BY MS HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Could you explain what
is meant by the term mixed personality
disorder?
A. Well, the nomenclature
is such that in this area there's quite a
likelihood, in fact, even a
probability that you will have overlap or,
in
some cases, a mixture of
the criteria for the various categories of
personality disorder, and
the protocol there calls for making a
diagnosis
of a mixed - personality
disorder of a mixed type when you have
significant
number of elements from
more than one category. So that means that
there's
some overlap, and it should
be individual shared features from more than
one category of personality
disorder.
JUDGE CAPPS: Which
categories, in his case, were mixed, in your opinion?
THE WITNESS: Well, this
was, as I pointed out, mixed narcissistic and
borderline type. I'll
elaborate on what those are
JUDGE CAPPS: So you were
unable to diagnose this as a narcissistic
personality disorder, as
opposed to any other type such as borderline
and
vice versa?
THE WITNESS: No, actually
he meets the criteria for both narcissistic
and
borderline.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
THE WITNESS: And, then he
also, you know, he has features from some of
the
other categories too, but
it's predominantly narcissistic and borderline
BY MS HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Can either one of those,
in the hypothetical type of question -- if a
person met all of the
criteria for narcissistic then that person would
be
diagnosed as having a
personality disorder, had a psychiatrist
interviewed
them and gone through the
proper consultation that is here?
A. That is correct.
Q. And the same would be
true for borderline?
A. That's correct.
Q. What are the features of
the narcissistic personality?
A. Well, the essential
feature is a personality disorder in which there
is
a grandiose sense of
self-importance or uniqueness, a kind of special
quality that this person
perceives about himself. It's a very special
quality. There's a
preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success and
there is an exhibitionistic
need for a constant attention and admiration
and the behavior of an
individual is driven to that end, obtaining this
kind of attention and
admiration. There are characteristic responses to
threats to that
individual's self esteem and characteristic
disturbances in
interpersonal
relationships. These might be feelings of entitlement or
deserving, you know,
special consideration because, after all, this is a
unique set of circumstances
which just, you know, really hasn't happened
before; this is the kind of
approach that the individual might take.
There
would be a tendency for
exploiting interpersonal relationships, and also
relationships would be
characterized as being really kind of split, and
that is that initially the
individual would overly idealize the other,
the
person in the relationship,
and then at some point there would be a
sudden
reversal, and at this point
the relationship would turn completely
around
and probably not be able to
continue, and that there's a particular kind
of, well, persistent and
pervasive lack of empathy on the part of the
individual with this type
of personality disorder, and by that I mean,
it's
as if he doesn't or she
doesn't realize that other people have feelings
and
what those feelings are, or
that others have rights or that others have
their own personal
integrity which has to be expected.
Q. What are the traits of a
borderline personality disorder?
A. Well, they are quite
similar, and I would indicate just briefly that
they are fewer in number,
but they encompass some of the same features
that
I've already discussed.
Essentially what happens in borderline
personality
is that this is a, I think,
less healthy or less well developed type of
personality, and that
there's instability in a variety of areas which
include interpersonal
relationships and behaviors, mood, self image.
There's no single feature
that you can say is invariably present in a
borderline personality, but
it does generally tend to include one aspect
which is that of transient
psychotic episodes. At that time there may be
brief loss of contact with
reality. Also, more mood fluctuation than
say in
a narcissistic personality
disorder, where you may have depression
lasting
for longer periods of time
than say, just a few hours or a few days. In
the
borderline type of
individual this may go on for longer periods of time,
but usually not for months
as we see in a depressive state.
Q. Dr. Powers, is it
uncommon or common for a person to have a mixed or
--
when a person has a
personality disorder, to have a mixture of traits?
A. Yes, it's very common.
In fact, I think it's, you know, close to half
the time one finds a
mixture of personality traits rather than a pure,
well, a diagnosis that you
could fit exactly to one of the individual
categories. After all, you
know, we're talking about something that's
extremely complex which is
human behavior and human psychology, and you
know, each of us are
individuals and it's very difficult to describe an
individual or diagnose an
individual in terms of just a category which
is
defined as a constellation
of characteristics. So, that, really, I think
that almost the rule is
that there will be a mixture of elements from
one
or more of the categories
of personality disorder.
Q. Okay. You listed on your
diagnostic impression on page 53, number 2,
rule out primary affective
disorder bipolar-type; could you explain what
that means?
JUDGE CAPPS: We have to
change the tape.
THE WITNESS: Could you
repeat that question.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. On page 53 of your
report in your diagnostic impressions, you listed
under number 2, rule out
primary affective disorder bipolar type; what
is
that and how does it relate
to Mr. Campbell?
A. Yes, that specifically
is the most severe type of disorder, and it's
characterized by periods of
very high ion, or as we say, manic periods,
and
also by periods of re
depression, and that's the so-called bipolar,
both -
you know, the upswing and
the downswing of the mood to the extremes of
the
spectrum.
JUDGE CAPPS: Just peaks and
valleys all the time?
THE WITNESS: Well, not just
peaks and valleys. I think we all tend to
experience emotional peaks
and valleys. I'm talking about displacement
of
the mood to the extreme,
which at the high end of the spectrum means
acute
mania, which most
oftentimes a psychotic manifestation. An individual
speaks with pressure,
rapidly, is very -- is likely to be very
convincing,
may be able to be very
successful in sales or in other type of endeavor
at
that time. And, at the
other extreme is depressed to the extent that
usually one has to be
concerned about a psychosis at that end of the
spectrum where there is a
pervasive feeling of worthlessness,
hopelessness,
and oftentimes suicidal
ideation and intent.
JUDGE CAPPS: But you ruled
these out in his case?
THE WITNESS: Well, I felt
that I had pretty much ruled it out when I
made
the primary diagnosis of
personality disorder. However, there were
things
that he had told me about
his history and there were some things that I
observed in the interview
which I mentioned earlier, the pressure of
speech, that caused me to
think that perhaps it might be an individual
with
an affective disorder who I
was seeing at a period of time when the mood
was relatively normal. But
my primary diagnosis, really, was that of a
personality disorder. Also,
according to DSM-3 now, you are asked to
make
diagnoses in both
categories, as I did in this case.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. I'd like to now talk
specifically about the criteria of DSM-3 as they
relate to Mr. Campbell's
interview with you and information that you
had at
that time, and referring to
Administrator's Exhibit Number 2, as you
feel
you need it, could you
explain what aspects of Mr. Campbell's behavior
fit
the guidelines set forth
under DSM-3 for narcissistic personality
disorders?
A. Yes, well, as I pointed
out, in the narcissistic personality disorder
you have this grandiose
sense of self or uniqueness, a special
attribute.
This to me was conveyed in
his presentation in the interview situation.
He
also made reference to it
in terms of his historical data. There's one
other thing that happened
that I think I'd want to include here because
it's of significance in
this kind of work to observe what happens in the
entire transaction with the
individual, beginning from the first
telephone
call, and, as in my case, I
have somebody working in the office who does
telephone work - it's
important to know what happens when the individual
calls and talks with that
person, and we have a woman who works in our
office who's been doing
this for a number of years and she's quite good
at
it. In fact, she's just
about concluded her master's degree in
psychology
and, herself, is pursuing a
career in psychology.
On her first or second or
third telephone contact with Mr. Campbell,
indicated to me that he was
at first very insistent and then forceful
and
then persistent in trying
to obtain an early appointment with me. He
began
calling a week or so prior
to the time that I was able to see him, and
that
she said also, "You know,
Dr. Powers, he became very angry with me over
the
telephone". And that's not
an ordinary occurrence, but when that
happens,
Betty Kerr, she's my
receptionist, will draw that sort of thing to my
attention, and she did on
this occasion. So, in that sense, you know, he
was trying to convey to her
that this was really an unusual situation
that
demanded that I change my
schedule which was solidly booked. In fact, I
gave him the first possible
hour that I had available in my schedule for
the interview.
Again, in support of the
element of the grandiose sense of self or
uniqueness, the historical
data that he gave me, he described himself
as a
dare devil, a would-be dare
devil, and a pilot who had done some rather
unusual things.
Also, specifically, the way
in which he described his masquerade. "I
became
Dr. Campbell. I did it to
get attention." Also, the World Trade Center
incident, he described with
great enthusiasm, and in a somewhat
convincing
way that he'd done months
of research, with extensive notes which
consisted
of hundreds of pages, and
that he'd even gone to the trouble of getting
a
friend to fly him around
the World Trade Center in a helicopter and drop
smoke bombs to see which
way the wind was blowing around the building so
that he'd be able to
execute his jump safely, presumably. And in the
way in
which he described the
events that had led up to his coming to see me,
which was a really highly
unusual set of circumstances.
As I mentioned before this,
in the narcissistic personality disorder,
there's a preoccupation
with fantasies of either success or power or
brilliance or beauty or
sometimes ideal love. This he related to me in
the
history of his relationship
with Ellen and that this was a really
perfect
love kind of relationship
which had started in the high school years and
blossomed for many years
and was very strong until it ended suddenly and
abruptly.
Also, he described himself
in what was his fantasy of how the jump from
the
World Trade Center building
would be completed, "the phantom of the
World
Trade Center". And, then,
also his description of his function as a
teacher
at Daniel Webster College,
he described himself as being a very, very
successful and popular
teacher and that he enjoyed that very much and
the
students enjoyed him and he
got a lot of positive reinforcement about
the
terrific job that he was
doing, despite the problems that he'd had with
these other matters.
Then, there's this quality
of exhibitionism which is really a driven
need
and a continuing need. I
would point out that all of these elements
persist, not just at times
of illness or difficulty, but they persist
pretty much all the time in
the individual, and there's this particular
need for exhibitionism in
the aim of gaining attention and admiration
from
his surroundings. And,
this, paradoxically as we understand it
psychologically, is really
to support a somewhat less conscious
perception
of the self as being really
needy and kind of hollow or empty on the
inside. Along this line he
told me about his performance as a skydiver.
He
was a showman, a stuntman,
a dare devil. Also, in this category would be
the incident that he
described as impersonation of a M.D. where he
really
played the role of another
person to get social recognition.
JUDGE CAPPS: I think I've
heard enough example that gave rise to his
conclusion, so do you want
to get to the next question?
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Okay -
JUDGE CAPPS: In fact, I
think I understand the basis for his diagnosis
from
the history - I must say
the very detailed history, and you should be
complimented for it, Dr.
Powers.
THE WITNESS: Can I just go
on to include one or two from each of the
main
categories, because that,
then, would establish the diagnosis. You do
have
to have features present
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay, just
mention them, because I've heard these in the
history portion that you
gave.
THE WITNESS: Okay, then,
when challenged or finding some kind of stress,
the individual responds
with either cool indifference or marked
feelings of
rage, or feelings of
inferiority or shame of humiliation or defeat.
This is
typified in two examples
right in the context of my work with him, and
that
was with my receptionist on
the telephone and with me directly. Also, in
his relationships with many
other people, where he would get suddenly
infuriated.
Then there's characteristic
disturbances also consequent in all
interpersonal
relationships. Again, the relationship with Ellen and with
Ellen's father; possibly
also, although we don't have sufficient data,
with
his own father. There's a
lack of empathy, a lack of respect for the
feelings of people who are
ill, and this goes on to effect situations of
employment, dealings with
agencies, with family members and it's a kind
of
pervasive quality of
impoverishment of interpersonal relationships.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Okay, just briefly, I
want to ask you if you could touch on the
features
of the borderline
personality disorder which you feel were indicated to
you
in your interview with Mr.
Campbell
A. Borderline personality
disorder, as I pointed out, is again -- it's a
constellation of enduring
personality features that render the
individual
likely to be unstable and
vulnerability in terms of function or even
possibly transient
psychotic episodes. There's a certain quality of
impulsivity or
unpredictability. You really cannot guess what the
individual's likely to do
next, and in this case I'd point out the World
Trade Center event and the
impersonation of a physician.
There's a pattern of,
again, unstable and intense interpersonal
relationships. This
overlaps with the narcissistic, as I pointed out.
There is, oftentimes,
inappropriate and intense anger. This, again, you
know, was reflected towards
the examiner and my receptionist, and this
overlaps with narcissistic.
There is a more specific
disturbance in identity in the case of the
borderline disorder then in
the narcissistic, and this would be
evidenced
in Mr. Campbell's case by
his wanting to be "Just like my grandfather"
and
then, "I became Dr.
Campbell". This also, as I pointed out earlier, more
affective instability and
more marked mood shifts, maybe in terms of
depression, maybe in terms
of irritability. Again, these were evidenced
in
the interview, and he gave
me a history of episodes of rather severe
depression from childhood
to the teens and into his early adult life.
There is, in particular, a
kind of intolerance to being alone, and this
could be seen in Mr.
Campbell's description for his rationale for
impersonating a physician.
He said at the time, "I was very lonely and I
needed friends", and there
may be also and typically, or physically, or
personally self-damaging
acts, and I would point out here, again, the
World
Trade Center event and
perhaps even the injuries sustained while
skydiving,
and other injuries,
although the history of other injuries is not clear
at
this point. And, then, also
in the borderline configuration there are
more
or less chronic feelings of
emptiness or boredom which is again a more
serious manifestation of
what you see in the narcissistic personality
disorder which is almost
unconscious, this feeling of emptiness, and is
compensated for by the
grandiosity, which is much more
pervasive in the
narcissistic form.
Q. Then Mr. Campbell fits
both the categories of borderline and
narcissistic?
A. Yes, he does.
Q. Would Mr. Campbell be
classified as having a personality disorder
under
DSM-2?
A. Yes, he would.
Q. Based on your interview
with him, does Mr. Campbell have a
personality
disorder which is severe
enough to have manifested itself by repeated
overreaction? Yes, he does.
Q. Could you just briefly
summarize what overt acts -- would those overt
acts be the same type of
things which you have mentioned in going
through
the DSM-3 criteria?
A. Yes, they are, and,
well, are you speaking with reference to my
evaluation at this point?
Q. Just, at this point up
to what you knew at the time of your
evaluation?
A. Yes. I was speaking in
what preceded from this basis of my
information
at that time in my
interview with him at that time.
Q. Just based again, on
your information at that time and assuming for
some
reason legally there were
not sufficient overt acts under the
regulations,
do you have an opinion as
to whether or not Mr. Campbell has a
personality
disorder of the type which
would, in the now, within the next two years,
make him unable to safely
perform as a pilot?
A. I think he does.
Q. Could you just explain,
mostly in layman's terms, what is the nature
of
Mr. Campbell's personality
disorder which makes him -- which, in your
opinion, makes him unable
to safely perform the privileges of an airman?
A. There are a number of
features, but I think I would focus primarily
upon
the impairment of judgment
and, likewise, I think that one would have to
mention the sudden and
unpredictable mood changes, and I think, also,
his
excessive use of denial and
rationalization to explain to himself, I
think
at times quite
convincingly, as well as to other people, how certain
things
happened to occur to him
and what his accounting for those events is or
might happen to be.
I think, also, that
although in his case he has evidenced some
considerable
insight, that there is a
significant defect in insight or impairment of
insight in that he sees
only part of the problem, at the same time
acknowledging that he has a
problem, so that he, in effect, hides the
problem from himself,
thinking, yes, well, I have this problem and I
have
to attend to it, but I
don't think he really realizes how it affects his
judgment at times,
particularly in an emergency type of situation. This
is
why I feel that it's
unlikely that he can be considered reasonably safe
to
fly an airplane, because
there will be times when things will occur
which
he will be convinced he is
doing his absolute level best, and perhaps in
that immediate situation,
he would be doing his best to manipulate
circumstances or people or
situations to solve the problem, but he
would be
doing so at great risk to
himself, to other people or to property.
Q. You have heard all the
testimony here today; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have reviewed
the rest of the medical file and events which
came
to light after your initial
interview with Mr. Campbell?
A. Yes.
Q. When you interviewed Mr.
Campbell, did he tell you anything
concerning
whether or not he had
prescribed drugs for people out in Oklahoma while
he
was posing as a doctor?
A. No, he did not, and as I
recall, he even said that he'd done nothing
wrong at the time. He just
passed himself off in the identity of a
physician, perhaps giving
some first aid, but had not prescribed drugs
and
had not performed surgery
or anything of that kind.
Q. So he didn't tell you
that he had assisted a woman who had suffered a
heart attack and, in fact,
ridden in an ambulance with her to the
hospital
posing as Dr. Campbell?
A. I think he may have
recalled that incident, however, he didn't
describe
it quite so specifically.
Q. He did not mention that
he had scheduled his girlfriend for a
hysterectomy?
A. No, he did not.
Q. Did he mention, or did
he indicate to you, how he came to return to
New
Jersey from Oklahoma?
A. Well, he said he went by
himself, voluntarily, or that was the
impression that I had.
Q. Did he state whether or
not he had been in the Service?
A. He indicated that he had
spent some time in the Air Force.
Q. Did he indicate that he
had ever been married?
A. I'd say he was not
married and had not been married.
Q. He never said anything
to you concerning very traumatic events of the
loss of a wife and child?
A. No, in fact, I asked him
also if he had any children, and he said,
no, I
have no children.
Q. Did he ever tell you
that he had been fired by his employers in
Georgia?
A. No, he didn't. In fact,
if that's, I think, the job that he referred
to
as working for a man by the
name of Jim in Georgia, and I believe that's
the only job in Georgia
that I've heard described today, he said that he
left that job voluntarily
because he was disenchanted with the man and
his
operation, after being
initially very enthusiastic about working for
him.
Q. Now, I want to refer you
to Mr. Brown's letter on page 36, and I'd
like
to ask you if there is
anything of clinical significance in what is
related
to the FAA by Mr. Brown?
A. Sorry, can you repeat
that question?
Q. Yes. Referring you to
the letter of Mr. Brown on page 36, is there
anything of clinical
significance in that letter which would bear on
your
diagnosis of a personality
disorder?
A. Yes. In the third
paragraph where Mr. Brown describe getting
complaints
from students and
customers, that he is no longer teaching them to fly
the
airplane himself --
teaching them to fly, flying the airplane himself,
and
telling them how great it
was.
MR. CAMPBELL: Your Honor, I
have to object to this line of questioning,
specifically, number one,
no one has verified Mr. Brown's statement. I
believe I can disprove Mr.
Brown's statement given the opportunity, and
on
top of that, commenting
about the observations of a non-professional
observer.
JUDGE CAPPS: Mr. Brown's
letter is in evidence and it can be commented
upon
by any witness. You'll have
the opportunity in your case to attack
certain
portions of it that you
feel are not true or accurate.
MR. CAMPBELL: I see. Thank
you.
JUDGE CAPPS: At this point,
I think we're going to have to take about a
five-minute recess. I want
to make a few phone calls.
(Whereupon a five-minute
recess was taken.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Okay, I believe we were
on page 36, Mr. Brown's letter; is there
anything else of clinical
significance with regard to what he's related?
A. Well, this letter points
out one of the primary diagnostic features
for
the narcissistic
personality disorder, and one of the important
associated
features, and that is that
what is described in the letter is the kind
of
thing that the individual
with the narcissistic personality does, to
support this grandiose
sense of self, and later on in the second from
the
last paragraph, in
describing this apparent outright contradiction of
what
has been said, with the
facts and circumstance in order to support or
rationalize this sense of
self there may be distortion, fabrication or
outright lies, and I'm
inclined to believe that this is an example of
that.
JUDGE CAPPS: Let me ask you
something at this point, There has been a
tremendous amount of
evidence thus far in the case of what are
purported to
be untruths. At the time of
these utterances by the Respondent, is it
your
professional opinion that
he, in fact, believed the things he was
saying at
the time?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it is,
and it's convincing not only to the individual
but
also those surrounding him.
And, it's usually -- and this is really an
important part of the
problem -- it's a mixture of truths, half-truths,
more severe distortions and
outright lies, and as the web becomes more
complex and intricate, the
individual with this disorder really loses
track
of where he or she might be
in that web, and they don't know,
themselves,
the difference between fact
and fan
JUDGE CAPPS: The
fabrication just rolls like a snowball?
THE WITNESS: That's right.
And then it becomes, you know, usually the
response to that when the
individual is confronted is a kind of
emotional
outburst or a sudden
cooling and almost unbelievable kind of emotional
distance or indifference.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. I want to refer you both
to the testimony of Inspector Taylor and
also
the letters from Dean
Schultz at Daniel Webster which are on pages 16
through 33, and ask you
what, if any medical or clinical significance is
there to Mr. Campbell's
claim of being a stuntman in the Screen Actor's
Guild and in various movies?
