Newry crash prompts lawsuit
By Christopher Williams
,
Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
AUBURN - The parents of two Lewiston High School students who died in a plane crash along with another ROTC cadet two years ago are suing the school system and the city where they lived.
Nicholas Babcock, 17, and Teisha Loesburg, 16, died on June 22, 2006, when the single-engine plane they were riding in crashed on the western side of Barker Mountain in Newry.
Shannon J. Fortier, 15, also died in that crash. Her parents filed a lawsuit last month against the school district and the company that employed the plane's pilot.
All three were students at Lewiston High School where they had joined the Air Force Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps summer program. The flight that day was scheduled as part of an orientation flight program offered through the school and the U.S. Air Force, designed to introduce cadets to general aviation through familiarization flights in single-engine aircraft.
The students were passengers aboard a Cessena plane operated by Twin Cities Air Services, LLC. Other cadets who participated in the program had alerted its operators immediately before the crash that the pilot of the plane flew "in an unsafe and reckless manner" during their flight, according to the lawsuit, filed recently in Androscoggin County Superior Court.
Those cadets had reported that the pilot:
• flew the plane barefoot in order to "feel the rudders better;"
• flew the plane at "unreasonably low" altitudes;
• executed a "near-vertical climb" that concluded with an "aerodynamic stall, causing the aircraft to fall backward, and then dove toward the ground, recovering at about 75-100 feet from the treetops and 300 feet from the side of a mountain;" and
• executed a "zero-g maneuver, during which he pushed the throttle to full, cut the fuel mixture to idle and caused the aircraft to dive precipitously for five seconds before restoring the fuel mixture."
The pilot had a "history and reputation of conducting unsafe maneuvers in the course of orientation flights," the suit reads.
Another cadet who flew with the pilot in February 2006, four months before the crash, had complained about his conduct. Yet, the program's staff allowed the cadets, including Babcock and Loesburg, to fly with that pilot, the suit says.
The pilot's "extreme and unsafe conduct," was known to the company that employed the pilot as well as the school district, the suit says.
The parents seek to recover damages from the school district and the city due to the untimely deaths as well as "pre-death pain, fright, terror and physical injuries," suffered by Babcock and Loesburg, the suit says.
Lewiston School Superintendent Leon Levesque could not be reached for comment Monday afternoon.
The suit says the school department is responsible for the wrongful deaths and negligence including the "careless, reckless, negligent and malicious piloting, control, maneuvering and operating" of the plane. It also says the school failed to provide for the plan's safe operation.
The suit says the city of Lewiston is responsible for the school's actions in allowing the unsafe operation of the plane. |
CLICK HERE To Show/Hide Discussion Thread - (54 Comments)
Comments
 |
Posted By:T.A. at June 24, 2008 7:51 AM (Suggest Removal) Somebody needs to take responsibility for what has happened to those kids and there family. Good kids with promising futures are gone, and it isn't out of their carelessness so who's was it?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Keith at June 24, 2008 7:52 AM (Suggest Removal) The pilot died in the crash as well
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 7:55 AM (Suggest Removal) It was 2 years ago this past Saturday that this happened. I had know Teisha since she was born. She was a bright beautiful girl who was engaged to a soldier in Iraq. The people who claim to have know Charlie said he was a very responsible pilot, but sounds like he did alot of hot-shot piloting with these kids on the plane. He was flying barefoot for one thing. To top it all off, he was not familiar with flying around mountains and took risks that no one should have.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:lewiston at June 24, 2008 7:57 AM (Suggest Removal) yes the pilot died as well.and no he did not do this. the kids that said he did this were very mad at the pilot cause they lost their friends.so they r going to say anything. sueing the school they had to sign permission slips saying the kids were flying at that camp. NOT THE SCHOOLS FAULT.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ski at June 24, 2008 7:59 AM (Suggest Removal) what the pilot did was wrong not the school. I hope the judge throws the lawsuit against the school and city out. Money isn't going bring the kids back. I agree someone needs to take responsibility but the school isn't at fault. Didn't the parents allow their kids to sign up for ROTC and let them go on this trip? wouldn't that make them just as responsible as the school? I think so....
