Overall

BPA DEATH TOLL – CAA RESPONSIBILITY

The Civil Aviation Authority has a responsibility to make sure that when it issues a Permission to Parachute, the parachuting is carried out safely. The CAA is not competent to meet this responsibility and has therefore delegated regulatory oversight to British Parachute Association Ltd trading as British Skydiving, as the BPA itself confirms in various documents and on its website. 

In a letter to the Parachute Training Organisation Association dated 8.2.2021, BPA COO Tony Butler states: If British Skydiving did not exist, either the CAA would need to take on the role and reproduce what the Association does, at a far higher cost, or there is a danger the HSE would likely carry out the role.".  

Documentary evidence of BPA/BS hostility to the HSE and its regulations is rare but this is a prime and current example.  Here we have Tony Butler, who has run BPA Ltd trading as British Skydiving for many years as its ghost supremo after serving as the Association's National Safety Officer for years, expressing the BPA's hostility to the Health and Safety Executive in writing. 

CAA Safety Director Rob Bishton

BPA Watch wrote jointly to CAA CEO Richard Moriarty and Safety Director Rob Bishton asking for a comment on their designated parachuting regulator Mr Butler's express hostility to the Heath and Safety Executive. Rob Bishton responded: "Executives of the CAA represent the CAA position and that which reflects government policy. I assure you that you will receive a reply in due course and after due consideration, given much of what is being referred to pre-dates those of us in office at this time.". 

A long-serving former member of the BPA Council of Governors told BPA Watch; "Since the early 1990’s when the UK Government introduced legislation such as the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, the strategy of the BPA has been to avoid at all costs any form of HSE regulation or oversight.

"Although the BPA have over many years intimidated PTOs and others into not reporting accidents in accordance with RIDDOR and ordered them never to involve the HSE –– the threat being loss of their BPA ratings –– the BPA have always avoided putting anything in writing – until now. This recent letter from Butler to the PTOA clearly indicates what is happening - the BPA is conspiring to break the law.   

"There are approximately 700 people employed in skydiving, whether they are directly employed, contractors, self-employed or volunteers. All of these instructors, riggers and packers are at work and subject to the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and therefore subject to HSE Regulation.  Butler was the BPA National Safety Officer in the 1990s when John Ward died and narrowly escaped a charge of corporate manslaughter.

"Butler's arrogance is astonishing. It's not only because he has gotten away with it for years. He actually believes that he is the Regulator, not the CAA or the HSE. Butler has total control over skydiving – PTOs, instructors, everything – it is a dictatorship. The BPA has managed to avoid being called to account for any of the 50 or 60 deaths on its watch during Butler's reign, which is why Butler doesn't want anything to do with the HSE!

"Any accident at work involving death or serious injury opens a company up to prosecution by the HSE if there is negligence. So Butler doesn't want anything to do with the HSE.  There is an added advantage, as the BPA do not categorise and report accidents in accordance with RIDDOR, which enables them to manipulate the figures. The BPA accident and injury rates are far higher than those being disclosed to the CAA and the outside world.".   

In and of itself, this would be very serious given the shocking death and injury toll on Butler's watch as National Safety Officer and, more recently, Chief Operating Officer, a title allowing him to receive a high salary and other perks whilst pretending not to be a director of the firm. Everyone knows that the BPA Council is a smoke and mirrors exercise, that it has no actual power and that Butler runs the BPA aka BS like a personal fiefdom along the lines of a Sepp Blatter or a Bernie Ecclestone.

Out of control: Tony Butler
The fact that the CAA has effectively made Butler the UK parachuting regulator and that successive CAA Security Directors have failed to reign Butler and his cronies in and to make the firm and its CAP 660 more Health and Safety-compliant a a scandal-in-waiting. BPA Watch has communicated with a number of individuals whose warnings to the CAA about the BPA have been ignored. Or have they?

Until recently, CAA Safety Directors were appointed by ministers of state and tended to have impressive CVs as military officers and test pilots but this changed in 2019 when CAA CEO Richard Moriarty appointed the current incumbent from within CAA ranks. In 2010, the Ministry of Defence responded to concerns about the CAA's reliability by setting up the Military Aviation Authority or MAA. 

A  currently serving member of the BPA Council of Governors, who recently contacted BPA Watch but asked to remain anonymous to avoid reprisals, expressed his exasperation and frustrations: "The BPA operates like a private members club from the 1960’s. The organisation is run by a group of doddering old fools behind closed doors, who have not moved on with the times. 

"The council have little or no say and the Chair is always Butler's puppet. I am not even sure if they are aware of current legislation. They are in charge and make the all rules and everyone must obey. The Law doesn’t apply to them or so they believe.".

He and other BPA Council members are becoming increasingly concerned that as Directors of British Parachute Association Ltd, they could be held culpable for the illegal activities and potentially corrupt behaviour of Butler and the cabal of ghost directors that have controlled the BPA for many years. 

Later on in his letter to the PTOA, Butler refers to the BPA insurance scheme, which was examined in detail by BPA Watch and is one of the main topics of the letter to BPA Ltd from the PTOA's legal counsel:  "If the current policy is changed and different sections/members are covered in different areas for different amounts, everyone is vulnerable. This could include the PTOs, instructors, riggers, packers, members carrying out student talkdown etc, anyone who may have been involved. 