A. Well, this, again,
would, I think be probably, at best, an
exaggeration
or very possibly a
prevarication or an outright lie in support of his
need
for the recognition and
esteem.
Q. And is there any
clinical significance to his claim of teaching for
the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association? Would that be the same type of
thing?
A. This would be the same
kind of thing.
Q. What about his style of
teaching and his failure to follow the
orders of
Dean Schultz with regard to
not showing up at particular classes after
he
had been suspended?
A. Well, this would be
both, you know, need to fulfill the grandiose
sense
of himself and the need for
exhibitionistic kind of outlets.
Q. What clinical
significance is there to his having claimed to be a
parachute rigger, and, in
fact, signing his own emergency chute when not
qualified to do so?
A. Well, again, I think
that this would be, perhaps a kind of slip-up on
his part I'm not sure. It
doesn't seem that in that situation that he
would
be particularly trying to
impress someone, although it may have been at
the
time. I don't have enough
information, but I think it is an example of
the
kind of behavior which, at
the very least, but also, perhaps the most
dangerous, it is inclined
to trip up the individual who has this
disorder.
Q. What does such behavior
say with regard to Mr. Campbell s judgment?
A. That his judgment is
severely impaired.
Q. And this would be
similar for his claim of being a U.S.P.A.
instructor,
when he is not; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. I want to ask you about
the story which has been related to a
variety of
people and apparently first
originated when Mr. Campbell was confronted
with the newspaper article
of his behavior of pretending to be a doctor,
that is posing a story of
the reason for that behavior being his wife
and
child were killed in a car
accident; of what clinical significance is
this
fabricated tragedy about
his wife and child?
A. Well, this, again, would
be one of the associated features found
quite
commonly in that there
would be distortions, fabrications or outright
lies
in support of whatever set
of circumstances at the time needs to be
maintained to continue the
kind of state of uneasy equilibrium with the
need for gratification and
admiration from others and also the problem
with
maintaining consistency and
validity in the truth.
Q. I want to refer you to
pages 34 and 35, which is a letter from Dianne
Stuart at my request, and
ask you if there is anything of clinical
significance in the
information set forth in that letter.
A. I think quite possibly
so. I don't know fully what happened. Again,
there's something that I
was told in the course of my conversation with
Mr.
Campbell which appears to
relate to the incidents that are mentioned
here.
I recall at the end of the
interview he was wanting to state the case
for
all the things that he was
capable of doing that reflected his skill,
his
ability as a pilot and his
judgment and function under pressure, and he
said, at the time that, and
I think he said in the last month or so, he
had
had three emergencies, one
of which consisted of he was taking someone
up
for skydiving and that the
individual had jumped out and his parachute
had
gotten caught in the tail
assembly and Mr. Campbell was able to maintain
the aircraft and maneuver
so that the skydiver got free of the tail
assembly.
He also mentioned that he
had an engine failure in a single-engine plane
that required a forced
landing on a highway which he executed safely and
also that he had engine
failure or some kind of mechanical problem in a
multi-engine aircraft which
he had also solved without incident. And he
was, at the time, attesting
that these were examples of the kind of
behavior that he wished
that the FAA knew about so that they'd give him
credit for, and, I think,
it sounds to me like that's what is being
referred to here, although,
again, the time framework has been distorted
and these things apparently
happened sometime earlier and also they were
described a little bit
differently to me than they are described in this
letter. In fact, they were
described quite differently to me than
they're
described in this letter.
Q. Is it quite possible
that in Mr. Campbell's mind there was some kind
of
emergency?
A. I think it's quite
possible and quite likely. I want to point out,
again, that in the last
paragraph on that page there's another incident
which is changed slightly,
but also important. In this occasion Mr.
Campbell described he had a
wife who was pregnant at the time, who was
killed, and so you have a
sort of constantly changing story; one time --
well, when he was seen by
me, he indicated he wasn't married, he had no
children. On other
occasions he reportedly has a wife and child who were
killed, and then on this
occasion he had a wife who was pregnant, who
was
once, at a time, killed in
an automobile accident which he uses as a
way of
accounting for some unusual
situation or behavior.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, at
this time I have a problem with regard to a
letter which I have not
received that would explain the circumstances.
There is a Detective Larry
Brown with the Fresno Police department that
I
have spoken to on a couple
of occasions, and he had some dealings with
Mr.
Campbell which are
pertinent to this case. When I first spoke to him in
May
of 1980, when the case was
originally set for hearing, he had promised
to
send me a letter similar to
those in the file with regard to his
dealings
with Mr. Campbell. He was
subsequently, I learned from the Police
Department, injured in the
line of duty and has been recovering for some
time. I did manage to get a
hold of him last week through his superior,
and
he has promised to send me
a letter with regard to his dealings with Mr.
Campbell. Those are
referenced in the FAA file on page 77. However, I
clearly acknowledge that
this is somewhat weak hearsay of a notation in
our
file, and I would ask that
the record be kept open for me to submit this
letter at a later date so
that at this time I could ask Dr. Powers some
hypothetical questions
based on what I believe that letter will relate.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right, no.
I'm not going to allow that at this late
date.
MS. HAUSELT: Okay.
JUDGE CAPPS: Because I will
be rendering an oral decision today in this
case. I think the
Respondent is entitled to a decision in his case as
soon
as possible, and I'm going
to render that decision and order today, so,
no,
I cannot allow the record
to remain open. Is there any way you
can get the
hypothetical based on other
facts in evidence?
MS. HAUSELT: I will refer
to the record as it is currently constituted.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right, and
I'll just give that the weight that I think
it
should be entitled to.
MS. HAUSELT: Okay.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Dr. Powers, I want to
refer you to page 77 which represent notes to
both
Dr. Sexton and his office,
which is the Regional Flight Surgeon's
Office of
the western region,
relating information that they received from the
Fresno
GATO and there is
information there indicating that, and I ask you this
in
terms of were you to have
information concerning Mr. Campbell that he
had
told someone that he was
qualified as a scuba diver and asked them to
give
him certification without
any test, and when the person refused, then
got
into the water with them
and subsequently proved that they did not know
how
to scuba dive; of what
clinical significance would that be?
A. This, again, would point
out, if so, that the individual has a
defect in
judgment and also engages,
in terms of the problem with interpersonal
relationships engages in
manipulation of others to serve needs of the
moment; so much
manipulation that the rights and the well being and the
integrity of the other
person may be really severely overlooked or
neglected.
Q. And I would ask you of
what clinical significance it would be should
Mr.
Campbell have made the
claim that he -- when asked about a gunshot
wound in
his leg, which was noticed
at the time of the scuba lesson, asked how he
received that, indicated
that while flying John Connolly and others,
Governor Reagan, and
President-elect Reagan was now included, around for
Swift-Air in Nevada -
MR. CAMPBELL: Your Honor, I
object. I don't know where they got this
information from. It's
ridiculous, and unless they can provide some
type of
substantiation, I don't see
how this can even be read into the record.
First of all, I know
nothing about this, and it's just caught me
completely
by surprise. In fact, it's
kind of hysterical, especially considering
the
fact I was in Fresno
working the entire time. Mr. Brown knew where I was
working the entire time and
he had seen me working at that time. I
wasn't
working for, what it is --
Swift-Air -- or something to that extent.
Everything I've seen so
far, it may be a misunderstanding or somebody's
attempt or for that matter,
just blatantly and absolutely true, but
this is
science fiction.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right, you
will have a chance in your case in chief to
attack the contents of page
77. It is in evidence. I'm allowing her to
go
ahead and pose her
hypothetical question on that. As I said, I'll give
it
the weight I think it's
entitled to.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
would merely state the good faith basis for
my
questions, that I have
spoken to Sergeant Brown on the phone and had
conversations where this
information was -
JUDGE CAPPS: Of course,
that can't come into evidence. I can't consider
that as evidence.
MS. HAUSELT: I just wanted
to indicate that I have a good faith basis
for
my question, Your Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, Ms.
Hauselt, I've had you in enough cases. I don't
think
you would do anything
improper along those lines. But, as far as ruling
on
his objection is concerned,
I am going to allow you to frame your
hypothetical question to
this expert using the facts from page 77 of the
exhibit that is in
evidence, and as I've explained to the Respondent,
he is
entitled in his case in
chief to state under oath that these facts were
never supplied to these
people by him, which is the basis of his
objection.
BY MS.
HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Again, Dr. Powers,
referring you to page 77, and assuming that Mr.
Campbell had told someone
that he was engaged in flying Governor
Connolly
and Reagan and during the
course of that -
MR. CAMPBELL: Excuse me,
where does it state Reagan? I mean, let's keep
this to the facts, and I
hate to be nit-picking, but at this stage of
the
game it's the only defense
I have.
JUDGE CAPPS: Is Reagan
included?
MS. HAUSELT: Connolly and
Reagan to Reno from Swift Air -- while he was
there, he saved an
eleven-year old girl from being raped and was shot in
the leg in the process.
BY MS. HAUSELT: (Resuming)
Q. Of what clinical
significance would such a fabrication be?
A. Well, again, it would be
an example of how the individual distorts,
fabricates, outright lies
to support his inflated sense of self. It
would
also be of significance to
me in that if, in fact, it were a gunshot
wound,
this would be an important
omission from the historical data that I have
obtained from Mr. Campbell
at the time of my interview.
Q. Mr. Campbell did not
indicate he had ever been wounded?
A. No, he did not.
Q. Referring you to pages 7
through 10 and 11 through 15, we have some
information there with
regard to Mr. Campbell's employment by Japan
Airlines and his subsequent
use of a uniform following his being
suspended
from their employment. Of
what clinical significance is such behavior?
A. Well, this would be, I
gather, the most recent or more recent
example of
a kind of bending of the
facts, distortion and then outright lies,
including in this specific
instance again, a masquerade, a confusion of
identity, adopting the role
of a pilot for the airlines that the
insignia
and the uniform represent.
And it's not only a questionable example of
his
judgment, but an example of
where the boundaries of self and reality
become
so blurred as to be crossed
back and forth with relative ease and grace
and, I think, probably
convincingly so.
JUDGE CAPPS: Off the record.
(Whereupon, an off the
record discussion was had.)
JUDGE CAPPS: At this time
we are going to suspend the proceedings in
order
to take some time off for
lunch. We'll recess now and reconvene at a
quarter to three.
(Whereupon, a lunch recess
was taken.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record.
You are still under oath,
Doctor.
Whereupon,
DR THOMAS POWERS
having been on the witness
stand at the time of the recess, resumed the
stand and was examined and
testified further as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
(Continued)
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt) I
believe where we had left off, we had gone through
information which had come
to light after your interview with Mr.
Campbell.
In regard to the line of
questioning we just went over , were -- did the
incidents of lying and
behavior which we have just gone through
constitute
overt acts which were
manifested as a result of Mr. Campbell's
personality
disorder?
A. Can you remind me of
exactly where we were, and what documents we
were
referring to?
Q. Okay. Well, I believe
the last question was the clinical
significance of
Mr. Campbell's using the
Japan Airlines uniform back in Nashua, New
Hampshire, and his claim
with regard to his employment past, and we had
gone through a series of
questions concerning his employment in Georgia
and
his claims in Nashua to
have been in the Screen Actor's Guild, his
methods
of teaching, his failure to
follow the orders of the dean at the school,
his claims or being a
parachute rigger - those questions.
A. Yes.
Q. Were those types of
behavior be overt acts manifested as a result of
a
personality disorder?
A. Yes. All of these are
examples of overt acts.
Q. I'd like to ask you a
similar question to what I asked you earlier --
now, are these episodes and
acts which we discussed consistent with your
diagnosis of a mixed
personality disorder including both narcissistic
and
borderline features?
A. Yes, they area.
Q. And could you just
briefly summarize how they fit into that criteria
of
DSM-3?
A. Well, all of these
manifestations for which we have a written record
or
direct observational
evidence or second-hand information would be
examples
of the kinds of features
that are required to make specific diagnosis of
narcissistic personality
disorder, on the one hand, where we have to
meet
the requirement of making
observations of the individual having a
grandiose
sense of self or
uniqueness, and a need to support that sense of self.
This may be done in various
ways -- through masquerading, through
manipulating, through
distortion and fabrication, or outright lies.
Also there is a
preoccupation with a fantasy life, which may involve
fantasies of success -- in
this case, for example, we could think of an
individual masquerading as
a successful airline pilot, wearing the
uniform,
discussing with other
people the kind of work that the individual in
involved .
Or he could be masquerading
as, let us say, a physician and introducing
himself as a physician,
prescribing medications, wearing the white coat
of
a physician, a name tag
indicating that he is a physician. Likewise,
with
these kinds of examples of
attention-seeking behavior that are very
obvious
of exhibitionistic, we
fulfill another requirement in the diagnostic
realm
of criteria, in that there
is a constant need for attention and
admiration
on the part or the
individuals surrounding the person with the
personality
disorder of the
narcissistic type.
Likewise, when challenged
or threatened, if there is a direct threat
made
or if the individual is
called into question and account for his
behavior,
there may be a response of
cool indifference which is sometimes quite
remarkable or just the
opposite of that may occur -- he may fly into a
rage
-- an explosive rage.
There may be extreme
feelings of shame, humiliation, or defeat.
Q. Where do we see evidence
of this in the file?
A.
Well, I think the
account of the dean at Webster College -- when
confronted with certain
facts of the situation which developed there; in
the letter and notes that
the dean supplied, I think -- on Page 32, on
the
top of the page, paragraph
goes on to say, "I wrote a letter to Mr.
Campbell that afternoon,
which he received personally. "After reading,
it,
he stormed into my office.
He was obviously infuriated, especially about
the prohibition against the
parachute club meeting. He accused me of
taking
away his livelihood and he
screamed that; he was going to sue me and the
school, following which he
slammed the door violently and he left the
building."
Other examples would be
those that I referred to in my direct
observation,
and that of my perceptions.
For example, if there was a failure of
response
to efforts to manipulate or
move in the direction that Mr. Campbell
wanted
to go, there was anger. In
my case, there was a kind of threat. And then
there was a sudden cooling
and change.
Q. Wouldn't you expect a
person to be somewhat angry, under those
circumstances? What
is abnormal about that?
A. Well, I think anger
certainly is to be considered a normal response.
But it is a question of the
context and the way in which it is handled.
I think one does not try to
force an issue when it is obvious: that
there
is no way that the outcome
is likely to be changed -- or very unlikely
that
the outcome is going to be
changed. For instance, when he was told by my
receptionist that I had no
time -- I really had no time -- I had given
him
the first available hour,
and I think it was because I had some
cancellations that I was
able to move his time up.
Likewise, if we consider
the accounting of the events at Daniel Webster
College, I think that the
dean pointed out, as I recall he gave a very
good
explanation as to why he
could not allow Mr. Campbell to meet with the
classes -- either the
classes he'd been asked to teach or the
organization
that Mr. Campbell wanted to
do, I guess on a voluntary basis, which was
not
required as part of his
teaching assignment. But there was a very
serious
question as to his having
the proper certification to engage in that
type
of activity. And when
confronted with those facts -one might, I suppose,
feel the normal frustration
and some degree of anger. But one
would not
respond by threatening
lawsuits, screaming and slamming doors. That is
not
normal behavior.
Q. Is there any
significance to the fact that the behavior occurred in
several different
situations?
A. Yes. In fact, as I
pointed out, I think early on you have to see an
on-going pattern of this
kind of manifestation in the individual, that
is
present pretty much all of
the time, to make a diagnosis of personality
disorder. This is not an
occasional event; it is a constant recurrent
type
of manifestation.
JUDGE CAPPS: It is just
when the individual does not get his way?
THE WITNESS: Well, it can
be that, or I think anytime that the
individual
is threatened in terms of
the sense of self or in terms of his
functional
capabilities
It might come -
JUDGE CAPPS; You mean his
ego is threatened, or his self image?
THE WITNESS: His self
image, his --
JUDGE CAPPS: And the image
he is trying to project?
THE WITNESS: Right.
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh, I see.
THE WITNESS: Who he is, or
at the time -- who he may think he is or who
he
is trying to convey that he
is. But it also might be simply in -- it
could
happen in driving a car,
and someone bumps into your car and causes a
dent.
And sure, it's an
unfortunate circumstance, but there might be a sudden
angry outburst of temper
that is kind of a miniature psychosis. During
this
period of time, there is
such an angry outburst that you almost have to
consider that this is a
transient psychotic event. It is a very short
duration and it is not the
same as an ongoing process of psychosis such
as
we have in schizophrenia,
which is another diagnosis entirely.
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) I didn't mean to throw you off the track,
but getting back to the
DSM-3 criteria, what events support those
criteria
with regard to the
narcissistic personality?
JUDGE CAPPS: He has been
through this already. Are you asking for just
events that were brought to
the doctor's attention subsequent to his
meeting with the Respondent?
M5. HAUSELT: Right.
JUDGE CAPPS: All
right. Just limit it to those.
THE WITNESS: All right.
There are more, and I can definitely go about
it in
a fairly organized and
speedy fashion. I reviewed the file , and
beginning
with the information, we
have -- and these are all incidents which came
to
my attention outside of the
context of the interview -- beginning with
Pages 81 and 82 -- however,
in some cases, they relate to things that I
learned in the interview,
but they may be appearing in slightly modified
form.
In Pages 81 and 82, we have
memorandum from the chief of Portland GADO
15,
Mr. John Van Horn that's
the October 5th, 1979 -- and the last
paragraph on
the first page, at the end
of the description that is rendered there, of
Mr. Brown's description of
Mr. Campbell's performance for the first two
months. He was an excellent
employee. The third month it was like
someone
pushed a button. He did a
complete turn-around and caused quite a bit of
trouble. This would be the
kind of thing that one expects to find -- if
the
need that this type of
individual has to exaggerate -- well, I'm sorry
--
what happens in the
inter-personal relationships of the person who has a
personality disorder. There
is an overidealization in the beginning, and
then for some very small or
perhaps even significant reasons, there is a
sudden dramatic change. And
it's like night and day. And there is no
going
back. It's what we call
"splitting." And this is an example of that
kind of
psychological operation.
On Page 82 there is a
reference to Mr. Campbell telling several others
that
he had spent -- that he was
at one time a stunt pilot and did the
flying in
the movie, "Hooper." Well,
I gather from the preceding testimony that
that's of questionable
validity. Again, a distortion, fabrication, or
twisting of the facts, to
support an exaggerated sense of self. There's
the
description of Mr. Campbell
as a very flamboyant individual. This, I
think,
is a layman's way of saying
that this individual is exhibitionistic.
That
is another one of the
criteria.
One Page 76, there is a
notation from someone's notes that Mr. Campbell
had
-- is observed to undergo
very marked and quite wide mood swings, all
within 30 minutes. This is
kind of affective disturbance which is
observed
in the borderline
individual, and also can be observed in the
narcissistic
type of personality
configuration.
On Page 73, we have a
notation from Sandy Taylor at the bottom of the
page.
By the way, he owes the
flight school in New Hampshire $165 in phone
bills.
This would be an example of
the kind of lack of empathy and the
manipulation of others to
accomplish one's ends.
On Pages 55 and 56, this is
the copy of the psychiatric evaluation from
Dr.
McKnight, which I think I
must say I disagreed in terms of his overall
conclusions and I found
much lacking, particularly from the history. But
it certainly occurred to me
that Dr. McKnight was not in possession of
all
the facts of the history of
this individual, much the same as myself,
when
I had the chance to
interview the individual. It was only by having some
additional time and by
going back and carefully questioning, that I
began
to see that there were some
holes in the information that he had given
me.
JUDGE CAPPS: What page are
you referring to in Dr. Knight's -
THE WITNESS: McKnight --
that's pages 55 and 56. Again, here is an
example
of information which is
slightly distorted, in that -- at least in Dr.
McKnight's accounting -- of
Mr. Campbell's account of his World Trade
Center episode, that he was
only thinking about jumping off the World
Trade Center. So I think
that, well, there's none other mention in his
concluding paragraph under
"impressions" -- Dr. McKnight says that he
observes that this is a
young man who is somewhat of an over-achiever in
his chosen field, that of
air science for piloting. It seems to me that
this is what Mr. Campbell
would like others to believe of him. And he
was
successful in conveying and
portraying that kind of image, and that is
basically a successful
young pilot pressing the outer limits, and in all
ways achieving success.
Here again, this is the over-exaggerated and
exhibitionistic driven
empty self, and the failure - the failure of jobs
-- the broken relationships
-- the shortcomings, the mismatching of
stories
and facts -these were left
out of the interview with Dr. McKnight.
Also, that occasion, he saw
a psychologist who performed a number of
tests.