The ones responsible is the company that employeed the pilot. Suing the school and city in addition tells me they are just looking for money. I think when such lawsuits are won every cent should go to a charity in the kids names and the families get zip. The ones responsible would be punished and the families don't get a pile of cash..then you'd see if people were truly greedy or if they are truly looking for punishment of the responsible party.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:lewiston at June 24, 2008 8:03 AM (Suggest Removal) he has been going to camp for a few years he flew around those mts before
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 8:04 AM (Suggest Removal) Anyone who wants to know the facts, go to the ntsb website. The link is http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20060705X00863&ntsbno=NYC06FA154&akey=1
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:T.A. at June 24, 2008 8:07 AM (Suggest Removal) It was reported 4 months before the crash that he was flying recklessly. HE did do it. But the sad part is he didn't do it alone.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 8:10 AM (Suggest Removal) I just spotted a boo-boo from the SJ. It was Nick Babcock who died in the plane, not Phillip, who I believe is Nick's dad's name
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:lewiston at June 24, 2008 8:14 AM (Suggest Removal) NOT THE SCHOOLS FAULT.PARENTS HAD TO SIGN PERMISSION SLIPS SO THEIR KIDS COULD GO.SOME SAY HE WAS A GOOD PILOT.SO WHAT IF HE WAS BAREFOOT.WE DRIVE BAREFOOT DONT WE.ALOT OF US DO AT SOMETIME.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 8:19 AM (Suggest Removal) Yes, Lewiston, the parents signed a permission slip for the kids to go to the JR ROTC camp and an introductory flight. But they didn't give Charlie permission to take such stupid chances with their children. You think if they knew before-hand what the end results were that they would have let them go up in that plane with him? If you read the NTSB report, they found scratches near the locked release pins to the door. Which means they were trying to release the hatch pins because they knew they were crashing. A "good" pilot would have instructed them how to release the pins as soon as he knew they were going down. These poor kids were burned so bad from the crash they had to use dental records to ID them.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 8:29 AM (Suggest Removal) I think the pilot was 24 or 26.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:lewiston at June 24, 2008 8:34 AM (Suggest Removal) what r they suing for money for their pocket.thats not bring their child back.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 8:38 AM (Suggest Removal) Probably want money to cover the funeral costs.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:lewiston at June 24, 2008 8:39 AM (Suggest Removal) thats been paid for they already got money for that from fund raisers
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:T.A. at June 24, 2008 8:48 AM (Suggest Removal) It WAS pilot error,but there are many other error's from the school JRROTC program to the charter company that employed this guy. They all recieved reports on his recklessness. I as a parent have signed many permission slips, never once thinking that my kids wouldn't come back home.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 9:40 AM (Suggest Removal) To Lewiston tell us what you would do if you was in a car accident and broke bones, rupptered ur spleen or got a scratch. Odds are you would sue for ur injuries. So what makes the anquise that these parents are going through any different then injuries you would sustain. Granted money isn't everything but responsibility in this incident is a big part of the law suit. I am Tiesha's Aunt and she was and is absolutly amazing in my eyes along with many other people's I see that girl work harder them most grown ups. She had an amazing future coming to her and now she is gone. Why shouldn't someone have to pay for that?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:BEN HARRISON at June 24, 2008 9:57 AM (Suggest Removal) All three were students at Lewiston High School where they had joined the Air Force Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps summer program. The flight that day was scheduled as part of an orientation flight program offered through the school and the U.S. Air Force, designed to introduce cadets to general aviation through familiarization flights in single-engine aircraft.
I assume this program was to show these kids the thril and excitement of flying if they wanted to someday fly for the air force (jets fighter planes ect) This pilot looks like he took it to far and lost control of his plane doing an manuever he had preformed a hundred times!!
Terrible tradegedy but the school system is not responsible. This was not a field trip. It was flying in a very small plane for the thrill!!! Parents new where their kids were going and what they were doing!!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 10:10 AM (Suggest Removal) Hi Tina. Long time no see. Did you know Denise and family moved to NC.? I talked to her the other day online and she said they were leaving Sat.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 10:13 AM (Suggest Removal) No, Ben, it was an introductory flight, not a thrill flight. Yes, it was to familiarize them with a plane, but not to scare the crap out of them like the pilot did on the previous flight. These kids were 15,16 and 17.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 10:22 AM (Suggest Removal) my yahoo to concerned tinamarie613
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 10:24 AM (Suggest Removal) Smokey, you bring up valid points. You must be a fellow pilot.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:j at June 24, 2008 10:34 AM (Suggest Removal) So again, how exactly is this the school's fault? Or the city? The person responsible is dead. If this truly is not for money, anything they gain should to to a charity or scholarship fund, otherwise, this is about nothing but getting paid.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 10:42 AM (Suggest Removal) Commercial/instrument pilot airplane single and multiengine land. Single engine sea. Former C-172 (on Edo floats) owner.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 10:48 AM (Suggest Removal) A 160HP 172 on floats is basically limited to 2 people and 1/4 fuel tanks. The floats take about 250 pounds off useful load. Drag accounts for about a 15ish knot reduction in cruise.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 10:57 AM (Suggest Removal) Smokey, the Cherokee Arrow is a nice airplane. No speed demon, but a solid performer. Any issues with the "land-o-matic" gear?
