An Indiana farmer who was allegedly trying to prevent crop dusters from scaring his goats has been charged with attempted murder after he allegedly shot an aerial application plane last year. Kedrick Miller, 41, of Boone County, was charged last week after a yearlong investigation. He has since been released on bail. According to court documents obtained by 9News, Miller told an official of the farming cooperative that had hired the crop duster “they’re lucky I’m not a better shot” in an irate phone call. Miller’s wife said her husband objected to overflights by the low-flying aircraft because the noise had caused miscarriages by his goats. He had obtained a “drift notice” that prevented spraying over his land, but it did not stop planes from flying over his property.
The pilot flying crop duster told authorities he turned off the sprayers and heard a “pop” as he flew over the Kedrick farm. He noticed a change in the feel of the rudder control and the air conditioning quit, but he decided to keep spraying his assigned fields. He noticed a bullet hole in the fuselage just below the cockpit after landing at his base in Paris, Illinois. In addition to the felony attempted murder charge, Miller is facing the following charges: Disrupting the operation of an aircraft using force, violence or threats – Level 4 felony; Criminal recklessness with a deadly weapon – Level 5 felony; Intimidation with a deadly weapon – Level 5 felony.
Well wifey better get herself a FOID card now or lose the guns.
On a different note – loud pop, A/C goes out, and rudder feels funny – keep on flying. Gotta love those crop duster folks!
I wonder if 14 CFR § 137.37 applies if goats are harmed by flying <500 ft
“No persons may dispense, or cause to be dispensed, from an aircraft, any material or substance in a manner that creates a hazard to persons or property on the surface.” I would say no. His argument (Miller) is that the noise caused the issue.
Ha! Good point unless, perhaps, the aircraft has an exceptionally noisy dispensing system.
Double HA! Yeah, it’s called the propeller. ;-P
Isn’t miscarriages or failure of the hens to lay the same thing they said about sonic booms?
You know, I’d forgotten that!
Yes, 14 CFR § 137.37 definitely applies, but the farmer likely understood that our massive government has lost its humanity and really doesn’t care who gets harmed anymore and he would just be another case number for a court and a judge somewhere down the road while he needed defense right now that was not available from our current system. And by the time all the lawyers got done charging him money for the suit, he might not even be alive. He already tried to defend himself using the legal system and “He had obtained a “drift notice” that prevented spraying over his land, but it did not stop planes from flying over his property.”
I don’t want people shooting at airplanes or pointing lasers at them either, but the fact is that our own government has proven time after time that it has no regard for the life of the innocent, and in fact gives its help to the guilty.
So you’re saying that if you don’t agree with the way the government is or isn’t regulating something that it’s acceptable to take the law into your own hands? That violence is the correct response when you don’t agree with the laws and statutes?
I’m not advocating violence in any way shape or form. And when someone is about to take the innocent life of another, whether through ignorance or malice, we all have the right to defend ourselves under the law. And while I do not advocate violence, it is a fact that some people will defend themselves when attacked, tortured or threatened. What you don’t realize is that when pushed far enough, you would likely defend yourself as well. Even a cocker spaniel will bite you if you beat him enough.
I won’t get into gripes against the government, we have enough hysterics in the comments of this site bringing political rants into every little thing, but I’d call your application of 14 CFR §137.37 specious, where does the line lie by this logic? Does the harm our exhaust (a substance we dispense) does to people render all of aviation in violation of 137.37? Does the noise we cause which distresses animals the world over render all aviation in violation? It’s certainly not provocation for attempted murder. You make a, frankly inane, comparison to beating a dog, how is causing direct and malicious physical harm to a dog and getting bitten in the same region of thought as inadvertently terrifying goats by flying over a pasture and their owner trying to murder you in response? It’s a borderline reprehensible leap of logic to say “well if you push people far enough…” about this. The farmer belongs in prison for life for trying to shoot down an aircraft and kill its pilot, end of story.
So if a crop duster flew over your house and sprayed a neurotoxin agent from his chemical tank that caused both your family and your animals to die, you believe that you should just take it like a man and you would be ok with that? That is really heartless and thoughtless. And it shows a lack of concern for your fellow man. I don’t know what he was spraying, and the pilot probably didn’t bother to tell the farmer either. But apparently the farmer attempted to go through the proper legal channels first without getting any help. I don’t advocate what either one of them did since both the pilot and the farmer took actions that were potentially harmful to the other. But I think we should all have more concern for our fellow man than what you are displaying. And as aviators, we have a moral obligation to the people we are affecting both in the air and on the ground. The really reprehensible leap of logic here is comparing aircraft exhaust and noise, to dumping a load of neurotoxins on a persons home that causes them to slowly die of cancer or worse.
But he didn’t drop on his farm. He just flew over it.
Jay, it is interesting how you state you don’t advocate violence, yet seem okay with the idea of people taking up violence. How about we just not condone any violence.
I dug into this a bit further. First, a Drift notice protecting property means an Ag sprayer cannot spray over or onto a property that has the notice. In this case, shooting Farmer had been granted a drift notice so no spraying occurred over his property. A drift notice does not preclude a pilot from flying over a property *while not spraying* and according to the pilot, he had connecting pastures so it may have required an over flight. The Government actually did listen to the shooting farmer and granted what he could get, but did not extend it to overflights. There is no massive Government here, this is all local issues.
The pilot was doing his job, he was not doing anything harmful but flying over the property. He was not spraying. From a news article:
“…irate about the spraying, as he has a ‘no fly zone’ over his property.” According to court documents, the farm was referencing a “drift notice” that is used to protect the property from spraying.
The pilot of the crop duster told officials that he had shut off the sprayers as he flew over Miller’s property, according to court documents.”
the shooting farmer did do something harmful. He shot at an airplane. This is against the law. The farmer could be frustrated, angry, upset; he could shake a fist, take a picture and go on social media or go back to court, but instead, he pointed a gun and pulled the trigger.
This is not political, it is just legal.
Now the farmer will have his day in court. He can try to argue his justifications, but I don’t give him good chances on a win, hopefully a plea down in charges. Maybe he goes back and argues to create a real no-fly zone over his property, but good luck with that. The court will most likely say “take it up with the FAA”.
And it’s political, again.
Well, unless we just want come right out say that there is no such thing as God, law or government, our conversation is pretty much bound to the reality of all 3 whether we like it or not.
Guilty as charged.
Mr. Farmer would likely have more success at getting the problematic pilot to stop if he had used a camera with a zoom lens capable of getting the tail number to turn in to the proper authorities. On the other hand, if the pilot was dispensing poison that was threatening the life of his family and livestock directly on his house, that’s another matter. I once knew of a cropduster pilot that accidentally spilled bug spray chemicals on himself while filling up his airplane. About 3 days later he got so cranky that nobody could stand to be around him. Then he crashed the crop duster and it was fatal.