I think in many ways I can
agree with the description of some of the
dynamics. However, again,
in this case, the psychologist just did not go
far enough, and probably
because he didn't have adequate historical
information or correct
historical information. Also, there was, I
think, a
very important omission,
and that is that is that no standardized
personality test as such --
no personality inventory, for example, was
given.
There were other types of
tests of personality functions, but in terms
of
the best kind of a survey
test which would be likely to turn up evidence
across the board, of
problems in personality functioning, one would
think
of giving the classical
Minnesota MultiPhasic Inventory of Personality,
or
the California Personality
Inventory, or other such similar tests. And
this
test was omitted from this
evaluation. And I really don't understand,
because he had several
tests done, and these were observed to be
incomplete, and then he was
sent back and given a couple more. But he
still
didn't get what I would
consider to be a very important test, and that
is
the basic MMPI -- Minnesota
MultiPhasic Personality Inventory. So I
would
disagree with the overall
findings that this is a psychiatrically normal
individual, principally on
the thoroughness of the testing, and the
inadequacy of historical
information. And the psychologist has to go on
that in attributing his
tests. On Page 54 -- I'm sorry -
Q. And the presentation of
one's self in the psychiatric interview in
such
a matter that one withholds
valuable information about one's past --
would
that be consistent with the
personality disorder which we are talking
about?
A. Yes, it would be.
As I have pointed out before, at times,
consciously
withholding and other times
being kind of drawn in to the role that one
has
created, and maybe only
being semi-consciously aware that there is
distortion of facts, but in
either cased this is part of the dynamics of
the personality disorder.
Then there is on Page 54 the letter from Dr.
Dorsey. Again, he mentions
in the second paragraph, without specifically
giving a diagnosis of
personality disorder, he gives the bare bones of
that diagnosis.
Likewise, the end of the
last paragraph, he indicates that treatment was
terminated not by mutual
agreement, as is the case in psychotherapy,
when
such has been completed
successfully, but that the treatment was
terminated
by Mr. Campbell finding
employment out of the area. This means that the
treatment was not probably
- and I think in fact most likely
insufficient
even in Dr. Dorsey's eyes.
And I think later evidence would attribute
it to
the fact that it was
incomplete.
On Page 46 and 47, there is
an article from the Tulsa trip, again this
indicates that here is an
individual who has a tremendous need to gain
support from his
surrounding environment. And this need will drive the
individual to extreme
lengths including, in this case, masquerading as a
physician without license
or education or any of the requirements for
being
a physician, except the
kind of externals -- the garb, the nametag and a
very convincing demeanor.
Also, here again we have an
example how there is a disregard for the
rights
and integrity of others,
and this contributes all the way along the
line to
impoverishment of
interpersonal relationships. In this case, he shows a
flagrant lack of empathy by
not only introducing himself as a physician
to
people who are ill, but he
also prescribes medications for them,
indicating
that he is a physician.
On Pages 44 and 45, we have
the parachute rigger's card entries which
were
inappropriate and
distortions of qualifications. Again, this shows such
a
blurring of distinctions,
and poor judgment that here he may have been
endangering his own life or
property of others.
On Page 43 we have the
letter from someone who recognized this behavior,
and was trying to do
something to kind of shore up the gap that he saw
in
this individual's reality
testing. And he was saying to an authority in
the
parachute organization, in
essence, "please do something about this
individual because he
doesn't have what he says he has, and he is going
to
get himself in trouble and
he is going to get other people in trouble."
On Page 40, we have an
application for employment which I thought
curious
in that there is an
indication that he was a member of the Screen
Actor's
Guild,, which was not
mentioned in my interview with him -also that he
left
that job because he had too
many injuries. That information was also
omitted from the history
that I obtained from Mr. Campbell.
We have on Pages 37 and 38
-- this is a letter or memorandum "to whom it
may concern" from Mr. Steve
Rikelson to Sandy Taylor. He is described by
Mr. Rikelson in that
correspondence as having a pronounced tendency
towards
extroversion. And then he
goes on to specify the kinds of things that
he --
that had come to his
attention - claims that Mr. Campbell has made that
were never really
confirmed. There was some question of their validity,
and
there appears again to be a
confusing mixture of fact -- somewhat --
slight
distortion, serious
distortion to outright fancy and prevarication.
On Page 36, we have again
the letter from Mr. Brown to Dr. Pakull, an
indication that there was
both in terms of his work performance -- which
was not in accord and
appropriate to the situation -- but that he was
beginning to do things
which basically were directed at again the need
to
fulfill this grandiose
sense of self.
And again, an incident was
accounted, which was apparently an outright
lie,
and the fact that he was
terminated from that job -- which again points
out
the difficulty in
interpersonal relationships. On Pages 34 and 35 we
have
an accounting of the
emergency landing and some other similar kinds of
events -- hasty landings
due to serious aircraft malfunctions. I think
these are hard to evaluate,
but certainly they can be examples of the
kind
of situation that would
predictably develop with an individual who has
difficulty sorting out fact
from fantasy. It is possible in the press of
circumstances, whether it
is a real emergency or whether the facts have
been distorted, that
something impulsive, hasty and dangerous may be
done.
Again, the story -- at
least inconsistent with the facts that I was
given
in my interview with Mr.
Campbell -- of a wife who was pregnant and who
was
killed in an automobile
accident -- a confusion of fact with fantasy --
either that or outright
lying.
In the second to last
paragraph of that letter, there is again a
notation
of Mr. Campbell's response
in a situation where he was confronted ---
where
his self image was called
into question, at that time with the apparent
charging of $130 worth of
long-distance phone calls to relatives. And at
that time, according to
this description, Mr. Campbell became not only
totally unreasonable but
also completely irrational.
On Pages 16 through 33, we
have again a series of events that took
place at
Daniel Webster College
which show how Mr. Campbell was caught up in a
situation where he had
apparently told some tall tales about himself.
This situation gradually
escalated into kind of a full community crisis.
And in the course of trying
to work his way out of what I suppose he
thought at the time was a
perfectly righteous and explainable and in his
best interests, matters
became even more complicated and ended up in an
explosive outburst in the
dean's office, and he was terminated from his
position there. And then
there is the question of his function as a
teacher
--- again, the kind of
relationships he had as a teacher with his
students,
and the questions of
identity and boundaries come up in that context --
and
also in his relationship
with the dean, where it appears in the record
that
he directly disobeyed
written orders.
On Page 19, -- well, I
could go through and point out more specific
items,
but we've already been over
that. So I would move on to Pages 7 to 15,
which appear to be the most
recent example in the record. Again,
extremely
poor judgment and inability
to suspend a drive to feed this empty and
needy
self with exaggeration and
distortion and again, a kind of role-playing
that I think amounts to
really a confusion of identity.
And here we have -- first
at Page 9 -- this is a memorandum from Mr.
Scarborough, written, I
think, shortly after the time that Mr. Campbell
left JAL IASCO in Napa,
saying "somehow it seems to me I didn't get back
from you a red jacket,
wings and epaulettes. Would you please stick
these
items in a box and mail
them to me. Thanks, Ed S." And he has enclosed,
or
someone has enclosed in the
record, an inventory which was made of items
checked out on the date of
employment. And that includes, sure enough,
a uniform with a red
windbreaker, a cap, wings, shoulder boards and
stripes. And these items
were noted at the bottom of the page either
returned or not returned on
3/11/80, and in this case the uniform, was
not
returned on 3/11/80, which
I gather is when Mr. Campbell left, or about
the
time that he left working
for this organization.
JUDGE CAPPS: What page was
that?
THE WITNESS: That is on
Page 10. You see that the top of the page, it is
initialed "EMD," and date
of employment, "February 4th, 1980." And the
items were checked off, I
gather, when he received them, and then at the
bottom of the page there
are zeroes next to the items that were returned
on 3/11/80. And
unreturned items included I guess the Jeppson
manual and
the uniform and some of the
others
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, I see
that.
THE WITNESS: Then following
that, on Pages 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, with
dates some of seven or
eight weeks later, accountings of individuals who
had met Mr. Campbell and
spoke with him dressed fully in the uniform,
with
insignias that depicted
Japan Air Lines. And also they indicated that
Mr.
Campbell had specifically
said that he was working for Japan Air Lines
and
had flown into Boston the
night before. He said he was a captain on the
Falcon 20 and a co-pilot on
a B747. Again, here is an example -- I
think it
is evidence now that this
is a continuing process, that the identity
does
become confused because of
the need that this individual has to fill
this
tremendous void within.
Such distortions occur as really a question not
only judgment but
occupation functioning, social functioning, and
really,
I think if not to cause
significant subjective distress on the
individual,
to certainly raise
questions in that individual as to why it is that all
the world seems to be
turning against or finding fault.
JUDGE CAPPS: Let me ask you
this -- do you know, when you see a movie
with
Danny Kaye playing all
these characters, it is funny as the devil.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: And you look
and you say, "Well, there's nothing wrong with
somebody blowing their own
horn -- you know, good con man. He puts his
best
foot forward." Some
people look up to that. Obviously this
Respondent was
able to do that; he was
able to talk himself into many, many jobs right
in
the same industry.
What differentiates the behavior here to make
it
dangerous to air safety for
this man to go up in the air?
THE WITNESS: Well, I think
generally speaking that there is evidence of
a
serious impairment of
judgment such that I would wonder if in judging
that
it was safe and appropriate
to do what he indicated to me he did -- that
is, to plan to jump off the
World Trade Center Building -- to get --
just
at the last minute as he is
going over the side, albeit with a
parachute on
and he is an experienced
parachutist. But this is taking a real
risk with
his own life
JUDGE CAPPS: Well, are you
saying that we can't tell, because of his
unpredictable nature, what
he might do when he once got up in the
clouds?
THE WITNESS: That's
right. You don't know what is going to happen
next. I
think I can go further to
say that given pressing circumstances that he
could be counted on to make
faulty judgments
JUDGE CAPPS: If there is
the slightest bit of pressure brought to
bear? Is
that it?
THE WITNESS: If there is
pressure of if - even if there is not pressure
--
if it just happens to fit
with a particular kind of scheme or scam or
fantasy that is going on at
the moment, For instance -- I don't know
that
there was any particular
pressure involved when he says -- and I don't
know
whether to believe this or
not -- that is one of the problems -- but he
says that he went up with a
friend and they flew around the World Trade
Center Building and they
were dropping smoke bombs out to see which way
the
wind was blowing. I believe
that that is a violation of air safety. It
is
at least doing something
that I think is probably likely to meet with
the
disapproval or the
authorities, both of the city and of the state if not
the FAA.
Also, I was think of
another example of that - but in any event,
basically
it is difficult to predict,
except to say you are not sure what is
going to
happen next, but like as
not there is going to be faulty judgment,
because
there has been such faulty
judgment in the past. And there has been
lack of
insight as to how that
judgment was faulty. So therefore there is no
learning from continued
experience.
JUDGE CAPPS; So in your
testimony is he has removed himself from being a
charming, lying rascal -
THE WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: -- to a person
who doesn't even know himself who he is.
That affects his judgment
and causes defects in that judgment?
THE WITNESS: Yes. And in
his perception of reality and what is
appropriate
and what is inappropriate.
You mentioned Danny Kaye, and the kind of
madcap
things we see in the media
and on television and in the movies -- you
know,
it's quite likely, I think,
that perhaps there is a place for Mr.
Campbell
in the Screen Actors Guild.
It would certainly be more appropriate for
him
to do this type of thing on
the stage or in a controlled setting where
no
one is going to suffer --
where there is a net at the bottom when the
person goes off the top of
the World Trade Center, in case something
goes
wrong. He would not
smash himself as a result of faulty judgment.
Now, on Page 7, I think
finally the last example is that we began
confirming information that
while at - I asked if Mr. Campbell was not
involved in the operation
of Falcon Aircraft. "We do not operate Boeing
747's or other air carrier
jets."
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) Dr. Powers, you were present during Mr.
Campbell's opening
statement, were you not?
A. Yes
Q. I want to ask you if --
I noticed you took notes at that time.
Was
there anything of clinical
significance stated during those opening
remarks?
A. Well, I was making note
of some discrepancies that I was hearing,
between what I had been
told or I had been led to believe, and what I
was
hearing then. But I
think that - most of those I have been over
-- there
are one or two things I
would care to comment on, in that Mr. Campbell
said
that with respect to his
treatment with Dr. Dorsey that he had
relatively
few sessions, that he felt
that little progress had been made.
However, he felt that he
had been seen by his grandfather and had been
spending some time talking
with his grandfather, who has had some time,
I
gather, directing a state
hospital, but who is a GP, and therefore not
specifically trained in
dealing with psychopathology or personality
disorders which I think are
probably some of the most difficult kinds of
cases to work with. And he
at the time conveyed to the Court that he was
getting what he needed, in
this relationship with his grandfather. Well,
I would submit to the
contrary -- that he was getting what he was
seeking,
which is evident from other
examples of his behavior. But he is not
about
to get the appropriate kind
of psychotherapy that is required for the
treatment of the
personality disorder.
JUDGE CAPPS: Did I read
somewhere in the record -- refresh my
recollection
-- that his grandfather
thought he was schizophrenic?
THE WITNESS: Well, I don't
remember reading that per se. I just don't
remember.
JUDGE CAPPS: I thought I
saw something in there.
THE WITNESS: Well,
somewhere in the record it was noted that somebody at
one time or another thought
that he was schizophrenic and then
confronted
him with that, at which
time he did not respond with anything except
kind
of tacit agreement.
And I don't know what else to place that
time, but he
indicated that he had had
some mental problems and it stopped at that --
that particular point.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
just to clear that up -- I believe there is a
reference in the Tulsa
Tribune article that his parents have said that.
However, we are not
alleging that Mr. Campbell has a psychosis.
JUDGE CAPPS: Which would be
schizophrenia, right. Okay. I knew I
had read
that somewhere. Okay. You
were going to give us other examples from his
opening statement .
THE WITNESS: Well, Let me
just review those notes for a minute.
(The Witness examined his
notes.)
To give us an example of
the kind or thing that happens to him, when
describing what to place at
the Daniel Webster College -- and this I
wrote
down from his statements
here earlier today -- "I went along with what
had
been said in the past, even
though some of it was not true, to save my
pride." This is the way he
explains it to us, and this is the way he
explains it to himself, and
I think he believes it himself. I think he
believes it himself more
than we are able to believe it.
Likewise, he
said, "When I left there, I
wanted to throw them off the track, so I
told
them I was going in all
directions." And that to him made a lot of
sense at
the time. But what it
amounted to was that he was telling people
different
things at the same time.
And that is inconsistent with the truth.
JUDGE CAPPS: Tell me, what
is your professional opinion as to what the
prognosis for the
Respondent is, with your -- with the diagnosis you
have
found and all you know from
this case, from having been in here today
and
having studied all the
records, plus your own interview and personal
observation of him? What is
your prognosis for his condition?
THE WITNESS: At this point
in time I would say that I consider his
prognosis extremely
guarded. The reason for that is because he is -- has
not conveyed to the court
today, in my observation, that he is really
involved in psychotherapy
for its own sake, to really get at the
personality disorder which
he is suffering with.
JUDGE CAPPS: He doesn't
have the proper motivation?
THE WITNESS: Well, I think
his motivation is to clear up the problem -
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes. To get
his certificate back.
THE WITNESS: I don't think
it is so important, really, whether or not
this
man flies an airplane
again. He may be able to, at some time in
the
future, if he really gets
into treatment and stays at it for sufficient
time and intensity to
change his behavior and therefore to change his
personality. That is
what is going to be required, and this is
going to
take a long time and a lot
of work and effort on his part.
JUDGE CAPPS: But it can be
done with proper treatment?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it can.
JUDGE CAPPS: Under a proper
doctor that knows what he is doing?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Q (By the Board) And as
long as there is the proper desire to be cured,
on
the part of the Respondent
-is that about it?
A. Yes. The proper desire
and motivation. And there is one other
thing
that is in his favor. He is
relatively young, which not only means that
he
has got more time to work
on it, but that his personality is in some
ways
still in the formative
phases. And that gives him statistically a
little
better prognosis. Otherwise
it would be even worse, if he were ten years
older.
Q. You can teach a new dog
new tricks?
A. That's right.
Q. Yes. Go ahead, I'm sorry
I interrupted, but that was really
uppermost in
my mind there -- this
prognosis deal.
A. That was really the end
of what I wanted to say about the notations
that
I made on what Mr. Campbell
had said earlier.
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) Okay, Doctor, just in conclusion I would
ask
you -- based on the
regulations and as a result of all the testimony and
your own background with
this case -- do you have an opinion as to
whether
or not Mr. Campbell has a
personality disorder which is severe enough to
manifest itself by repeated
overt acts?
A. Yes, I do. He does have
such a personality disorder.
Q. And as pertaining to the
second regulation at issue, and putting
aside
the question of the overt
acts, do you have an opinion as to whether or
not
Mr. Campbell has a
personality disorder which now or within the next two
years may reasonably be
expected to make him unable to safely perform
his
duties of his certificate?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And what is your opinion?
A. That he is unlikely to
change without sufficient and appropriate and
complete treatment of his
problem.
MS. HAUSELT: I have no
further questions.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay. Would
you like a brief recess -- maybe five minutes
--
before we go into your
cross-examination?
MR. CAMPBELL: That's not
necessary.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. Go
ahead.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
(By Mr. Campbell) I am
going to have to run over some material in here,
specifically about your
evaluation.
The first question I have
is specifically how much information did you
have
a chance to look over, or
how much information had you received from the
FAA at the time of my
evaluation?
A. I had had a conversation
with Dr. Sexton, at which time he gave me
some
of the information that I
later received in a written form, in terms of
letters and the evaluation
from Dr. Knight and the psychologist, Lundey.
There were some other notes
that had been made in his office, that he
sent
me copies of. I received
those prior to the time that I saw you.
Q. By any chance did this
information include any data on the attempted
World Trade Center -
A. It did.
Q. We talked for several
hours. During this time, there were some
disagreements over what
specifically happened. You stated pretty much
close
to the end of this that
with reference to my request to get some
information concerning the
outcome for any results that you might be
able
to give me -- and I am
reading from the mental status examination that I
came up "angry and furious,
demanding that the examiner was supposed to
phone the FAA at the exam
and give an oral report to the requesting
physician." "When the
examiner pointed out that the hour was
late, he
stated that he had in his
possession a notarized statement -- that
immediate action would be
taken. "When asked to produce the document, he
shifted the topic, quickly
cooling his rage, and informing me that he
had
enlisted the help of a
congressman in dealing with the bureaucratic
snafu
that resulted in his
suspension." Now, you are specifically
stating that I
said that I had in my
possession the notarized statement. Is that
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. And I became
outwardly angry and furious. That is also
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Let me ask
you sir --- is frustration a normal reaction?
Is
that within the normal
realm?
JUDGE CAPPS: I hope it is,
as frustrated as I get sometimes. Please say
it's normal.
THE WITNESS: Yes, it
certainly can be.
(By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Would you consider the period from early
October to early March an
easy time to get frustrated in -- specifically
over having one's career
killed over his head?
A. I think some frustration
was to be expected.
Q. And if a person was
promised second-hand certain results, and had
expected those results, and
did not receive them after he built up some
dependence on getting that
information/that would specifically inform
employers, parents and so
forth, wouldn't that be - or would that be --
normal reaction?
A. Well, let's not lose
sight of the context. The context is late on
Friday
afternoon, and demands are
being made in the office of the physician
which
cannot be responded to, and
an explanation is given as why. I told you,
as
I can recall, that I really
had to look over the data and think about it
and write a report, and if
from that report there would be
forthcoming some action on
the part of the FAA.
But it was not really my
position to decide anything, but merely to
give an
evaluation, write a
diagnosis, to submit a report and the rest of it
would
be handled by the FAA. That
was out of my realm. That kind of
explanation
should have been given
appropriate consideration, and utilized in
holding
some of the anger in check.
And specifically I would refer I don't know
whether you had a notarized
statement in your pocket or not -- maybe you
did. But it seemed to
me to me -- you know, I was being
intimidated and
somewhat threatened and
coerced in that situation, to do something that
I
was not prepared to
do. And it was inappropriate of you to
require me to
do it.
Q. So at that time you said
you were not capable or prepared to give any
impressions or judgments in
relations to my medical.
A. Well, I think I gave you
some feedback right at the time.
Q. No, sir. I can't recall.
A. We had an exchange of
information at that time as I recall.
Q. Well, please refresh my
memory as to what that was.
A. Well, I can't remember
my exact words, but I think I did indicate at
that time that there were
some real problems in what you had told me.