Oops....we're hijacking this thread....
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 11:20 AM (Suggest Removal) It was a 1974 M model. Not a beauty queen, but it worked for me. :)
You're right, the Arrow will smoke the 172 and Archer. It should also give the C-182 a run for its money, especially considering the Arrow as 30-60 less HP.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 11:45 AM (Suggest Removal) Good talking to you, smokey. And my apologies to others, for the thread hijack.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 11:57 AM (Suggest Removal) To Smokey: Understand you don't know much about this but the kids repoted back in Feb. to the JRROTC that the pilot was showing off in the plane with them on board, and them being told of such actions makes them responsable for what has happened.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Gary at June 24, 2008 12:24 PM (Suggest Removal) I also agree that the charter company should be held accountable, if they had reports of this pilot previously violating any FARs, or engaging in reckless conduct. The Air Force also might have some responsibility for this.
The school board hired a licensed charter company to conduct the flights. They did so, in good faith. IMO, they shouldn't be held accountable.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:kerri at June 24, 2008 12:44 PM (Suggest Removal) Please leave the school out of it! That is just wrong period!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 1:05 PM (Suggest Removal) Staff employed through LHS were well aware of the pilots actions prior to the crash, and still allowed my niece and two other innocent kids to board the plain, and put their lives in his hands. And the charter company is just as well to blame. Someone needs to stand up and except that this has happened,but no one is doing it. I know this was an accident, but it didn't have to be.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Bill in NC at June 24, 2008 1:38 PM (Suggest Removal) Aiming the lawsuit at the school system and the city is the wrong target. Maybe there were some people at the school who had direct knowledge of the incidents and the pilot. That does not make the school system or the city responsible. Suing them only hurts the entire school system and the city's tax payers. Sue the charter company for employing a reckless individual and find out who the students reported him to and file a civil suit against the individual if it is found that they were negligent. Suing the city and school system is just blatant greed of attorneys. If people are found negligent they should be punished, but to punish the city, entire school system, and tax payers is wrong.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 1:54 PM (Suggest Removal) Well, FYI, Twin City Air is the company who employed the pilot. And to top it all off, today they had an article regarding opening up the L/A airport to passenger flights.......
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 2:33 PM (Suggest Removal) It is the school system that employe the people along with twin city that are responsible for this happening.......
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:j at June 24, 2008 2:41 PM (Suggest Removal) Tina, you are not even remotely an unbiased source of information. Do you have proof that staff employed by the school department had knowledge that this pilot was dangerous or is it just hearsay? Sorry, the only person responsible for this is already dead. Suing the school department and city is a move designed to get money (maybe by the lawyers, maybe by these kids parents). Rule 1 of any lawsuit, find someone with deep pockets to name in the suit. It is typical for lawyers to name anyone and everyone in hopes that they will settle because quite frankly, it is typically cheaper to settle than to pay the lawyers. Yes, you lost your niece, it was a tragic accident and you want to blame someone, feel that someone needs to be held accountable however, in the end, the one person responsible is already in the ground.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:BEN HARRISON at June 24, 2008 3:06 PM (Suggest Removal) would the parents settle out of court for I dont say maybe a Collisee!!! Just a though two birds one stone!!!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 3:53 PM (Suggest Removal) I do know that other students that flew with the same pilot voiced their concerns and fears of flying with him. So why was he allowed to be apart of their training, and Teisha's, Shannon's and Nick's lives but into his hands. After just one complaint from one student should be enough for them to demand another pilot, but did anyone take that complaint into mind before he took off with them? No they did not..
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:j at June 24, 2008 4:36 PM (Suggest Removal) And you know this how? Because Teisha's parents told you so? Because you heard it somewhere? If the students complained long before this, maybe it was mentioned to the charter service and maybe they said they spoke to him and thought it was taken care of. Funny though, I dont recall any of this in the articles that came out in the month following this accident. Maybe this is a recent development.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 5:52 PM (Suggest Removal) What if people????????
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 5:55 PM (Suggest Removal) According to a cadet who had flown with the flight instructor on a previous occasion and on the day of the accident, the accident day flight was "different" from the flight he had participated in with the same flight instructor on a previous occasion.
According to the cadet, during a flight with a group of Civil Air Patrol cadets in February of 2006, the flight instructor asked the cadets if they were getting bored. He then performed two "dips" which were "pretty steep," and then did what the cadet described as a "zero g" maneuver. During the maneuver the flight instructor climbed the airplane to approximately 3,500 feet msl and then descended to "less than" 2,000 feet msl. The cadet also observed, "stuff floating around" and a pen "came off" the top of the airplane's instrument panel.