And
I think you then said
something -- you had copies of the regulations
with
you, that you referred to.
You had them in your attach‚ case -- your
flight
kit. And you, I think, had
also at the time to some extent pretty much
appraised the situation and
you said something to the effect, "You-
don't
think I could be considered
under Section -- whatever it was --
referring
to psychosis, which is
automatically disqualifying; or alcoholism,
which is
automatically disqualifying.
Q. At the time, I think you
zeroed in on a section which specifies that
a
medical certificate for an
airman can be disqualified for having an
history
of personality disorder
with -- overaxed. And I think you read to me
out of
the manual at the time,
saying something to the effect that it looks
like
it will be this, which is
Catch-22. Do you recall that?
Q. That I do. That was
during the course of the examination itself; not
at
the conclusion.
A. Well, it was near the
conclusion. In any event, I thought to
leave well
enough alone at that point,
as far as you were concerned.
Q. All right. Let me ask
you this: You put a lot of faith in a
lot of
hearsay evidence,
specifically letters and reports from various people
from
non-professional
backgrounds, who may or may not be associated or may or
may not really have the
knowledge of the situation. Would your opinion
change very greatly if you
were to find out that a great deal of this
information is misleading?
A. Well, I suppose I could
change my opinion. However, I think it would
require some doing to
explain this whole pattern of events, in addition
to
what I observed at the time
that I spent with you, and -this business
about
you wanting to be given an
appointment ahead of anybody else that I
wanted
to see.
Q. Doctor, we aren't
talking about explaining. I'm talking about
producing
irrefutable evidence to the
contrary of these statements.
A. Well, yes, if you could
refute point by point all of the items that
have
been presented today, then
I would have to reconsider, but I don't
think I
could reconsider -- I could
reconsider, including the other information
that is in addition to what
I learned about you in my interview.
I would
not change my diagnosis.
Q. Okay. Let's talk about
one thing. You had a great deal to say
about,
and have indicated a great
deal of interest during the course of the
interview, and frankly, it
caused me a few problems here. Specifically,
going back to the World
Trade Center -- and there has been a great deal
of
disagreement on this --
specifically, the act of jumping off of a tall
building with a parachute
and with preparation is in your mind not a
stable
act?
A. I think that my point
there was in terms of evaluating judgment, that
that is the example of
extremely poor judgment.
Q. Doctor, are you a
parachutist?
A. I am not.
Q. Do you have any
knowledge of parachuting?
A. Very little.
Q. Are you aware of what
general -- at terminal velocity -- for
instance a
term used to describe an
average velocity after acceleration -- are you
aware that it takes
approximately 350 feet for a parachute to open,
max.,
and that the building is
1,377 feet tall?
A. I don't know these
particular facts. But I would guess that it is
possible to jump off the
building with a parachute on, and survive.
Q It is more than
possible. It's been done twice. Now, in
that respect,
you also made a statement -
and this is something I take a great deal of
exception to -- that there
were flights in the World Trade Center, there
were smoke rings. However,
do you still maintain that objects were
dropped
from the aircraft?
A. I don't know, but that
is what you told me. That you had a friend fly
you around the building in
a helicopter and you dropped smoke bombs to
see
what way the wind currents
were -- to see what the wind was doing around
the building.
Q. Are you absolutely sure,
now, of dropping objects from the machine?
A. That's what you told me.
Q. Around the Center?
In relation to the fact
that I have two substantial -- not rather
substantial, but I could
feel complete evaluations by a psychiatrist
and a
psychologist, a letter from
another psychiatrist and a letter -- for
what
good it may do and whatever
attention it may be paid -- from my
grandfather, who we will
grant is not a psychiatrist, but I often
wonder if
a general practitioner does
not have a little bit more insight than the
average psychiatrist into
people -- how did you find one man's testimony
able to refute four?
A. Well, I don't. I am just
stating my opinion. I will leave it to the
Court to decide which -
Q. Personally, I wouldn't
give myself that much credit for being able to
fool four professionals,
especially one that has been acquainted
with me
all of my life.
A. I did say why I thought
that the evaluations submitted by Drs.
McKnight
and Lundey were incomplete,
insufficient, and therefore wrong. I think I
can substantially agree
with what Dr. Dorsey had to say, in that he
basically is giving the
bare bones of the personality disorder in his
letter. And I don't
remember exactly what your grandfather had to say
but I
would insist that it is not
appropriate for you to seek or obtain
treatment
for a personality disorder
from your grandfather.
Q. Well, I maintain nobody
would know me quite as well.
A. Well, that is in fact of
the problem. He would know you so
well as to
again fall into this kind
of blind spot that you have created, where
issues
of reality and judgment
come into -
Q. I think his judgment is
extremely important.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
would ask that you explain to Mr. Campbell
that
during the course of his
cross-examination, he is not to interject his
own
comments.
JUDGE CAPPS: That's right.
This is not a time for commentary from you,
Mr.
Campbell. All this is is
the opportunity for you to ask questions and to
elicit answers. That
is all. You make no comments, other than to
voice a
question.
MR. CAMPBELL: All right.
Thank you. In reference to your opinion
concerning my suitability
as a pilot, let me ask you first if you have
any
flight experience,
specifically a license or any type of rating or any
type
of instruction, upon which
to base a judgment from a practical
standpoint?
THE WITNESS: I have no
experience or pilot certification of any kind in
that regard. I've
flown in a lot of airplanes, though.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Can you tell me specifically when Dr.
Sexton came to you?
A. I think he -- I don't
know Dr. Sexton. I think I am known to the FAA
regional office in Los
Angeles. I have worked with some of the staff
there.
I think it is likely that
someone else there - possibly one of the
attorneys that I have
worked with on other cases somewhat similar to
this
case -- might have said
that I was in their area and would be available
perhaps to do an evaluation
on behalf of the FAA of yourself.
That is my
guess. I really don't know.
I don't know Dr. Sexton.
Q. Okay. In reference to
your comment concerning Dr. Lundey's
psychological
testing, you seemed to
indicate that there are some omissions.
Are you
aware that the tests taken
were the exact tests that the FAA had
requested,
and apparently this was on
a form letter, so this is established
procedure?
A. No, I wasn't-aware of
that at all. But I will repeat that they were
deficient in two respects
one, I think in respect that there was
insufficient historical
data given at the time on the part of the
individual being examined;
and then I would have myself wanted to see
the
results of one very
important additional instrument -- which is the
MMPI.
Q. All right. In what ways
are these tests deficient? I would
just like to
clarify that just a little
bit, and specifically since the psychological
written testings seemed to
come out in my favor, how does one fool a
piece
of paper and a pencil?
A. It's not easy. But
I think that it is possible, and we see it
happen
again and again. And most
often it is for lack of the sufficient and
correct clinical
information which in reading the evaluations and
summaries
written up by Dr. McKnight
and Dr. Lundey - there was just insufficient
data available to
them. They didn't go far enough with their
inquiry
Q. Well, from the
information you just gave me, and some statements you
made during the interview
back in March, it seemed to indicate to me
that
you didn't have a whole lot
more information than they did.
A. Well, I didn't. But I
had a little more, and in this case it might
have
been the critical
difference.
Q. You had more information
at the time this report was made,
approximately
five days later?
A. Well, I knew that for
one thing that - that those reports had been
done
and that they had been
considered to be perhaps lacking and that they
did
not sufficiently explain
all that was going on. So I found myself
with the
question in my mind shortly
after the beginning o_ the interview - for
instance, why it was that I
really wanted so much to believe what you
were
telling me.
Q. I'm going to go back to
the World Trade Center here, because
according
to your diagnostic
formulation you stated "this is a young- man with a
history of two dramatic
examples of severe impairment of
judgment." First
of all, would you consider
the World Trade Center as one of those?
A. Yes.
Q. I take it you consider
the events in Tulsa, Oklahoma as the other?
A. Yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: What events in
Tulsa, Oklahoma?
THE WITNESS: Well, this is
the series of events at which time he was
impersonating a physician.
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh, right.
Okay.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Well, let me ask you this, and if I
seem to
be repeating myself, I am
sorry. I am just trying to reach an
understanding of the
rationale behind your title of "severe impairment
of
judgment" in respect to the
World Trade Center. First of all, the
severe
impairment of
judgment does that lie more in the fact that it was
an
illegal enterprise or
something where a possibility o_ risk presented
itself?
A. Well, I think
both. As I recall you telling me about that
situation,
you said that "they caught
me with one leg over the side of the
building,"
It doesn't seem to me that
those are the optimum circumstances for even
the
best of daredevil
parachutists to successfully leap from the top of a
tall
building. If you've
got security guards hanging on to one arm,
how are you
going to pull a ripcord?
And at the same time, yes, it was against the
law.
Had you gained permission
from those who owned the building and the
thing
had been properly carried
out legally, I suppose that that would be a
different set of
circumstances. But again, you didn't do that. You
disregarded the fact that
you Were in violation of the law to trespass
and
jump off somebody else's
building .
Q. By any chance did you
have an opportunity to get a little bit more
information about the
attempt itself, specifically the incidents leading
directly up to the arrest ?
A. The only thing I knew
was what you told me about that, except that
this
had allegedly had occurred
and that this was omitted from your
description
of it until the very end.
Q. Were you aware that the
attempts stopped not at the arrest but simply
because the attempts
stopped when another person entered the immediate
area?
A. No, I was going to go on
what you told me, which was that it stopped
when you had one leg over
the side of the building.
Q. Correct. That was the
point at which it stopped. Are you aware - and
this is a matter of police
record - are you aware of the fact that the
attempt stopped when the
danger presented itself to a person other than
myself - that the attempt
stopped when another person had crossed the
fence
and was in the process of
trying to stop me from making the jump?
I think
this makes a big difference
in impairment of judgment.
JUDGE CAPPS: Put a question
mark on that, and I will allow it.
Otherwise,
it's going to be a form of
testimony which I don't allow. Does
that have a
question mark on it?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, it does,
Your Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay. He
put a question mark on it.
THE WITNESS: I really can't
- I don't recall that you told me
that. But
you did explain some of the
circumstances; my recollection is that the
security guards were there
and you said, as I recall, that you had one
leg
over the side of the
building.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) All right, sir. By any chance does that
make any difference to you
in the - All right, now, in
relation to some
statements I had made
during my opening statement, you had ventured some
opinions about them,
specifically in respect to some comments I had made
about being caught and
having problems with pride and so forth.
In your
opinion, does this fit into
a situation where there were deliberate
fabrications or
fabrications simply based on the fact that one's back
was
up against the wall?
A. I honestly don't know,
Mr. Campbell. All I know is that the
stories
don't match with the facts,
and when we have this kind of discrepancies
then usually there is
either distortion, outright lying, or there is an
even more serious thing
going on, which the individual isn't aware of -
that there is a real
distortion of reality, such that you don't know
when
you are telling the truth
and when you are not telling the truth.
And I
think that you are at risk
for getting into kind of situation on that
day-to-day basis.
Q. So it is your opinion
that at this point I not aware of the
difference
between right and wrong?
A. I don't know that. It
could possibly be so, in a given situation.
Q. Do you find your
qualifications any better or equal to, or even
lacking,
with respect to Dr.
McKnight, Dr. Lundey, or Dr. Dorsey? What I
am getting
here is we've got three
different opinions, and I would just like to
know
the rationale which says
"you are right, they are wrong."
A. Well, as I said before,
I disagree with two of them. I don't know
what
their qualifications are,
so I can't really answer that question.
Q. Oh, yes - one other
question. This, I think is going to be
rather
important. I am sure that
as a practicing psychiatrist you have had the
opportunity to speak to
people about this, but do you find a lot of
prejudice toward mental
illness or people who have experienced any type
of
mental health problem, or
people who have consulted with psychiatrists,
psychologists?
A. There is considerable
prejudice and much of it is irrational and
unwarranted.
Q. Would that - would some
of those feelings manifest themselves at
times
in trying to either damage
someone or make false statements concerning
someone? Is that
within the realm of possibility?
A. It certainly is.
Q. What is - throughout
this procedure, there has been some references
to
"con man." Is that an
accurate characterization in this particular
circumstance?
JUDGE CAPPS: I was the only
one who used that phrase, and you've just
voiced it out of context.
THE WITNESS: You would have
to be more specific, because I don't know
what
you are referring to.
I don't remember the incident which the
Court has
referred to - the Judge
introduced that notion by way of seeking further
explanation of something I
had said. Could you be more specific?
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Well, what I am trying to establish is
the
absence of a malicious
intent. Was there any evidence of
malicious intent
through the fabrications -
that you have seen?
A. Malicious? In what way
malicious?
Q. Hurt somebody
else. Did you know of any deliberate attempt on
my part
to hurt anybody else?
A. I would say that what I
was aware of was a conspicuous absence of
feeling of that sort, when
it would have been appropriate to consider
that
possibility that someone
might be hurt, that someone might be deprived
of
their rights - individual
rights, property rights and so forth.
There was
a lack of empathy and a
total absence of feeling of that kind, That
would
be the kind of point that I
would make.
Q. Okay. No more questions,
Your Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Redirect?
MS. HAUSELT: I have a
couple, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
MS. HAUSELT: Dr. Powers, is
there any indication from the record that at
the time Mr. Campbell
attempted to jump off the World Trade Center, that
the area below was cleared
of pedestrians, vehicles and other
obstructions?
A. None that I am aware of.
I would gather not, because it seemed to me
that this was a kind of a
surprise on his part, and there were no
preparations made, except
that he had a parachute on.
Q. Had there been a person
who as claimed by Mr. Campbell came over the
fence in an effort to stop
Mr. Campbell from jumping over the edge of
the
World Trade Center - what
did that indicate about Mr. Campbell's
understanding of other
people's feelings and well-being?
A. Well, I fail to
see the point that he is driving at. I don't
see that
it really makes a shred of
difference but apparently to him it
does. And
that he can make those
kinds of distinctions, I think is part of the
problem, It's like what I
referred to earlier today, in his accounting
of
the difference between a
man who walks across from building to building
on
a tightwire, and one
climbing the side like a mountain climber.
And the
one was questionable
judgment or and the other was not. I can't make
those
kinds of distinctions
either, which Mr. Campbell apparently is able to.
And
I don't share his point of
view in that regard.
Q. Would you make, or would
you be able to make a diagnosis of a
personality disorder based
on psychological testing?
A. No
Q. Is that the theory you
had, without all the information of the
individual's past history ?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. If you had received no
information about Mr. Campbell, and merely
relied
on what he told you, do you
think you could have diagnosed him as
having a
personality disorder?
A. It would have been
difficult. I think I could have done it,
had I been
given more time. But that
would have been difficult. I think Mr.
Campbell
has shown us today here
that he is extremely verbal and adept at
portraying
his intelligence and his
ability to stand on his feet and speak for
himself
and to be entirely
convincing in a role which is, I gather, rather
unfamiliar to him - and
that is defending himself in a court of law.
MS. HAUSELT: I have no
further questions, Your Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Thank you, Dr.
Powers.
MR. CAMPBELL: Your Honor?
JUDGE CAPPS: Do you have
another one -
MR. CAMPBELL: I have still
one question.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay. Go ahead.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
Q. You had mentioned some
personality tests - I believe the MMPI. Is
that
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Would those -
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
this goes beyond the scope of the Redirect
questioning.
JUDGE CAPPS: That is
outside of -
MR. CAMPBELL: She asked
questions about psychological testing.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, way back
on Direct.
MR. CAMPBELL: She just
asked questions on psychological testing.
She asked
specifically if -
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh go ahead
and ask it. It will save time. Go ahead
and ask
your questions. You are
allowed to ask. Go ahead.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Sir, would those tests have any bearing
on
your opinion at this time,
or could they make a difference?
A. Can you ask the question
again. I'm not sure what it is that
you are
asking about.
Q. Could the MMPI
possibly make a difference in your decision, at
this
time?
A. No, it would not.
All right. Thank you.
FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt) But in
your opinion, that might have made the
difference in the
evaluation of
Dr. Lundey and Dr. McKnight?
A. Yes. That was my point.
MS. HAUSELT: I have no
further questions.
JUDGE CAPPS: Let me ask you
this;
Dr. Dorsey - he didn't make
any diagnosis,
THE WITNESS: No.
JUDGE CAPPS: Because his
treatment was ceased before it's natural
culmination, in his
opinion, because the Respondent moved out of the
area.
Is that right?
THE WITNESS: It was
terminated for that reason. I don't know if that is
the
reason why he didn't
venture a diagnosis. What he did do was - in
more
descriptive language - gave
some of the essential elements of a
personality
disorder, in that letter.
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, I noticed
in that letter he did cite certain things -
THE WITNESS: Right.
JUDGE CAPPS: - and that
leads you to think that that was an inherent
diagnosis - I mean, coming
from a psychiatrist like it was.
THE WITNESS: If we had Dr.
Dorsey here today, and asked him, he would
agree
that that was the diagnosis
- the diagnosis of personality disorder was
correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: He would that
these are symptoms -these things that he - or
characteristics.
THE WITNESS: These are the
manifestations and the characteristics, yes.
JUDGE CAPPS: That DSM
THE WITNESS: The Diagnostic
Statistical Manual is a standard in the
field.
Q. (By the Board) That is
so you all will know what each other is
saying,
and talking about, right?
A. That's correct.
Q. Much less, us -
A. More importantly, you, I
would say - in this case.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay. I have
no further questions Thank you, Dr.
Powers. We
will take a five minute
recess before your next witness.
(The witness was excused.)
(A five-minute recess was
taken.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record.
MS. HAUSELT: We call Dr.
Barton Pakull.
Whereupon,
DR. BARTON PAKULL assumed the witness stand, and having
been duly sworn by the
Administrative Law Judge, was examined and
testified
as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt)
Would you state your name for the record?
A. Barton Pakull. First
name, B-a-r-t-o-n, last name, Pakull,
P-a-k-u-l-l.
Q. What is your business
address?
A. 800 Independence
Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C.
Q. A. And you are - where
are you employed?
A. I am employed for the
Federal Aviation Administration in the office
of
Aviation Medicine.
Q. In what capacity?
A. I am the chief
psychiatrist on the staff of the Federal Air Surgeon.
Q. Are you Board certified
in psychiatry?
A. I am Board qualified in
psychiatry.
Q. Dr. Pakull, could you
briefly summarize what your medical education
is,
or was?
A. Yes. I am a graduate of
Syracuse Medical School, in 1961. I took the
prescribed residency in
psychiatry, in the Department of Psychiatry in
Syracuse, completing that
in 1965. I also parenthetically in 1965
received
training as a flight
surgeon in the Army, and served as an Army flight
surgeon in Viet Nam in
1965-66.
Q. When did - what did you
do after 1966?
A. After serving in the
Army as both a flight surgeon and with the
Special
Forces and paratroopers, I
served in the Peace Corps for three
years. I
served as Deputy Chief
Psychiatrist in the Peace Corps. Following that,
I
was staff psychiatrist
-chief psychiatrist - currently - with the
Federal
Aviation Administration,
since 1970.
Q. And do you have any
aviation and flying background?
A. I am a licensed hot air
balloon pilot and a parachutist.
Q. And you have reviewed
the-file in this case?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Could you just explain
briefly what personality disorder is?
A. Well, much the same as
has already been testified to by Dr. Powers
quite
eloquently and quite
directly. He referred to the fact that there
are
different types of
personality, and that a personality disorder is an
extreme and maladaptive
pattern of behavior that is ingrained, that
occurs
and usually is seen to
manifest early in life - in adolescence - and
persists throughout out
life. It is a pattern of behavior and a
constellation of behavior
that is recognizable, so that you see what the
person is like - it's a
personality disorder when that is both extreme
and
maladaptive. In that
sense, a personality disorder is in some
instances
more clearly observable, or
just as clearly observable by lay people as
it
is by professionals. It is
just that we can articulate and explain or
categorize it, but the
manifestations are things that are within the
purview of all lay people.
Q. Okay. What are the
characteristics of a person suffering from a
personality disorder?
A. Well, they vary,
depending on the personality disorder.
However, with
reference to the Aviation
Medical Certification Regulations, part 67,
which
although I have not
written, I am quite familiar with - we are referring
to overt acts related to
personality disorder. We are referring
to those
types of personality
disorders specifically that bear upon judgment that
bear upon the kind of
judgment involved in aviation and in aviation
safety.
This is not with specific
reference to intelligence or proficiency
Personality disorders of
certain types, that manifest themselves in
overt
acts, are related to safety
because they are related to kinds of
judgment
that people will make
Q. Okay. Let me ask you a
general question. In your opinion,
based on the
file and all the testimony
that you have heard today, does Mr. Campbell
suffer from a personality
disorder?
A. Yes, he does.
Q. And has that personality
disorder manifested itself by repeated overt
acts?
A. That is correct.
Q. Could you outline
briefly what some of those overt acts were?
A. Yes In general it has
been testified to and observed and is in the
record and is acceded to,
to some extent, by Mr. Campbell himself, that
he
has shown poor impulse
control. He has shown poor judgment. He
has shown
an inability to take
responsibility for his acts, with a tendency to
blame
other people. And he has
evidenced that he does not understand; that he
feels little guilt for some
of the things that he has done. Some
of these
overt acts - they've been
gone into in quite detail, and they are quite
numerous. But they can be
grouped, and at least they could be referred
to
in certain individual cases.
For instance, the incident
about the World Trade Center, which in
itself is
an irresponsible action
because obviously someone jumping off a tall
building is doing something
that is illegal, first of all, which makes
it
an irresponsible act by
itself - one of many that would manifest itself
in
this. But secondly,
he did not understand that this involved
danger to
other people, when you land
on other people in a parachute.
Posing as a doctor - now I
understand from some of the comments not
under
oath by Mr. Campbell that
he would take issue with some aspects of the
article written in the
Tulsa newspaper. Be that as it may,
whether or not
he in fact did - and I
don't know that he didn't do it - I mean, as far
as I know, he did attempt
to treat people - the posing as a doctor is an
irresponsible act because
it can pose a risk to the life and safety of
other people.
This is poor judgment. If a
person and these experiences have occurred
to
me - I have become familiar
with experiences such as this, where a
person
suffering from a heart
attack or incapacitating situation, other
people
rush to the wrong person,
thinking he is a physician, instead of taking
proper action of calling
for proper servicing. This is a
life-threatening
kind of situation, an
example of possible irresponsibility.
His claims of being an
instructor for - that's AOPA - it is in Aircraft
Owners and Pilots
Association organization, where he made a claim to
have
done some ground school
that was not - he had made claims to credentials
he doesn't have, and his -
the credential of having a parachute rigger,
are
examples of poor judgment
where he puts people at risk. I myself
in the
purview of being a student
parachutist know that I would not want to
put my
life and my safety in the
hands of somebody who would be impulsive or
who
would not be completely
qualified, or would do these things without
being
qualified.
Certainly in my
responsibilities of chief psychiatrist at the FAA I am
concerned, and let this
concern be manifested throughout the office of
Aviation Medicine at the
FAA, that we are concerned with lapses of
judgment
because this - if it
reflects itself in this kind of personality, we
expect it might reflect
itself in aviation activity and impinge upon the
safety of others. In
fact, in this case it did impinge on itself
in
aviation activity. But even
without that, I would consider having this
personality and having
these overt acts - even outside of aviation -
would be sufficient for us
to want to take action under part 67, which
we
have a right to do.
Again, there are other
aspects that reflect on this kind of acting-out
personality disorder, such
as taking things. It has been alluded to
films;
in one case, educational
materials in the case of one of the other
employment - places he was
employed at. These are examples of an
acting-out personality -
irresponsible actions, financial
irresponsibility.
The business with the phone
calls; also the business with non-payment-on
Page 73, non-payment of
bills.
Again, these are overt acts
that are not in aviation, hut they don't
necessarily have to be in
aviation to be overt acts that reflect an
acting-out
personality. And an acting-out personality is a person
with
poor impulse control, poor
judgment, who we would not want to have
responsibility within
aviation. Misrepresenting himself as a JAL
pilot,
including taking the
uniform and not returning the uniform, also
reflects
overt acts of the nature
which has already been alluded to.
But I feel that it is
important, although it would seem minor, to -
perhaps to other people -
it is important within the evidence there are
at
least two occasions where
one of the reasons why there was objections to
what he was doing was not
in the technical sense proficiency, but was
his
digressions from his
responsibilities to students - digressions that in
some cases may have
involved showboating in the air and on the ground.
Such cases - at least in
two of the parts of the evidence - I think it
was Brown Aviation as well
as at Webster College, where there was
evidence
that some students were
falling away from him because of these kinds of
behaviors.
Sometimes, in a young
person, you might consider it immaturity. But
continuing on into early
adulthood, and under the pressures of
responsibility, it begins
to he what we call a personality -"character -
personality
disorder." And these are the kinds of- overt acts
that we
would associate with this
behavior. And finally I would point out
that he
does manipulate people; he
tried to manipulate Dr., Towers; he tried to
manipulate the student body
at Daniel Webster College against the
administration.
And frankly, I, as a
bureaucrat can very much identify with the
administrator of a college
or an administrator or someone running a
school
- a training school for
pilots - where you have a great deal of
responsibility and legal
liability to make sure that the person that is
representing yourself has
proper credentials and is acting in a proper
way.
You are liable, and you
worry about it, and the notes there reflect the
worry that the
administrator at the college had. He asked for
credentials
and they weren't
forthcoming. There were promises and he was told there
were credentials, and he
was worried even before he received the copy of
the article about this
person - the Tulsa article. Even before
that, he
was worried about this
man's employment.
And I think these are
examples of the things that you see in this kind
of
- these kinds of acting -
out personalities, that make them unreliable
and
therefore unsafe. And
of course I don't know-he has perhaps
alluded, not
on the testimony, that he
didn't actually treat people. But for a person
that treats somebody even
with a non-:prescription drug, it is a
dangerous
thing - an act of
irresponsibility that when reflected with all these
other
acts, on the personality,
is the kind of personality that FAA,-I feel,
cannot be represented as an
airline pilot, as an instructor of pilots,
as
an instructor of
parachutists.
Q. Is the problem something
that he will Outgrow? it a function of
immaturity?
A. Generally speaking, the
answer would be "no." But I wouldn't want to
say
the prognosis is impossible
for him to change. I would like to
see a
number of years of
stability in employment, stability in his
relationships
with people, an absence of
the kinds of behavior that he has shown
before -
which is impulsivity,
prevarication, blowing himself up, avoiding
responsibility for what he
does, not paying his debts, conning people,
et
cetera, et cetera, and
making rationalizations. A few years of
absence of
this might convince the FAA
and psychiatrists that perhaps this is
ameliorated, for whatever
reason - whether through therapy, or through
experience .
JUDGE CAPPS: I love you
psychiatrists. You're the only branch of
medicine
that never uses the word
"hopeless." You all don't think any case is
hopeless, do you?
THE WITNESS: No, I think
there is always room for hope for everything.
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) Taking all you know of this case, and
based
on the personality disorder
that Mr. Campbell has, do you think that he
understands what the truth
is?
A. I am not sure that I can
answer that question, directly that
way. For
instance, I don't think - I
think he understands the facts, but he
doesn't
give them the way I would
give them, in terms of judgment. So I
can only
compare him to myself , and
I think he understands the truth at times.
Although I can understand -
I'm not sure, I haven't examined him
directly- where there is a
possibility that he lacks even the ability at
times to tell the truth
from not truth. I'm talking about that
aspect of
his personality that deals
with this prevarications and elaborating more
and more stories. At
some point he begins to understand or
believe his own
stories, and he confuses
them.
Q. Okay. Based on your own
experience as a parachutist and also your
position with FAA, what in
your opinion is irresponsible about his act
of
attempting to jump off the
World Trade Center with a parachute.
A. Well, if you are asking
- you are including my own personal feelings
when you ask "in my
experience as a parachutist," because I can recall
my
experience as a novice
parachutist, before I was in the military,
putting
my life in the hands of
people who were the earliest parachute
instructors.
Its very important these
people be - and in my knowledge and my
familiarity with these
people - be very responsible people, not
dare-devils.
The act of transgression of
law, in itself, is irresponsible. The act of
doing something spectacular
like that, may be nice, but it doesn't go
along
with the kind of
personality, especially if it is extreme, and reflects
a
personality disorder of the
kind of person who would be instructing
people
in flying - instructing
people in parachute jumping. So it is
irresponsible to make the
attempt, and of course I worried about the
people
down below. He may be okay,
but we are now in the neighborhood of the
World
Trade Center, and I don't
want to be walking around looking up to see if
someone is dropping a smoke
bomb or someone is descending in a
parachute.
Q. Okay. You reviewed the
report of Dr. Dorsey in the file on Page 54.
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Are Dr. Dorsey's
comments consistent with the personality disorder?
A. Yes, very much so, when
they describe - I would say they describe
what
I feel I see in the whole
record. Let's read the second paragraph
- yes -
the end of the middle
paragraph, It very much describes it.
Q. Okay. with regard to the
psychiatric and psychological evaluation
done
by Dr. McKnight and Dr.
Lundey, do you agree with them?
A. Oh, no. First, it's
already been mentioned that both of them seem to
be
convinced that he will
never do this again. And I can't see how they can
say this. I take that
back. I was thinking about Dr. Dorsey's
report. In
order to make an accurate
assessment of a behavior disorder or a
behavior
and personality disorder -
personality disorders are called "behavior
disorders" because much of
what is manifested is behavior that is
observable. You have
to know what the person is doing. It is
extremely
difficult to make an
accurate diagnosis -you may make very strong
inferences, but to make an
accurate diagnosis of an acting-out type
personality disorder, which
is what we are concerned with - without
knowing what the behavior
is, because characteristics of some of these
and
many of these disorders is
the person is also facile in making
explanations
and prevarications and
doesn't tell you what happened. So if you
don't
know what happened and
can't measure up what happened, to what they
say, it
is very difficult to make
the diagnosis
JUDGE CAPPS: When you say
"behavior" when you've just used it now - that
term - do you mean the
pattern of behavior?
THE WITNESS: And specific
acts.
JUDGE CAPPS: Not just - oh,
specific acts -
THE WITNESS: And specific
acts.
JUDGE CAPPS:-that
constitute a pattern.
THE WITNESS: That is
correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: That are
recognizable by even lay people.
A. And that is why
parenthetically I do place some credence on comments
-
colloquial comments such as
they are - by lay people who have come in
contact with him, as we
have seen in the record. That tells me
something,
because someone says "he is
loony," they are responding to something.
They
may not be psychiatrically
trained, but they are lay people who are
responding to something.
There is something wrong. I can say as a
psychiatrist that this is
not psychosis, this is not schizophrenia. But
I
understand what they mean,
and it helps me to understand, "yes, this is
a
personality disorder that
manifests itself this way," even though at the
same time, many people -
including some psychiatrists and psychologists
-
could be fooled because
they don't see all the parts of the behavior.
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) Okay. So in your mind, is there any
question
that Mr. Campbell suffers
from a personality disorder?
A. Not at all.
Q. And that disorder has
been manifested by repeated overt acts?
A. Yes.
Q. If you put aside the
question of the overt act, in your opinion and
based on the record, does
Mr. Campbell have a personality disorder which
may reasonably be expected
now or in the next two years to make him
unable
to safely perform the
duties of his certificate?
A. That is correct. He does
have a personality disorder and I could not
predict that he could not
continue to manifest that personality disorder
continually over the next
two years.
MS. HAUSELT: I have no
further questions, Your honor.
JUDGE CAMPBELL:
Cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Q. (By Mr. Campbell) In
line with the previous question, Dr. Power,
might I
get you to venture some
ideas on a prognosis of the future?
A. I don't know.
Q. I would say - I know
this sounds self-serving but the very act of
losing your medical
certification may motivate you and say make enough
impact to make you
understand or begin to understand how people like
myself
and others think and act,
and begin to modify one's behavior .
JUDGE CAPPS: Can that
sometimes work on an individual suffering from a
personality disorder?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it does
happen.
JUDGE CAPPS: You mean, all
of the talking to him by friends and parents,
and the cajoling and trying
to make him understand, won't do it.
But
something that he wants
very badly - if he is denied that - it can make
him sit up and take notice?
THE WITNESS: Something that
really slaps you in the face. The
trouble with
friends and relatives is
that they are too kind and not tough enough.
You
need to be slapped in the
face to really realize. That is what
perpetuates
this personality disorder -
if you can't pin them down. You have
to nail
them to the floor. They
keep running away to other parts of the country
and
starting all over again.
They keep fooling people. They keep getting
away
with it. So it
perpetuates the personality. They have not learned
enough
that it is not in their
best interests, that they have to earn and work
for
release of basic character
development that most of us undergo.
That needs
to be learned at a much
later age. It does happen. It happens in prison,
and through prison.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) Also in line with the previous
question:
In the event that you were
to discover that: a great deal of the
information presented in
the form of various hearsay testimonies on the
part of various
non-professional people were discovered to be incorrect
erroneous, misleading or
false, would that have any difference on your
judgment?
A. It is inconceivable to
me that all of these people, who don't know
each
other, just keep coming up
with the same kinds of feelings about this
person that "I don't want
him working for me. I don't want him teaching
my
students. I don't trust
him. He is not reliable. He doesn't pay his
bills,
"et cetera, et
cetera. Those opinions, alone, help me to make up
my mind
about what the personality
is, even though there may be distortions.
There
are always going to be
distortions. There are so many stories I don't
know
which is true and which
isn't true. Now I still can't make up my
mind
whether the person
described here actually was in the service, or was in
the reserves, did receive
certain kinds of training in the Air Force, or
didn't, or did have
somebody that they knew who may have died in a
parachute accident, did
have a close friend, did have a wife, didn't
have a
wife - there are all kinds
of distortions of people hearing messages
from
one to another, They do
distort. But the basic pattern is
certainly
evidenced throughout the
record.
Q. Okay. would you also
agree with Dr. Powers in respect that many
people
in the "outside world" hold
great deal of prejudice in relation to any
type
of mental health problem or
mental illness?
A. Yes, that is certainly a
generalization that is hard to disagree
with.
Q. Now, one question I have
- you have indicated or have started to
talk a
little bit about what you
would like to see before granting a medical
certificate in the
future. I am just curious if you would expound
on that
just a little bit.
A. Just a little bit -- may
I say that this would be in terms of the way
the regulation is set up;
the way we have set up that to operate in the
FAA. This is in terms
of granting an exemption to a denial for
certain
mandatory denials. And in
the case, the mandatory denial for a
personality
disorder manifesting itself
by overt acts, it has been in my experience
quite rare that our medical
consultants -- psychiatric consultants --
have
recommended an exemption,
but it does happen.
And what I know they will
want to see, and I want to see it - many
years,
a number of years of stable
behavior. It is not something that
you need to
be a psychiatrist to
understand, because you don't - don't need to he a
psychiatrist to understand
the issues of why a person like that, no
matter
what label you give it,
should not have the responsibilities of a pilot
or
a commercial pilot, and
what it takes for us to be convinced that they
could have the
responsibilities, These are not difficult concepts
for an
educated Lay person to
comprehend.
Q. Well, are you aware that
several years, or many years, as the case
may
be, in the competitive
environment that is currently in the job market
in
aviation, pretty much would
put the end to a person's career in that
area
especially if that would
put someone near the 30-mark by the time the
situation like this would
be resolved ? And I mention this
specifically
just to call your attention
to the gravity of what is happening here.
A. I don't know what job
market you are referring to. In my
opinion, your
chances of being an airline
pilot are zero. I mean, if I worked for an
airline and I know that
doctors have worked for airlines - why in a
competitive market would
they ever want anyone, if we cut off the last
eight months, the last
three jobs, they just don't want - they have no
right to take that kind of
chance in hiring you to fly a 747, past the
age
of 40. When you are
talking about the job market for commercial
aviation
and flight instruction,
there is always room for people. When you are
talking about other kinds
of Class 2 commercial responsibilities, it
depends upon the job
market. I think reflected in your question
is your
lack of understanding. My
concern is not with your career; my concern is
with public safety.
If I had your background, my concern was in my
reputation and changing my
reputation by my acts, not in getting my
certificate. We think
differently and see things differently.
Q. We do think differently.
However, is what you are saying pretty much
that the FAA has no concern
for the individual?
A. We have a great deal of
concern for the individuals in the air and on
the ground below the planes
that are flying above them, as well as the
individual who is being
carried by the pilots.
Q. Well, how do you explain
the FAA's actions up to now have been all
punitive and were never a
request for information or request for help of
one type or another -
MS. HAUSELT: Object to this
form of the question.
JUDGE CAPPS: Sustained. You
don't have to go through it.
Q. (By Mr. Campbell
Continuing) I have no other questions, Your
Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Any Redirect?
MS. HAUSELT: No , Your
Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: Thank you, Dr.
Pakull.
(The witness was excused.)
MS. HAUSELT: That concludes
the case for the Administrator, Your Honor.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. The
Government has rested. That means they have
put
on all of their evidence
that they have to present. Now, we turn
to the
Respondent's case in chief.
You have indicated that you have no other
witnesses other than
yourself. Is that correct?
MR. CAMPBELL: That is
correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. If
you will step up here, and be sworn, I will
hear
your testimony.
MR. CAMPBELL. Am I allowed
to bring this up with me, just to refer to?
JUDGE CAPPS: Certainly.
Whereupon,
JAMES R. CAMPBELL assumed the
witness stand, and having been duly
sworn by
the administrative Law
Judge, was examined and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
Q. (By the Board) Okay, I
am going to ask you a few preliminary
questions.
For the record, state your
name and current address?
A. My name is James Richard
Campbell. I am currently residing at 41
Stone
Vance Road, Oakland! New
Jersey.
Q. Mr. Campbell, are you
the respondent named in this case?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. At the commencement of
this trial, you availed yourself of the
opportunity to give an
opening statement, which was a rather detailed
opening statement in
narrative form. In the interest of saving
time, and
to avoid for you having to
repeat a lot of the stuff that you told me in
your opening statement, I'm
going to ask you this question: Is
there
anything in that opening
statement that you told me that you would not
be
willing to have considered
said under oath?
A. I stand by everything
that I said.
Q. You did not tell me any
untruth?
A. As far as I know, that
is correct.
Q. All right. So if I were
to ask you to start telling me your
side of the
story, of necessity you
would have to repeat a lot of the things you
said
in that opening statement?
A. Yes, m'am.
Q. And do you want to stand
by that now that you're under oath?
A. Yes, m'am.
Q. All right. Then what I
am going to do is accept that opening
statement
and the information you put
forth in that opening statement as testimony
sworn to under oath by you.
A. All right.
Q. I am going to ask you
now if there is anything that you failed to
tell
me in the opening
statement, that you think I should know?
A. Quite a bit.
Q. Okay. I am going go try
it this way I'm going to let you start in a
narrative form to bring out
some of this stuff. If I see that
it's not
working, I'll let you know.
You will be the first to know. And then I'm
going to start asking
specific questions.
A. Okay. Well, I'll do my
best to be brief.
Q. Okay.
A. I think the smartest
thing right now is simply to attack the
literature
as I see it, and any
comments I can render - I will keep those
down. In
reference to the
International Air Service Company, page 7 - everything
there is correct as is -as
is all the information presented from the
International Air Service
Company.
Q. Let me ask you this,
specific question; There was a press release
that
came out when you were at
Daniel Webster College.
A. There was a press
release prepared. It was never released.
Q. All right. There was a
press release prepared.
A. Correct.
Q. Did you give them the
information for that press release?
A. Some of that information
I did.
Q. Did you look over the
press release after it had been prepared?
A. I had the opportunity to
look it over. They had asked me if there
were
problems. I said, "Yes,'
and that was as far as they'd gotten.
Shortly
thereafter, things blew up.
Q. So you never made the
corrections that should have been made on that?
A. There was some
opportunity - very little.
Q. Was there anything in
that press release that you maintain now was
just
pulled out of the air, that
was not gotten from you? Now, the
reason that
I am asking the question
this way is if I was going to prepare somebody
-
a press release on somebody
- on you - I'd go to you and I'd say, "Here,
Campbell, I've got to
prepare this darn press release. I've got to get
information from
you." 'So, you feed it to me and I'll take it
down." All
right. That is the way it
is generally done. Are you saying that it is
not
the way it was done in this
case?
A. To a certain extent,
yes, and to a certain extent, no. A lot
of the
information was "I have
this and this and this. I'm going to write it
up.
Give me a little bit more
information on your flying; a little bit more
information on your family;
a little bit more information on the World
Trade Center; a little bit
more information about where you are from,"
and
so forth. A lot of
the information they had gotten from students.
A lot of
information was done either
over the phone or in person. It was a rather
hectic atmosphere the first
few days, because we were preparing for
students and we were
preparing the flight program -in addition to
preparing
classes. There was
very little time for any kind of dialogue.
Q. Let me ask you this -
have you ever been a stuntman in the movies?