A witness reported that on the day of the accident two light colored, high wing airplanes were flying southeast "awfully low" near Paris, Maine, between 1230 and 1300. The witness added that first airplane was going "fairly flat" but the second airplane was "going back and forth," and seemed to be "playing, making sweeps." A review of a local area map revealed the witness was located in a position to observe a direct repositioning flight from Auburn/Lewiston Municipal Airport (LEW), Auburn, Maine (the accident airplane's base), to 0B1.
The cadets, who flew with the flight instructor on the first orientation flight on the day of the accident, stated that the flight instructor flew the airplane barefoot in order to "feel the rudders better." After departing and turning right, the flight instructor headed over the top of some "ATV trails and logging roads." He then circled the Sunday River Ski Resort. The flight then proceeded around a mountain, and the flight instructor initiated a climb. The plane then stalled, "fell backwards and to the left," and then dove towards the ground. At approximately 75 to 100 feet above the treetops, and 300 feet from the side of the mountain, the flight instructor recovered and headed back in the direction of the airport.
Now who do you think that cadet repoted his concerns to????????
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 6:06 PM (Suggest Removal) How is the NTSB report in black and white bias?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 6:30 PM (Suggest Removal) Why wouldn't the men that lead the ROTC program do something about their student getting on that plane?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 6:55 PM (Suggest Removal) From what I have heard from cadets who were at the camp and had been on the plane beforehand, the teachers/counselors who were there told the other kids to be quiet about what they knew or saw. That makes me wonder smokey. Sounds like they adults in charge didn't want this info to get out. I for one never drive barefoot, last I knew it wasn't legal, at least for a car, but I may be behind the times in this.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 6:56 PM (Suggest Removal) I do so understand what you are saying. There are so many things I would love to say but here isn't the place. The people that are responsible for this tragerdy have to live with it for the rest of their lives and they know who they are.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 7:04 PM (Suggest Removal) I see the SJ corrected it's boo-boo from earlier by changing the name from Phillip to Nick.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Concerned parent at June 24, 2008 7:10 PM (Suggest Removal) To those of you asking about donating the money to a scholarship fund, the parents of Teisha, Nick and Shannon started a scholarship fund in memory of their children, but of course that info was left out of public knowledge.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Linda at June 24, 2008 8:16 PM (Suggest Removal) .
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:chef at June 24, 2008 8:31 PM (Suggest Removal) not the schools fault imo
must be a terrible thing to lose a child but direct the anger in the right direction
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Keith at June 24, 2008 9:31 PM (Suggest Removal) Sue the schools and the complain about the failing budgets. The charter company is at fault yes if they had knowledge, but the school department is not responsible for the pilots of the charter company.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 10:28 PM (Suggest Removal) It is the schools fault when it is brought to their attention and their lives are still put into their hands. obviously no one cared about the concerns of a cadet were voiced.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Tina at June 24, 2008 10:39 PM (Suggest Removal) Who do you people think that the cadets who have spoke up told about the pilots actions? I am sure it wasn't the twin city air, so who would that leave them going to?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Lewiston Grad' 07 at June 24, 2008 11:33 PM (Suggest Removal) Lewiston school department and the city of Lewiston are by far not at fault for this... And most of what people are saying with this CADET told this teacher this... Just seems like he said she said stuff... and if I am scared to fly with this person to where I fear my LIFE... then I wouldnt step on the plane...
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Mark at June 25, 2008 1:54 AM (Suggest Removal) Tina you are right. If this was the football team or the hockey team bus driver with a KNOWN reckless driving record lewiston would feel different. Defending the school system to protect the mill rate. Pathetic. They have insurance to pay for their negligent behavior anyway so it won't effect tax rates much.
| Add your comments
|
|
Advertisement

|
 |
| John R. Hatzenbuehler, M.D. |
a sports medicine specialist, has been named to
the Central Maine Medical Center Medical Staff. He is practicing with
Central Maine Sports Medicine in Lewiston. |
read more >>
|
| "Mini-Medical School" Educational Series |
beginning in October is sponsored by Central Maine Medical Center and the Central Maine Heart and Vascular
Institute. |
read more >>
|
| “Understanding Cardiac Medications For Those With ICDs” |
will be the topic of
a presentation set for the October 16 meeting of the Central and Western
Maine ICD Support Group. |
read more >>
|
| CMHVI Launching Chapter of Mended Hearts |
a national non-profit organization that supports heart disease patients and their families through a visiting program and monthly meetings. |
read more >>
|
|
|