A. In the movies - no.
Q. You didn't work on the
"Moonraker" or "Hooper." You didn't do any of
those movies, did you?
A. Well, they make the
mention of flying in "Hopper." There is none, so
I
certainly couldn't have
done that. And "Hooper" - I know who did
it. I am
a buddy of the guy who did
filming and in fact he used to show up at
IASCO
a lot, but no, that is not
me. And in the past I had claimed -
Q. Did you ever do any
stunt work or flying or anything in "Charlie's
Angels?"
A. M'am, nothing in
organized media -
Q. Nothing in television or
movies?
A. There was a news
broadcast in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where a gentleman from
News Center 8, or some
such, came in to take his parachute jump. It was
his
first in a year. That was
televised, and during that period of time
there
was some pictures of him
and me in free-fall, turning a back loop and
things like that.
However, there was nothing of any commercial
nature such
as films, television.
I have recently been involved with a few
things that
might be commercial, but
God only knows how they will work out.
Q. I'll tell you - the
issue before me is whether or not you are now
suffering from a
personality disorder that has manifested itself in
certain
overt acts that laymen and
psychiatrists and virtually everybody would
not
consider exactly normal
acts of normal people. Now, you have told
me about
- I mean, you've owned up
to it - you have admitted that you did pose as
a doctor. Was that
for three months?
A. Something around that
neighborhood - yes. Keep in mind that
during
that period of time, I was
escalating from one end to the other. It was
either as a medical student
or as a resident or as a doctor, or whatever
would work at the time.
Q. Work to do what?
A. Well, for instance of people who knew a
little bit
more of my background, it
was obvious that I was not a doctor.
However, it
was more suitable, it was
easier to believe that I was a medical
student.
Q. Tell me this - just out
of curiosity, why did you want anybody
to
think you were either a
medical student or a doctor? when you were in
fact
not?
A. At the period of time, I
was hurting a great deal. The only person
who
has never disappointed me,
the only person who has ever proven
themselves
to be absolutely
unimpeachable as far as his wisdom and as far as his
guidance, as far as
judgment, the only person that I have ever known who
just exceeds the basic
tenants of being good, is my grandfather.
He has
been -
Q. Well, wait. I know what
you are saying - You want to emulate him -
you
have such respect for him.
A. Well, not emulating, but
I see how he deals with people and I see
what
people look to him as. I
see the way he is able to help people. I
don't
know so much if I wanted
the emulation so much as the interaction, if
that
makes any sense at all.
Q. Well -
A. Well -I wanted the
involvement, the vitality, the
Q. But don't you see -
A. I wanted to be needed.
Q. - he worked for all
that, He sure did. I didn't.
Q. He got his degree,
A. I went back. I said,
"Yes, that's me." and it's not over yet.
Q. All right. Tell me this:
Have you ever been married?
A. No, m'am.
Q. Have you ever had any
little kids?
A. No, m'am.
Q. That evidence that's
come out about you saying something about a girl
came out there to Tulsa -
did her parents' house really burn?
A. There was a young lady
by the name of Gayle, in Georgia. she was
visiting her uncle, and I
believe his name was Frank. Her house,
and it is
a matter of record, was
burned out - not burned down - burned out. And I
saw this house, because
immediately after leaving Brown Aviation, I
drove
four hours - it's about
240-245 miles from that area to - this was out
near Birmingham, -just
south - I forget the name of the town. And
I drove
out there while they were
in the process of knocking out the windows and
the frames were charred -
knocking out the middle of the living room.
What had happened,
apparently was her little brother - and I may be
incorrect in this -
apparently was playing with matches,
Q. Okay. Let's go say
that's true, then. The hoes did burn out.
A. That is true. I can
prove that.
Q. She wasn't in a bus
accident, thought was she?
A. No, m'am. I never stated
that. I don't know
Q. Somebody made that up?
A. That, or a
misunderstanding. Jim Brown and I did not get along, and
when
I left it was ugly.
Q. Well, how could he
misunderstand you saying a girl is in a bus
accident
and is in critical
condition, and you were there next to her - and you
weren't? How could he
misunderstand all that?
A. The best person you
could speak to on her circumstances would be my
pastor, and I am sure he
has no knowledge of such a conversation.
I'll
tell you this much -
Q. You are saying that that
entire conversation with your pastor never
took
place?
A. I had a conversation
with my pastor about a lot of things,
Q. But not about Gayle?
A. I had a great deal to
say about Gayle. Gayle was the first casual
relationship I had had in a
long time.
Q. but you never told your
pastor that Gayle was hurt, or anybody else
that
Gayle was hurt and
critically injured?
A. The only thing I said
about Gayle was that was worried about Gayle -
specifically with what she
had to go back to.
Q. All right. Let's get on
that bit about the Japan Air Line pilot and
co-pilot and the 747's and
all that jazz. Did you do all that?
A. I was at Nashua
Aviation. - I don't know the exact date.- I am sure I
can figure it out - in a
Japan Air Lines uniform.. However, on the
weekend, when I was still
working for Japan Air- Lines, I managed-to
bum a
ride out there. It was a
kind of a crazy deal where we busted every
rule in
the book. And I was
out there, and it was just before I left, and
to be
very frank, a lot of this
is a surprise. I'm not really prepared with
any
real information, other
than the fact that I was out there.
Q. You know, we got a lot
of statements that You went there -
A. However, two of these
people I don't even know.
Q. Well, they knew you,
according to their statements
A. Everybody knows me out
there.
Q. I know. I imagine you
make an impression. They said - a lot of
them -
that you were there dressed
up in this Japan Air Line pilot uniform,
after
Japan Air Line said you no
longer worked for them.
A. I think that is
incorrect.
Q. Are you telling me right
now - looking me eyeball to eyeball.
A. Eyeball to eyeball.
Q. That you have never worn
a Japan Air Line uniform, when you were not
in
their employ?
A. I can't say that,
because I was - the end of my employment occurred
February 29th. I was around
for several weekends - several weeks
afterwards, just hanging
around and hoping, waiting for Dr. Powers and
waiting for Dr. Sexton,
waiting for various things. I had a lot
of time on
my hands with absolutely
nothing to do except occasionally ride
observer -
Q. You mean you were still
wearing the uniform, though?
A. Oh, sure. At work,
though. Back and forth, at home and so
forth. The
legal fine if - I don't
know how much of IASCO's records you have, and I
am rather distressed to
find out how much you do have, including
personal
correspondence. But
they kept me around for weeks afterwards, I
don't
know. Maybe they felt sorry
for me. I don't know. All I know is
that God
love them, they really were
quite supportive and quite helpful and I
came
in every morning in the
uniform, hoping to have a word, hoping - it was
the last - I don't know, I
guess it was my last stand. I couldn't
give it
up quite -that easily, and
yet it was valid. It was real. And
while I was
there, I thought I did a
good job. They wrote me a letter of
recommendation
that was beautiful. It got
me hired when I came back here, in about 20
minutes flat, in a very
good company.
Q. Let me
ask you this -
why did you have somebody from a New Jersey
congressman's office call
me late Friday afternoon, and try to change my
mind about: denying you a
second request for containment?
A. Oh, boy, that's a kettle
of -
Q. You should have known
better than that.
A. M'am, I had early in
October written a letter saying "I have just
received a letter saying my
hearing is November 18th. Nobody has checked
with me on that date. I am
not prepared to defend myself upon November
18th
Q. Yes, but I had already
denied that request. Don't you know
that after a
judge rules, that is the
end of it?
A. I do know that now.
Q. So you thought you could
get that congressman -
A. I was desperate.
Q. - to judicially
intervene and try to strong-arm me into changing it?
Well, he found out
differently - I can clue you into that. I was ready
to
report him for attempting
any type of judicial intervention. Now,
you have
heard some of this
testimony today? Does that sound like to you what
these
two psychiatrists have said
is evidence of some of this manipulative
characteristics?
A. M'am, what does a person
do when drowning? They clutch at -
Q. You say it was an act of
desperation?
A. Yes, it certainly was.
Q. Okay.
A. If this goes down here,
I am finished in aviation. Now, it's just
not a
job. I have got a good job
- in fact, .it's paying more than I had been
used. to, on an average.
But you're talking about a fellow who is
sitting
on the airport fence at
age, 8, after peddling a bicycle 16 miles out to
the airport, just looking
at people and saying, "Give me a ride,
Mister."
This is not a living. This
is a way of life. And I have kept up with
every
form of aviation. I built
myself a motorized hang glider and I have been
flying the absolute hell
out of that thing ever since, simply because it
doesn't require a
license. It is the only thing I am going to be
able to
fly for years.
Q. Well, let me give you
some Dutch aunt advice.
A. Thank you.
Q. If you are ever involved
in a judicial proceeding again, don't ever
either you yourself or urge
somebody else on your behalf to intervene in
that judicial decision
process, ever.
A. I have no idea how the
system works.
Q. Because we are rather
proud of the judicial system, and the fact
that it
is inviolate from any type
of pressure. That's what makes us
independent.
That's what makes the
system work.
A. Yes, m'am.
Q. And it's resented
terribly by the judge - him or herself - and I am
asking you this question
because it still disturbs me so much that I
want
it on a record somewhere
that I was incensed and that it didn't - it
certainly didn't have the
effect that you intended. In fact, it
had the
reverse effect. I would
have died before I would have changed my
mind. I
have been trying to get a
continuance for six or seven weeks. The
original
hearing was delayed for a
great period of time, during which the Federal
Aviation Administration
accrued a great deal of information which at the
time I was not prepared to
fight. However -
Q. All right. You had gone
into that with just about every member of my
staff, at the office.
A. I sure -
Q. That's all been related
to me.
A. I sure have. Okay.
I have asked all the specific questions I
want to
ask. Do you nave any
questions that you want to ask?
MS. HAUSELT: Yes, I do,
Your Honor.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
(By Ms. Hauselt) Mr.
Campbell, where are you now employed?
A. M'am, that is none of
your business.
JUDGE CAPPS: I beg your
pardon.
(By Ms. Hauselt Continuing)
It is my business, Mr. Campbell.
A. I refuse to answer. I've
had my jobs taken away from me. This is a
non-aviation job. I do not
believe the FAA is entitled to that
information,
and if they find out
they've got a problem or if they have a person who
has
had a problem, I'll wind up
on the street. And I can't afford
that. I'm
broke now.
Q. Mr. Campbell, I want to
ask you a question - Are you aware
that a lot
of the testimony today has
been to the effect that you do have a
personality problem - a
personality disorder?
A. I am very aware.
Q. And part of the problem
that you have is that you deny these things
to
other people. Now,
I'm going to ask you again where you are
employed?
A. Do I have to answer that
question?
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes, you do,
or else not take the stand. If you take
the
stand, you open yourself up
to cross-examination. And if you've got a
non-aviation job that does
not involve any of your certificates as an
airman, an instructor, or
parachutist or any other type of FAA
certificate
you have, there is nothing
to fear. Are you getting paranoid on
us?
THE WITNESS: Yes,
m'am. I've lost my living. What do you expect?
JUDGE CAPPS: She has asked
you a perfectly valid question. And
yes, you
must answer it. Taking the
stand is not a one-way street. You don't get
up
there and just answer the
questions you want to answer and then refuse
the
questions you don't want to
answer. You have opened the door to
answer a
question. And I am
instructing you to answer the question posed.
THE WITNESS: May I ask a
question?
JUDGE CAPPS: I'll tell you
what -
THE WITNESS: M'am, I'm
scared to death -okay?
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
Look, I'll make a deal with you. You said
you were
an electronics technician
THE WITNESS: Correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: You write down
for me where you are working, because you
have
stated under oath that it
doesn't involve any of your FAA certificates
or
aviation.
THE WITNESS: That's correct.
JUDGE CAPPS: And you
wouldn't lie to me, right?
THE WITNESS: I hope
not. I think I'm smarter than that.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay - You
write .down here where you work, if you are
scared
of those FAA people.
(The witness wrote down the
name of his work place.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Off the
record.
(Short discussion off the
record)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record) I can understand his fear a
little bit,
of what he has been
through. He has written down for me where he works,
and
it does have nothing
whatsoever to do with the entire aviation
industry.
By no stroke of the
imagination could it even be closely connected.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
was going to just note my objection for the
record, and there is no way
of verifying what he wrote down. There is no
way of knowing, and I am
going to note my objection. I think that
he
should be instructed to
answer my question. And I don't think that -
JUDGE CAPPS: Usually -
listen, have I ever seen this type of thing
occur?
No, I haven't. But I have
to play it by ear and I think in this
situation
this is the best way to
handle it. I am certainly keeping what he wrote
down here in my notes of
the record. And I want to state that I
certainly
wouldn't lie on the record -
THE WITNESS: Would it help
if I produced a pay stub? I might even have
one
with me, or a medical card
or something.
(The witness produced two
documents.)
JUDGE CAPPS: He has shown
me two employment documents here, that
substantiate to my
satisfaction the name of the employer he put down,
and
he described what he does
for that outfit. So I am willing to
state on the
record that I am the first
to admit that I think this is unusual, but I
think the circumstances
here call for it, and that's why I did it.
MS. HAUSELT: Okay. I'll
move on.
Mr. Campbell, were you ever
in the service?
THE WITNESS: Yes, m'am.
(By Ms. Hauselt Continuing)
When?
A. It's a good question.
The latter part of 1975 to June of 1975
Q. And where were you
stationed?
A. First in San Antonio,
Texas, for basic training. Upon completion of
basic training, to the
Lowry Air Force Base, Colorado.
Q. And you were only in the
service for approximately six or eight
months?
A. There was a period of
time before that - it was called "inactive."
That
was from October of '74,
early in my senior year of high school with the
United States Army National
Guard, 3rd/104 Armed CAB, that was at the
time
- they've since been
reassigned. I made a switch from Army to Air
Force
in June of that year. I
didn't go until November. I was trying rather
hard,
and in -fact even succeeded
in getting a nomination to one of the
service
academies, which was the
reason for the period of time with the
military.
That attempt was
unsuccessful
Q. And Mr. Campbell, you
were terminated from the armed services.
What was
the reason for that?
A. It was an honorable
discharge.
Q. What is your military
service number?
A. It would be the same as
my social security number - 146524672.
Q. Mr. Campbell, do you
have a copy of the record which I gave you - the
Administrator's copy of
your medical file?
A. I've got quite a bit of
information here. If you'll call my
attention to
where it is -
Q. Mr. Campbell, I want to
refer you to page 103 of that medical file.
Specifically, I want to
draw your attention to Section Number 11, and
what
did you indicate was your
service? Did you indicate on your
application
that you had served with
the Air Force or the Army at any time?
A. At the time, I wasn't,
though.
Q. At any time did you
indicate that you were part of the armed
services -
at any time?
A. During the period of
time when I was a member
Q. On the application
itself, you checked the blank, "None," under -
A. "Extended active duty" -
yes.
Q. And you also - you did
not put down your military service
number. Is
that correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Now, the next
application, on Page 105, you also did not put down any
military service number or
indicate any prior military service, did you?
A. That's correct.
Q. And also on your
application on Page 107, you again did not indicate
any
armed service, did you?
A. Correct.
Q. Mr. Campbell, while you
were in the service you were never at Viet
Nam,
were you?
A. No, m'am.
Q. And you never received a
shrapnel wound to your face, did you?
A. No, m'am. Tree branch,
but not shrapnel.
Q. Mr. Campbell, have you
ever been wounded in any way?
A. I have been hurt several
times in various ways.
Q. Have you ever received a
gunshot wound?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. Mr. Campbell, isn't it
true that you had some scuba instruction from
a
Detective Larry Brown?
A. I had no scuba
instruction from Detective Larry Brown. Let me give
you a
little background here -
Q. No, I'm not asking you
for background. I'm merely asking you -
A. I received no
instruction from Detective Brown. I received an
evaluation, nothing more.
Q. And you are telling me
that you did not tell Detective Brown that you
had received a gunshot
wound while taking various dignitaries around
Nevada?
A. I did not state to
Detective Brown that I was taking any dignitaries
anywhere.
Q. And you did not indicate
to him at any time. that after he confronted
you with the fact that he
could not verify your original story, you did
not
indicate to him that you
had been involved in an altercation between a
Mexican man and woman - a
domestic quarrel in which you were shot?
A. At the time, I was
involved in an altercation. A gunshot did
not occur.
An injury did occur. The
altercation is past history.
Q. There was an injury to
you?
A. That's correct.
Q. Didn't I just ask you if
you were ever injured or wounded, and you
said
no.
A. It's - you said -
"gunshot." I said no.
Q. Where were you injured?
A. Upper right portion of
the thigh.
Q. And that was in the
course of an altercation in Nevada?
A. That was not exactly
where it was.
Q. It was - I believe you
told the Detective Brown, at - Field.
A.
Detective Brown asked
for information. Larry Brown was supposedly a
"friend." I supplied him -
Q. Did you ever tell him
that, yes or no?
A. I told him that, yes. To
throw him off the track, yes.
Q. So you felt he was
asking you too many questions and you made up a
story
to throw him off the track?
A. Oh, very definitely. I
was scared to death.
Q. I see. Mr. Campbell
isn't it also true that you never mentioned this
injury to Dr. Powers in
your interview with him?
A. That's correct. I had
frankly forgotten all about it. It was not that
serious and I haven't
thought of it up until this point, or until it was
brought up today, which was
why that statement was such a
surprise. And it
very much was.
Q. Okay. But you never
indicated that you had been injured in any way,
to
Dr. Powers? Isn't
that correct? Other than the operations that
are listed
in his report.
A. As far as I know, that
is correct.
Q. Have you ever received
any other injury other than the one we know
about, where you were sky
diving and you injured your head?
A. There was one puncture
wound to the face, in the cheek.
Q. And that was what you
referred to, where you were hit with a tree
limb?
A. By a tree limb -
puncture. I was riding Reserve at the time.
Q. Okay, Mr. Campbell, I
want you to take a look at Page 40 in the file
that we have, and under
your employers at the top of Page 40, you listed
Screen Actors Guild, did
you not?
A. That is correct. I did.
Q. And you listed as the
reason for leaving, "too many injuries."
Is that
correct?
A. Correct. That is
absolutely correct.
Q. Your episode in
attempting to jump off the World Trade Center, in
November of 1977 - you were
involved in several helicopter flights
around
the World Trade Center.
A. We were in the vicinity
of the heliport, which is located not too far
from the base at the World
Trade Center.
Q. Suppose I were to tell
you that to be doing that, you would be in a
restricted area ?
A. We were within the
regulations, according to the pilot. I was
not the
pilot in command.
Q. Mr. Campbell, you never
made any arrangements with authorities in
order
to make that jump, did you?
-such as clearing the street below of
pedestrians.
A. It was already cleared.
Filming for "The Wiz" had been completed that
week. The entire area
was barricaded. All doors to the plaza were
locked
with chain and lock. It is
a matter of police record. As, a
matter of
fact, complaint was made
with the Daily News for printing different
material than that. But
there was nobody, not a soul, in the plaza at
the
time the jump would have
occurred. It is in the police record.
Q. Okay. Mr. Campbell, that
is a matter of police record, is it not,
according to you?
A. It would have to be.
They finished filming "The Wiz" right then,
Q. And you didn't make any
effort to bring any police records with you,
with regard to your jump,
did you?
A. I had no idea that this
was going to be brought up. However, a call
to
- a call to a Patrolman Al
Hallker at the World Trade Center might be
able
to clear this, up.
It's got to be record that .
Q. Mr. Campbell, I would
prefer, and it is the proper protocol for you
to
merely answer my question,
not to volunteer extraneous information.
A. Excuse me,
Q Now, Mr. Campbell, I
understand that there have been two successful
jumps
off the World Trade Center?
A. That is correct.
Q. And one of those was by
an unidentified person in the fall of this
year?
A. That is substantially
correct.
Q. And that person wouldn't
have been you, would it?
A. No, it was not. The
person has been since identified, and used my
methods and is familiar
with the research that I had done.
Q. But you yourself never
made a successful jump off the World Trade
Center?
A. Not off the World Trade
Center, no.
Q. But you yourself did
tell other people on the West Coast that you had
made such a jump
successfully, didn't you?
A. No. That is not true.
Q. In October and December
of 1978, you were living in the Tulsa,
Oklahoma
area. Is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And you posed as a
doctor at that time?
A. Occasionally, yes.
Q. And at that time, did
you or did you not give people drugs?
A. Would you please define
"drugs?''
Q. Any kind of over the
counter or prescription drugs.
A. An over the counter drug
in the form of Tylenol, yes.
Q. And at that time you
indicated that you were giving someone treatment
for "female problems," did
you not?
A. That is incorrect. The
offer was extended, the treatment never
occurred.
Q. But you offered the
treatment, did you not?
A. It was -
Q. So what you say is that
you offered to prescribe drugs, but you never
actually prescribed them?
A. No, no. No drugs
were ever offered to be prescribed - not that
I know
of. And my memory of this
particular incident is fairly clear.
It has been dragged up many
times.
Q. Mr. Campbell, isn't it a
fact that you offered yourself as a doctor
to
various acquaintances and
friends?
A. I have offered to help
them, yes,
Q. And in fact you offered
to help a woman who'd had a heart attack?
A. That is incorrect.
Q. A woman who had
suffered, shall we say, an incapacitating -
A. Pulmonary
embolism. I portrayed myself at time as a medical
student. I
rendered the proper first
aid. I didn't ride in the ambulance to the
hospital.
Q. But you never - to the
scene, did you not?
A. That was where I was
working.
Q. And you at that time
told people that you were medical resident?
A. No, that is incorrect. I
said "medical student."
Q. Medical student?
A. That is correct.
Q. Mr. Campbell, didn't you
offer also some medical treatment to a young
girl who had received a
severe cut by bumping her head on a propeller?
A. It was on a rotor blade
on a helicopter. I offered to go get some
aspirin and instead got
Tylenol.
Q. And you didn't indicate
in any way that you would be offering her a
prescription drug?
A. No
Q. So
what you are saying
Mr. Campbell, is that this article that was
published in the Tulsa
Tribune is substantially and largely based on
false
information?
A. Its content is basically
correct. Individually, there are quite a few
inaccuracies.
Q. Mr. Campbell, did you
ever undertake to sue the Tulsa Tribune for
libel?
A. We had spoken - my
folks, had spoken to an attorney. I was under the
impression that suit was
being undertaken. At no time have I
called the
Tulsa Tribune, and such
legal action is still under consideration. It
just
needs somebody to pay for
it.
Q. Mr. Campbell, what if I
were to tell you that the Tulsa Tribune
stands
by their article as being
accurate and a fair representation of fact?
A. Then they're going to
have to produce their source, aren't they?
Q. Perhaps if you sue them.
A. I'd like to. I wish I
could afford it.
Q. Mr. Campbell, after your
masquerade as a doctor, you went home with
your
father, didn't you?
A. I went home first. My
father then went to Tulsa, Oklahoma, and
returned
with a great deal of my
belongings. I went home before the
incident became
public knowledge.
Q. Okay, Mr. Campbell, I
want to talk about what you were doing in the
summer of 1974, up through
the summer of 1976. What were you
doing at that
time and where were you
living?
A. '74 to '76 -- good
question - I was in the neighborhood of Colorado -
most of it - let me think.
Colorado until late summer of '76.
That is
correct.
Q. And then where were you?
A. A combination of home
and - during the weekdays, and at the drop
zones
on the weekends.
Q. Mr. Campbell, isn't it
true that you never indicated that you were
anywhere other than living
in Colorado, to Dr. Powers during that
period of
time?
A. Could you restate it?
Q. Yes. During the
period of time from summer of 1975 up to the
summer of
1976, you told Dr. Powers
that you were living in Colorado, attempting
to
pursue a relationship with
a girl named Ellen, did you not?
A. That is incorrect.
The girl's name was Evelyn, and I was
attempting to
pursue a relationship with
the young lady -
Q. And you at no time
indicated to Dr. Powers that you were in any way
affiliated with the armed
services, did you, during that time?
A. I was affiliated with
the armed services at the time. I was
stationed at
Lowry Air Force Base from
sometime in January of '76 to June 22nd, 1976.
Q. And you were living in
the San Antonio area, were you not, for
awhile?
A. About six weeks, for
basic training, yes.
Q. And you never mentioned
that fact to Dr. Powers.
A. No. It did
happen rather quickly, and I did forget about
it.
Everybody wants to forget
basic training.
Q. Mr. Campbell, it was
during the fall of '77 you made your attempt to
jump off the World Trade
Center, is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And then you moved to
Oklahoma in the fall of 1978?
A. No. I moved there in the
spring of 1978, and I believe I left New
Jersey
May 28th - about three
weeks after -
Q. But it was in December
of 1978 that you finally returned from your
home,
from Oklahoma to your
home. Is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Okay, Mr. Campbell, I
want to refer you again to your application for
employment. And that
is on Page 39 to 40 of the record.
A. Yes, m'am.
Q. Mr. Campbell, on that
application for employment, did you not
indicate
there that for the period
of time from June of 1976 up through December,
1978, you were employed by
the Screen Actors Guild in Burbank,
California,
and you left that because
of too many injuries?
A. That is correct.
Q. And you mentioned
nothing about the fact that you were in Oklahoma
during that time, you were
in basic training during that time, you were
in
Texas during that time?
A. It certainly wouldn't
have helped my application
Q. It certainly wouldn't
have. I'll agree with you there. Mr.
Campbell -
you haven't received any
injuries during the stunts performed for the
Screen Actors Guild, did
you?
A. I have already stated
that - no.
Q. Okay. Because you
haven't worked for them.
A. That is correct.
Besides, nobody works for them.
Q. Mr. Campbell, you are
not and you have never been a parachute
rigger.
Is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And on your application
for employment with Nashua Aviation, you did
indicate that you were an
FAA senior parachute rigger, didn't you?
A. I had intended to be,
within two weeks, yes.
Q. But you were not, at the
time that you filled out the application?
A. No, I was scheduled for
a course.
Q. Mr. Campbell, referring
to your use of the Japan Air-Lines uniform,
you
were not employed by Japan
Air Lines on April 18th and l9th of 1980,
were
you?
A. That is correct.
Q. And in fact on April
9th, you sent a letter to Japan Air Lines
indicating that you would
return your uniform at a subsequent date?
A, Yes, as soon as I got
some stuff on the West Coast, yes.
Q. And have you ever
returned that uniform to Japan Air Lines?
A. No. It is still sitting
in an unopened box in the corner of my room.
Q. Mr. Campbell, did you
ever tell anybody up at Nashua Aviation that
you
had been flying 747's for
Japan Air Lines?
A. I stated that I was one
of the flight instructors involved in
teaching
flight engineers for
various aircraft, including Boeing 747, how to
fly, or
was going to be. And
I was working at the time with captains and
first
officers who were
constantly flying those machines.
Q. Mr. Campbell, didn't you
tell people at Nashua Aviation that you in
fact
had come in on a plane from
Boston, and that you were involved in the
Falcon Program at NASA?
A. It is no secret that I
wanted to be in the Falcon Program; in fact,
while I was at IASCO, I
made a couple of motions toward that area.
Q. Mr. Campbell, in your
desire to attain that goal, isn't it possible
that
you told people that you
had already attained it because you thought you
would be attaining it soon
thereafter?
A. I do not think so.
Q. Mr. Campbell, since you
have been back in New Jersey living with your
family, what have you been
doing in the aviation area?
A. I am very active in
ultra light technology - design and testing - and
a whole lot of flying.
Q. And have you been
involved in anything else with regard to hang
gliders
other than testing and
designing?
A. Just flying.
Q. Flying them yourself?
A. Oh yes. Very much so.
Q. Any other kind of
organized activities?
A. Not yet. I am hoping to
get an air race going is spring. It's in the
planning stages.
Q. Mr. Campbell, at the
time when you were down in Georgia, and you were
involved with the young
woman by the name of Gayle, she was never in the
hospital for any injuries,
was she?
A. No. I have stated that.
MS. HAUSELT: May I have a
minute, your Honor?
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes.
Q. (By Ms. Hauselt
Continuing) Isn't it true that when you left Western
Piper Sales, you had at
least $100 or more of phone calls?
A. Which were paid for,
yes. In fact, I may even have the receipts with
me.
Q. When were they paid for?
A. Prior to my leaving. In
fact, by several weeks, in any case.
Q. Isn't it true that when
you were originally confronted with those
phone
bills, you denied that they
were yours?
A. I did not deny that they
were mine. I denied the fact that I did not
have authorization for the
calls. I did not have a phone in my
apartment.
I had explained everything
to Diane and she said either use a HARTS
line or
write it down, which was
done.
Q. Mr. Campbell, isn't it
also true that when you left Nashua, you left
over $165 of phone bills
there?
A. That's absolutely
correct, They also owe re money.
Q. So those phone bills
were never paid?
A. Neither was my paycheck.
Q. Mr. Campbell, just
answer the question - Were the phone bills paid?
A. Those phone bills - no.
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
have no further questions for Mr. Campbell.
JUDGE CAPPS: I have no
further questions, either. You will be
able to give
a closing argument
now. Did you have anything else that you
wanted to
state under oath?
THE WITNESS: Can you give
me a moment, just to check through here? I've
got
some notes here - I just
want to check with them.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay. We can
take a five-minute recess.
Off the record.
(A five-minute recess was
taken.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record. What is it you feel should be
brought to
my attention?
THE WITNESS: Specifically,
throughout the entire history has been
presented
- at no time, in my
opinion, have I jeopardized the safety of someone in
my responsibility.
JUDGE CAPPS: Oh, that's a
closing argument,
THE WITNESS: That's a
closing -
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes.
THE WITNESS: I didn't know
if that was -
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes. That is a
closing argument. Why don't you hold
that in
advance and give it to me
in the form of a closing argument?
THE WITNESS: Okay. Fine.
JUDGE CAPPS: Does the
Government wish to give any closing argument?
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor, I
will just speak in rebuttal. I don't
have very
much to say in closing.
JUDGE CAPPS: All right.
I'll allow that. All right.
THE WITNESS: My ball?
JUDGE CAPPS: Yes.
THE WITNESS: All right. I
could probably go through each one of these
documents one by one and
pick out inaccuracies. However, for every
inaccuracy there is going
to be a truth as well, which is equally as
damaging. The problem
has been that each time after the awareness
of a
problem came to me that it
was always going to he the next place that
was
going to be better; the
next place was going to be different, and I was
going to make a
change. Slowly but surely, it's been happening
little by
little by little, the
problem is that during this process quite a bit of
information has to light,
and a great deal of it is unfavorable, and
unfortunately a great deal
of the unfavorable is also true. This
means
that most probably I expect
to lose my flight privileges for the great
majority of time after.
What they are trying to prove-they being Ms.
Hauselt and Dr. Powers and
Dr. Pakull-is that I am an unsafe pilot, to
which I can only rebut that
I have handled -
JUDGE CAPPS: Wait. Let's
get something straight.
THE WITNESS: Yes, m'am.
JUDGE CAPPS: I want you to
know the issue here. That is not what
the
Government is saying. That
is not what this has all been about. Nobody
has
said you were an unsafe or
unqualified pilot, as far as your piloting
techniques go. What
they are saying is that you are medically
unqualified
to pilot an aircraft, due
to certain disorders here - personality
disorders. But they
tried to establish through evidence of overt
acts -
and you've sat here and
listened to the overt acts - that have been
alluded to. So I just want
you to know: that nobody is arguing about
piloting techniques.
THE WITNESS: All right.
Most specifically in response to being medically
unqualified, at one time I
would have probably agreed with the FAA and
their investigation,
especially in weight of the evidence, it is
certainly
warranted. However, I
believe and I still believe now, that I can
within
the letter of the law, as
far as the medical certificate goes, safely
and
legally execute the
privileges as underlined by my medical
certificate. I
realize that this disagrees
with several learned gentlemen with a great
deal more training in the
area of human behavior than I do, but I like
to
think that I know my own
mind.
There are several areas of
contention throughout this entire proceeding,
which - not the proceeding
here, but over the past year - which I find
questionable.
Specifically they are Dr. Kagill's statement of
having
received medical
information on October 10th, when no information was
received until the
12th. The seizure of a certificate when the
certificate
excuse me - the seizure of
a certificate before that seizure was made
known to me, specifically
taking the certificate and then giving me the
order of suspension; not
offering me the opportunity to surrender the
certificate as ordered,
within the letter of the law.
There are several
statements - Mr. Brown, Mr. Piper, Nashua - and
statements related to the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association and the
United States Parachute
Association. Briefly I worked for Mr.
Brown. I did
a good job for him as long
as I was able. The last month there was a big
change, and the change was
in both of us. Specifically, I couldn't stand
him and he couldn't stand
me. he causes, in my opinion - 1. my
inability
or my refusal to bend to
what he wanted; his extreme displeasure at the
affair with his daughter;
his extreme displeasure with the fact that I
had
allied myself with John
Williams in response to several pay demands,
and so
forth; my refusal to cover
for him on a few matters with his wife; my
refusal to cover on some
135 instances, and so forth; also some
questions
on maintenance - not many.
Western
Piper specifically
- I was promised a lot and given very little.
Western Piper - there were
problems there, and most of them were mine.
However, Western Piper also
provided aircraft with extreme maintenance
problems resulting in a
forced landing in a Seminole, due to the fact
that
right after a 100-hour
inspection the right engine turned rich - the
carburetor heat control on
the right engine was inoperative, going to
"Full
On" - presenting myself
with an aircraft with a right engine so rich it
was loading up, and running
so rough that it made an emergency landing
necessary. I cut the
propeller and landed. But in evidence of
that, there
was another pilot in the
aircraft, a Ron Sterling, a multi-engine
student,
and he was shaken all the
way on down. So I am pretty sure that was not
my
imagination. In
response to Western Piper's accusation concerning
the
Tomahawk, to my knowledge
the FAA did not inspect the aircraft at the
scene, specifically because
of a city .and a truck stop right next to
route
whatever it was - I think
it was 51 - and it was in West Virginia, and
not Maryland. The
factory certainly never saw the aircraft.
That is a
fact
Nashua - there is very
little I can say about Nashua except for the fact
that there was a lot of
confusion and a lot of misunderstanding, I
loved it
there and leaving it was
very hard. However, I created a great
deal of
situations on my own,
simply because of my - not being able to swallow
my
pride enough to say what
had been following me was not true.
AOPA - I never worked for
them; I did attend many of their ground
schools.
United States Parachute
Association - in my resumes and publicly, I have
represented myself as a
USPA-certified Instructor. I did attend,
complete,
and pass the United States
Parachute Association certification course,
for
the jump master/instructor
certificate, in addition to competing at the
Nationals and being a staff
member at the Nationals, and competing in
several conference meets,
and so forth.
The USPA also made
statements concerning - about a reserve. The reserve
listed on the card -
whatever it was - was a secondary reserve. It was
the one meant to be cut
away. It was kind of a joke to write down a
packing
card. Emergency
deployment means it is deployed under emergency
circumstances - exact same
thing - a cutaway followed by a short period
of free fall, possible
instability and a subsequent reserve pull with
deployment. Both came out
beautifully. The card was removed unbeknownst
to
me, which indicates to me a
serious problem, because anytime anybody
tampers with a rig, whether
it is the reserve or not, that indicates a
grave problems to me.
And if anybody ever - if I ever catch
anybody
messing with my reserve,
they've got some problems.
Psych evaluations done by
Dr. McKnight and Dr. Lundey, Dr. Dorsey, and
Dr.
Schwartz would seem to
downplay a problem, and I would seem - well,
personally I don't downplay
it as much as they did, to be very frank.
However, I do not see
myself in as bad a situation as Dr. Powers
portrays,
to my apologies.
Throughout this situation
there has been a great deal of questions
raised,
and I believe a great deal
of information covered under the Privacy Act
that has been given to the
various people in the course of this
investigation, and I am
very curious about that. If you are
trying to
ground everybody that ever
jumped off a building or similar - you're
going
to have to ground about ten
pilots, and two of them are flying for major
airlines.
And as far as the World
Trade Center is concerned, I have not attempted
it.
I had the opportunity a
short time ago, when called by a gentleman
saying,
"Hey, let's go do
it." And the temptation was very great, but I
have no
desire to spend another
night in jail like I did then. I have no desire
to
get myself in the same kind
of problems as the failure - and it was a
very
real failure to me -
presented itself after the World Trade
Center. And
it was a defeat, not so
much because I didn't do it, but because that it
was done for all the wrong
reasons - under all the wrong circumstances.
Under a legal situation
where there would be no legal encumbrances, I
would
love to try it.
However, I do not see that happening.
I do believe that a great
amount of statements issued; a great amount of
the testimony simply has
been prejudiced by the fact that anybody
having a
mental health problem or
mental illness in this country takes on the
proportion of social
leper. Mental illness has become a social
disease,
and I expect to spend quite
a bit on the ground in the next few years,
maybe trying to do
something about it. I don't know. I have no
idea how,
but I would like to get
involved.
Tulsa Tribune - a lot of
that is ridiculous. And it is so easily
disproven. For instance, I
never had a grandfather who lived in
Massachusetts. That's one
thing. Riding in an ambulance to a
hospital -
well, there were three
people, as well as two people in the room where I
was working as a desk clerk
in a motel, trying to raise enough for the
rent
while I was flying on my GI
bill and so forth. And there were three
people
from the hotel, two people
in the room and two people in the ambulance,
and
they know damn well I
didn't follow them in the ambulance.
Other situations - I am
going to keep it short - specifically, the
newspaper article leaves a
great deal to be desired. Its basic content
is
true.
I have found
throughout the entire situation with the FAA, and
maybe this
is a little self-centered -
in fact it is a little self-centered, but
right now I've got nobody
else - and I really wonder how much damage has
been done to me personally,
specifically whether or not I deserved it.
People are aware of
situations; people are aware of things that may or
may
not have happened. And that
worries me a great deal. I object to a
personal
letter being used in
evidence, especially one that was sent to a
friend.
And I would appreciate it
if the Court would please understand one
thing -
there is a great difference
here between mental illness and trying to
get
yourself out of an
unsavable situation. My fabrications were
bouncing down
on me. They were rolling up
like the proverbial snowball downhill. And
it's
so hard to escape. And it's
so hard to deal with it.
And until you have dealt
with mental illness, you have never had a
fight in
your life like that.
Specifically, I didn't know how to stop. I am
beginning to have an
inkling. But I am in control when necessary,
specifically when I step
inside an airplane. And nobody will ever
believe
I can separate the two. But
all I know is through eight parachute
malfunctions, over a
thousand jumps which are logged and verified,
through
a couple of thousand hours
of, flight time, and a total three incidents
requiring some type of
emergency or sudden correction, no damage has
been
done to an aircraft.
I've not damaged anybody else. And I
personally
haven't hurt myself, other
than walking into a wingtip. Airplane
problems
- I've never had an
airplane problem that wasn't justified - I have made
more than one precautionary
landing, simply because the engine was
running
weird; didn't call
emergency to land it, just to play it safe. I
consider
that to be fairly smart,
and something I taught my students - if they
had
a problem, come on hack,
we'll talk about it, we'll look at it. feel
silly,
but don't -
Scuba diving - Larry Brown
- I received instruction from a Mr. Bill
Dailey on Route 17 in
Ramsey, New Jersey, several years ago. Mr. Dailey
is
no longer employed by that
same firm. I do know roughly where he is. I
never received my license
from Mr. Dailey, having paid for the course;
completed the course and
have been on almost a dozen dives since,
total. I
did complete the written
exam and so forth. Mr. Dailey has disappeared.
And
we know roughly where he is
and so forth. I never received a license,
but I
did go through the
course. It is not required When I met up with
Larry
Brown, I had indicated a
desire to be an instructor in that area.
In fact,
he and Conrad were in the
process of trying to find me a course. And I
don't know what happened to
Larry. I thought he was a good
friend. He may
be my best friend, maybe,
by trying to help me. I really don't know.
There were certainly quite
a bit - there was certainly quite a bit of
misunderstanding. I'm not a
con man. I've had problems. And I'm still
going
to have problems and I've
got the biggest fight ahead of me that I've
ever
had, especially if I'm
going to have to do it on the ground. But
let's not
look at this with a
malicious intent. I'm not a malicious person - I
don't
go around kicking puppy
dogs and knocking little girls off door steps or
whatever you want to call
it, whatever the case may be. My
problems - in
fact, very often the only
control I ever had was simply to avoid
somebody
being hurt. And Tulsa came
to a very rapid conclusion when I hurt my
parents and my grandfather,
which was the ultimate slap in the
face. There
have been - I really
question the methods and how this information was
accrued, specifically
the FAA has made several statements with
names
wrong, dates wrong, places
wrong and so forth. And that does
accumulate
over a period of time.
Just to reiterate one
thing- the World Trade Center plaza was cleared.
They had just finished
filming "The Wiz" the week before. It was a great
amount of damage done in
the plaza; I tried to get in the plaza,
frankly,
to get pictures from the
bottom looking up. I couldn't. All the doors
were
locked, number one. The
plaza was barricaded off, number two.
There were
police barricades and
everything else. It was barricaded off. I am sure
you
can verify this. I know you
can verify this, because of the fact that
something I brought up
because one of the policemen took this whole
thing
as a personal vendetta for
about 20 minutes, and I heard a few words I
had
not heard before. I
explained to him my research. There was
a great deal
of research done. It was a
wrong thing, because it was illegal and
because
there was a possibility of
hurting people to the extent that my family
was
shamed. I was shamed
and I wound up in jail. That was the wrong -
well,
landing in jail was not
wrong. It was the stunt itself. It was
illegal. -I
did go through a great deal
of preparation, Flying in the neighborhood
of
the World Trade Center - it
is not a restricted area below 1,100 feet,
as
long as you are in
communication with the heliport nearby. And
you would
be surprised what you can
find out in a chopper. We were curious to find
out a few things, in that
general area. The general idea was to
drift away
from the Trade Center
toward the river; land by the road next to the
river
or in the river where a
boat was going to be, and disappear. It
was not an
ego stunt. It was
just to do it.
Going back to one other
thing - Daniel Webster College, which made so
many
charges, and so many things
- first of all, several of the letters in
here
that Dr. Schultz supposedly
sent to me, "Jim, we need your resume, Jim,
we
need this, Jim, we need
that." I never got them. In fact, I
didn't even
find out I had a mailbox at
that place until October 4th. somewhere -
3rd
or 4th - I'm not ever quite
sure because I remember something happening
about then. I never
got a great deal of information; in fact, Dr.
Schultz,
very few times. I did enjoy
quite a bit of support among the students,
partially because of the
fact that I was carrying on a bit of a charade,
and partially because of
the fact that I had hoped to give
them
something. I had really
wanted to do it. It was my intention to run a
safe
and non-profit parachute
operation . I really wanted to teach
these kids
to jump. I love it and I
like to share something I like. DWC
certainly was
in a large hurry to finish
this whole thing up. Under Federal
regulations,
the college receiving
Federal funds - specifically bank loan funds and
so
forth - I was supposed to
get a hearing in 10 days, which I never got.
There
were quite a few
irregularities on the part of DWC, so I certainly
throw very little weight to
their testimony because simply I think they
are
covering themselves in a
lot of respects. Granted, there is a lot
true,
but there is a lot of
prejudice in there as well. And they did wind up
paying me for the entire
semester. I got almost $800 -$800 or $600 some
odd
dollar check from them to
my lawyer. So I'm sure they felt they
had goofed
somewhere along the line,
when they made that settlement.
Finally, the only thing
that I've ever wanted to do - I've talked about
sitting on an airport fence
when I was high as a grasshopper, and it is
not
kidding. And I'll
still fly, for the rest of my life, in one form
or
another. I've got a little
ultra light hang glider, and I'll be flying
the
hell out of that, and
that's about all I can do.
I would appreciate not
losing my privileges. Frankly, if I keep my
medical
certificate, I will not be
going straight back into the air. I will be
staying with the West
Bergen Mental Health Center. I will be speaking
with
my grandfather and I will
be consolidating some cash assets, simply
because
the job I have right now is
doing fairly well and I am due for a
promotion
and and I have no reason to
think that I won't get it. At any
rate, my
intention to improve the
situation. I have finally taken the big step. I
think the hardest step is
to do something that I didn't have to
do. Maybe
that is the key to it,
because I am a person motivated simply by what I
have to do. And when I
don't have to do something, it doesn't get done,
frankly.
JUDGE CAPPS: What did you
do that you didn't have to do?
THE WITNESS: Submit myself
for treatment at the West Bergen Mental
Health
Center.
JUDGE CAPPS: Okay.
THE WITNESS: They say that
the mind is a terrible thing to waste and I
couldn't agree more in this
one particular circumstance.
Everything that I
have ever done has been
geared to aviation, from model airplanes
running on
up to pacing the local -
for citations, whatever the case may be.
I have
pulled my ratings pretty
much all by myself. The GI did help me out with
some of them; however my
benefits were limited. I have spent a
great deal
of money and a great deal
of time and a great deal of emotion packed
into
this whole line :of process
- I have learned a lot about flying, but
added
to it some
discipline. Some of them obviously didn't work out too
well. I
really believe that at this
time I can keep my stuff straight. Sometimes
maybe a mental problem is
as hard a monkey to carry as any.
But the fact of the matter
is that I do not want to be a social leper.
The
fact of the matter is that
I am a marked man with a waiver. If I get
this
waiver on me, that pretty
much rules out any possibility of Federal
employment. I can pretty
much rule out any type of airline employment. I
can pretty much rule out
just about anything. Now, frankly my
desires are
not with airline
employment. I was too much of a teacher. I enjoyed it
too
much. But my options
are extremely limited and this leaves me
practically
nowhere to go, even if I
eventually get it back. And from the
situation
described, it's going to be
many years. I really don't know how many
years
he says - Dr. Sexton at one
time in an interview said six months. That
has
long since gone by the
wayside. The fact of the matter is that I don't
believe I will be flying
for many years.
I don't want to lose that.
Even if I can hold just a normal third
class, I
don't want to lose it. It
is the motivational force in my life. More
than
one the funny thing was,
about Tulsa, Oklahoma, and coming hack - it was
work with Dr. Dorsey, work
with my grandfather, and work on those
readings.
And slowly but surely a few
things changed. Not all of them - no.
It is a
long, slow process, but
they did change. There was change, there was
improvement. Maybe not
enough. I don't want to lose this. This is
not a
living, it is a lifestyle,
it is a way of life that has been since that
high. However, I do
believe that I am not a danger to anybody. I
do
believe that I am not
dangerous to myself, at least in an
aircraft. I may
still wind up destroying my
own mind. That's a possibility I won't rule
out. The whole point is
that I know the problem exists. It has been
shoved
up my nose all evening, and
for the past year.
And you have never had to
do anything until you go to the man you love
most
in this world and say "Hey,
I've got a problem," especially when he
comes
back and says, "you have
one hell of a problem." I want nothing
more than
to fly and to know that
I've got my stuff straight. Maybe I can't
do both
right now, But, eventually
I hope to. And if this court does rule
against
me, I would appreciate one
particular courtesy, and that is that the
responsible people will
please enable some type of aid or guidance to
enable me to take a place
in the so-called normal outside world
eventually,
instead of telling me what
I can't do or what I did do or what is
wrong.
Tell me what I can do to
make it right; how to correct the
situation. That
is all I have to say.
JUDGE CAPPS: Ms.
Hauselt? And the record will reflect that this is
rebuttal. I, say this
because I don't usually allow rebuttal. But
since
you didn't have any direct
argument -
MS. HAUSELT: Your Honor,
while I did not make any objections to hearing
Mr.
Campbell's closing
argument, I would point out that much of his
statements
concerning his desire to
fly are really irrelevant. And while he
Does have
the sympathy of people
involved here, I think that we have to look at
the
medical issue.
Throughout his testimony ,and also again in his
closing
statement, while he says on
the one hand to us that he recognizes the
problem, in the course of
cross-examination and in the course of his
questions it is clear that
he fails to understand the significance of
his
mental illness, Just
- I think one question I asked him, which in
particular capsulizes this
failure to understand, is when I inquired of
him
concerning his
falsification - his application to Nashua Aviation and
why
he did not put down
anything in regard to his living in Oklahoma; why
there
are various discrepancies
there. His response was "Well, I
wouldn't have
gotten the job if I put
that down." That is the whole point. This is the
person who with the illness
he has, is quite capable of manipulating the
systems in which he
operates and manipulating the people that he meets.
He attempted to do this
with Dr. Powers. He has attempted to do it
today.
He has attempted to do it
in talking to people on the telephone to get
interviews. He attempted to
do it from what you have said, with
indirectly
- to you. This is the
type of behavior we are talking about, and
this is
again further
manifestations of the problem and further indications that
the problem is not
understood by him. But even were we to
conclude that he
understands that he has a
problem, we have to look at what we have
before
us in the record. And I
chose to just do a rebuttal. I don't think it is
necessary for me to list
all of the acts and all of the behavior that
Dr.
Powers detailed in his
testimony. They are a matter of record.
The fact
that there may be some
minor inconsistencies in what some of the people
said, none of us can prove.
It is a miracle that we
have the evidence we have, based on the trail
that
had to be traced around the
United States. The interviews that he
spoke
of, with the other doctors
who interviewed him, I submit to Your Honor
that
these doctors simply had a
version which Mr. Campbell handed them - a
version he would like them
to believe. And close scrutiny of
those reports
shows that those doctors
were not aware of Mr. Campbell's complete
history.
There is a pattern that
appears in the record. It is a pattern of
recurring
behavior and that pattern
is not something that is likely to change,
and I
think even Mr. Campbell's
behavior here today is indicative of that
problem.
He has admitted some of the
falsehoods; denied others. I think the
point is
not whether a little
particular fact A is true or false. What we have
here
is a pattern. And all
of these parties have not - people who
don't know
each other; people who live
all over the United States have not come
together in a huge
conspiracy to point out that Mr. Campbell has a
problem.
These incidents are things
which Mr. Campbell must take responsibility
for,
and I think his testimony
indicates that he is not clearly ready to do
that. That is why I
say that it is clear that his personality
disorder
persists and is severe and
does manifest itself in these behaviors which
Dr. Powers set forth.
On the issue of Mr.
Campbell's operation of an aircraft, we are talking
about medical
qualifications, And they are numerous - as Dr. Pakull
relates -things in the file
which indicate that Mr. Campbell has poor
judgment. But there
are also indications that he has poor
judgment with
regard to his own personal
safety and with regard to the safety of
others.
You do not open - or hold
yourself out as a person who can operate a
parachute club when you are
not currently certified by the U.S.
Parachute
Association. You do
not sign in an emergency chute when you are
not a
parachute rigger, you do
not put down on an application that you are a
parachute rigger, when you
are not. These are the kinds of
behaviors that
show us that this person in
an airplane simply cannot be trusted.
His
judgment is just inadequate.
Mr. Campbell is not just
here because he attempted to jump off the World
Trade Center. While that
event is one of many and while it points out
the
pattern of behavior we are
talking again about a variety of
incidents. We
are talking about an
incident which is one of many. Mr. Campbell said, I
believe, that there are two
questions here - his mental illness versus
an
unsolvable situation that
he spoke of - and referring to this unsolvable
situation, saying that that
is why he felt the necessity to fabricate
all
these stories. The
unsolvable situation was kind of snowballing
as the
effect of all these stories
that he was trying to get away from.
Well, the
fact that he would
interpose those two things as separate things is
again
an indication he does not
understand that those fabrications are an
integral part of his mental
illness.
It is not two separate
things. So your Honor, I would submit to you that
the evidence is
overwhelming. There is no medical evidence from
Mr.
Campbell. He is simply
someone that in good faith we cannot put in the
air
and cannot allow to be
instructing other people in the air. And I
would
ask Your Honor to uphold
the Administrator's order of revocation.
INITIAL DECISION AND ORDER
JOYCE CAPPS,-
Administrative Law Judge:
This is a proceeding under
the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended,
wherein James Richard
Campbell, Respondent herein, has appealed the
Emergency Order of
revocation dated April 11, 1980, which has been filed
herein as the Complaint.
The Administrator is
alleging that Respondent, due to an established
medical history and
clinical diagnosis of a personality disorder that is
severe enough to have
repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts, is not
qualified for an airman's
medical certificate under sections 67.13,
67.15
and 67.17 (d) (1) (i) (a)
and Sections 67.13, 67.15, and 67.17(d)(1)
(ii)
of the Federal Aviat,ion
regulations,
After due notice to the
parties, this matter was heard on November 18,
1980
in New York, New York, at
which time the Administrator was represented
by
Sharon Hauselt, Esquire,
and Respondent elected to procede pro se.
There has been a lot of
evidence presented by the Government:-in
furtherance of establishing
its claim in this case. Said evidence came
in
the form of testimony by
Sandra Ann Taylor, an aviation safety
inspector in
the Portland, Maine,
General Aviation District Office, who testified as
to
the results of a rather
extensive investigation conducted by here in
connection with this
case. There has testimony from two
well-qualified and
Board-certified
psychiatrists, Dr. Thomas R. Powers from San Francisco
and
Dr. Barton Pakull from
Washington, D.C.
There is little doubt in my
mind, from the evidence that has been
presented
in this case, and in many
instances from the Respondent's own admissions
and testimony, that there
is sufficient overt acts to convince me that
they
were the result of a
personality disorder which the two psychiatrists
who
testified agreed the
Respondent now has - and has seemed to have for
quite
a while.
The Respondent first bit of
what I would call rather unusual or bizarre
behavior did occur when he
made the very foolish attempt to parachute
off
the top of the World Trade
Center. I say this was foolish,
despite the
testimony of the Respondent
of the precautionary measures that had been
taken for several months
prior to the jump itself. He should be
commended
for taking some of the
safety precautions he did take. On the other
hand,
it disturbs me that such an
action was so long in the planning stages,
and
it was something that the
Respondent obviously at the young age of just
21
wanted to do. He has
said it wasn't to prove a point or to get any
attention or anything of
that sort. It was just something he wanted to
do,
and he thought at the time
it could be performed safely, both to himself
and to others. He has
testified that the area or the landing site
was in a
closed-off area. That
testimony is uncontradicted. I don't know whether
that is true or not, but I
am going to give the Respondent the benefit
of
the doubt. Despite
that fact, though, even if it were cleared
off, it was
still not in my opinion
constitute, a safe jump, without having first
secured the permission of
the management of the World Trade Center, to
let
them know that such a feat
was going to be attempted. I do not
think it
was safe without having
first notified the FAA of the attempted feat, in
order to make sure that no
special authorizations were required by the
FAA
under the particular
circumstances that this jump was going to he
made. It
may be that the FAA would
have still considered this a congested area,
just
due to the close proximity
of buildings and structures in the very
confined
area of the World Trade
Center. That was the first instance of an
overt
act that I think
establishes this mental condition of a personality
disorder,
Then we turn to his time in
Tulsa, Oklahoma, where for three months he
posed as a medical doctor.
I have not heard any type of satisfactory
explanation or reason for
doing this, and I can't find that it is
anything
other than a manifestation
of the disease he is suffering from. Some of
the characteristics of the
disease were exhaustively testified to by Dr.
Pakull and Dr. Powers. Some
of the characteristics of what Dr. Powers
diagnosed as a mixed
personality disorder with narcissistic and
borderline
features are such things as
an inappropriate and intense anger shown by
the
Respondent on occasion,
unpredictable actions, some instances of
transient
psychosis even, where he
would be completely out of touch with reality.
Such a person suffering
from this mixed personality disorder would have
illusions of grandeur, is
the way I've always heard it. Dr. Powers said
it.
was a grandiose sense of
self importance and of one's own image of
himself
as being an unique
person. Such a person constantly is seeking
attention
and admiration. A lot of
the instances of overt acts in this case
illustrate and give
credence to many of these different characteristics
that have been cited.
I think we've got a lot of examples in the
evidence
where in various way -
either through applications for employment of in
statements to fellow
employees or an employer or even during the
conduct or
his teaching- the
Respondent alleged certain things that simply were not
true.
For instance, he claimed
that he had taught ground school for AOPA,
which
is Aircraft Owners Pilots
Association, when in fact he never did.
He - I
think this grandiose
behavior would be exemplified be keeping the Japan
Air
Lines pilot uniform beyond
the term of his employment, and going back
to a
prior place of employment
and telling certain people there about these
Falcon jets he was
flying. This seems to be more wishful thinking
that I
think perhaps the
Respondent was hoping would be true, and it wasn't
true
at the time. But it
sounded good and it made him look good in
front of his
friends and former
co-employees,
Another characteristic of
the personality disorder syndrome would be the
ability of the Respondent
to manipulate others, many times through very
devious devices - either by
outright lies, by charm itself, by some time
intimidation. I think
he did intimidate Dr. Schultz at the Daniel
Webster
College, or at least he
tried to, in order to effect something he very
much
wanted, thereby evidencing
another characteristic of the disorder - and
that is a failure or
refusal to recognize that others have rights, and
to
appreciate the rights or
others. Some or these untruths that were
told by
the Respondent, I think
were very serious - this business of saying he
was
an FAA certified parachute
rigger, and that he wanted to form this
parachuting club or some
sort of parachute organization at the Daniel
Webster College at the time
he had lost his certification by the U.S.
Parachute
Association. And yet he continued to lead others to
think that
he was still certified by
that association, which is the real pinnacle
of
parachute jumping. I mean,
it s really something to be certified by that
organization and whether it
was true or not at the time, at least we
find
it recognized that that was
a "status symbol," at least among
parachutists,
to belong there.
I think another serious
action on the part of the Respondent was that
three-month period of
posing as a doctor. One can look back on
it, and
think it was rather amusing
that here a guy that looks so young, fooled
so
many people, which really
illustrates just how persuasive the Respondent
can be when he wants to be,
and when he wants to make a certain
impression
on others and at the same
time build up his own self-image and buttress
his
own ego - which obviously
the Respondent, because of his personality
disorder, must have.
This evidences a lack of responsibility on
the part
of this Respondent, as did
saying he -was a certified instructor with
the
U.S. Parachute
Association. This misled people, who he in turn
still
wanted to put their trust
in him. It's a bad circle that was started by
the
Respondent - a circle that
can lead to no good. I think we have no
evidence here of any actual
harm being done to anyone by any of the
masquerades, machinations
or any other manifestation of grandiose
conduct
on the part of the
Respondent. But I think that is just because
we have
been rather lucky. I think
as a result of his personality disorder the
Respondent, as testified to
by both Dr. Powers and Dr. Pakull, has and
will
in the future - at least
for the next two years and somewhat beyond -
exercised poor
judgment. He has shown a lack of impulse control,
feels
little guilt or willingness
to assume responsibilities for his own acts,
and would prefer placing
that blame on something else or someone else,
rather than accept the
responsibility himself.
I agree with the Government
counsel that it is irrelevant to hear
closing
argument from a Respondent
where he mentions how much he loves flying
and
what a jolt it would be to
lose his right to fly. I agree - that
is
irrelevant But whenever I
hear the argument, it just makes my job as a
judge that much harder,
because there is nothing in the world that I
hate
worse than issuing the type
of order that I am going to issue here.
I have
no alternative with
the evidence - or the overwhelming evidence
that I have heard today -
but to affirm the Emergency order of
Revocation
that has been filed in this
case, and to hold that Respondent is not
medically qualified to
exercise the privileges of any class of airman
medical certificate now or
for the next two years, due to the fact that
he
does have a personality
disorder that makes him unable to safely perform
those duties at the present
time or within the next two years.
Therefore he is
disqualified for airman medical certification under the
sections of the Federal
Aviation regulations herein before cited.
It is
therefore ordered that any
airman certificate held by the Respondent is
hereby revoked.
Entered this 18th day of
November, 1980, in New York, New York.
JOYCE CAPPS, Administrative
Law Judge
Edited on December 15, 1980
JUDGE CAPPS: All right. Off
the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE CAPPS: Back on the
record.
Mr. Campbell, I am handing
you a copy of the appeal proceedings that you
can pursue. I am giving it
to you in writing now, and that will be
attached
to the decision when it is
sent to you. But I am handing that to
you now,
because there is a time
limitation attached to this. All right.
There
being nothing further
before me, we stand adjourned.
(Whereupon the hearing in
the above-entitled matter was closed.)
APPEAL
Any party to this
proceeding may appeal this initial decision or order
by
filing with the Board a
notice of appeal within 10 days after this date.
Such appeal must be
perfected within 40 day after this date by filing
with
the Board a brief in
support of such appeal. Appeals may be dismissed by
the Board in cases where a
party fails to perfect its appeal by the
timely
filing of the brief.
Attention is directed to Sections 821.43, 821.47,
and
821.48 of the Board's rules
of Practice in Air Safety Proceedings for
further information
regarding appeals. An original and four copies of
each
document must be filed with
the National Transportation Safety Board,
Docket Section (LJ-10),
Waterfront Center, 1010 Wisconsin, Ave., NW,
Suite
301, Washington, D.C.
20007, as provided in Section 821.7 of the Board's
Rules, with copies served
upon the other party. The timely filing of an
appeal herein shall stay
the order in this initial decision.
SERVICE:
James R. Campbell
41 Stone Fence Road
Oakland, NJ 07436
Sharon Hauselt. Esq.
Enforcement &
Proceedings Branch, AGC-250
Federal Aviation
Administration
800 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, D.C. 20591
|