"If any of the above members were operating at a PTO, that for example had obtained a policy that only covered the business in order to obtain cheaper insurance (e.g. only insured for a claim against the PTO itself from a Tandem student), a PTO could try to deflect the claim to one another person in the chain. If those in the chain were unable to obtain adequate cover, would any of them be prepared to work or volunteer at the PTO and possibly put their house or other assets on the line?". 

[Editorial note: Tony Butler is clearly admitting that people are at work––and therefore subject to HSE regulation]

A former PTO owner who served on the BPA Council for a time told BPA Watch: "The clock is now ticking for Butler and the BPA. When the proverbial hits the fan, which it will, the fall-out is not going to be good for skydiving or for anyone else implicated. The BPA are going to be assigned to the scrap heap of history and people could possibly go to jail.

"There are 60 dead bodies, some of which are genuine accidents, but others are blatant corporate manslaughter and as BPA Watch have pointed out, there is potentially a murder or two lurking in the body count. People are now talking and questioning. This is a mess; it is going to explode in everyone’s face. Eventually there is going to have to be a public enquiry or a massive cover-up.  

"The HSE is going to be severely embarrassed for being asleep on watch and having the wool pulled over their eyes by the BPA for 25 years or more. As for the CAA, they have been dragged into the cesspit that is the BPA by Butler and Co and are up to their necks in it. The BPA could not have operated outside the law for so long without the CAA aiding and abetting them.". 

BPA Watch

STOP PRESS – BUTLER INTENDS TO TAKE BPA DOWN WITH HIM

STOP PRESS  

BPA Watch has learned that the BPA aka British Skydiving have taken legal advice in relation to the recent letter from legal counsel acting for the PTO Association. Our BPA source states that the lawyer consulted by the BPA advise that that the PTOA case is based upon extremely strong evidence and the argument is founded on substantive precedent, the PTOA legal counsel letter is sound and the BPA are highly unlikely to be in a position to challenge the PTOA. Word from the BPA offices in Leicestershire is that the firm's COO and ghost director Tony Butler is in meltdown and threatening that he "will use all of the Association's £3 million to crush the PTOs.".

BPA Watch

BPA-CAA DODGY DEALS

After receiving a letter from the Parachute Training Organisation Association's legal counsel, the British Parachute Association's governing Council held a meeting on 9.3.2021. One BPA Council member, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals, told BPA Watch: "We do indeed seem to be breach of The Monopolies Act and insurance laws as suggested by the PTO Association's lawyers.".  

The BPA insurance scam was reported by BPA Watch. The letter also mentioned the Civil Aviation Authority and the CAA-BPA CAP 660. The last revision of CAP 660 failed to address the document's lack of Health and Safety compliance but went further than any previous edition in advancing and consolidating the illegal BPA monopoly.

 It was agreed to keep the PTOA letter secret although disgruntled BPA councillors spilled the beans after the firm's highly paid COO Tony Butler signaled his intention to fight any PTOA lawsuit all the way to the highest court in the land––with BPA money. And the BPA trading as British Skydiving has plenty of money to fund Butler's Viking funeral.

As anyone familiar with how the BPA operates knows, the BPA Council doesn't actually have any directorial power. The BPA has been run for years by a small cabal of ghost directors over which Tony Butler presides. Mr Butler holds the title of Chief Operations Officer of the BPA but, as readers of our blog will know, has never been a registered director of BPA Ltd, trading since December 2020 as British Skydiving. However, Mr Butler is one of the two registered directors of another limited company called British Skydiving Ltd,

British Skydiving Ltd is registered as the same address as British Parachute Association Ltd. Some BPA Council members and insiders are concerned that Butler will hollow out BPA Ltd by transferring its funds and holdings to the new firm. BPA Ltd is sitting on a £3 million-plus fund amassed over the years because, some allege, of CAA undercharging. In other words, the BPA trading as British Skydiving has grown rich at British taxpayers' expense with the help of the CAA quango. The CAA has also delegated regulatory oversight to the BPA/BS organisation, thus transforming the shady firm into a quango, which strikes many observers as an abuse of CAA powers. Only ministers of state can create quangos.

One concerned BPA Council member, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid reprisals, told BPA Watch: "The longtime Council members who are part of Butler's cabal are adamant that a no-compromise, zero tolerance approach to the PTOA 'rebellion' is to be adopted, even if it means the matter being dragged through the courts at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds or even more. Others are worried that their responsibility as BPA Ltd directors, past or present, could be engaged by the authorities who will not accept that they had no power to curtail the various illegal activities and behaviour of Butler and his cronies over the years.". 

CAA CEO Richard Moriarty: backhanders?
The PTOA lawyers' letter was not unexpected. The BPA propaganda machine run by BPA Treasurer Natasha Higman had utilised social media, the BPA's print journal Skydive Magazine and the BPA Annual Report and AGM to put the most positive spin possible on the issues raised by the PTOA's legal counsel –– and by this blog. Addressed to British Skydiving, the trading name now used by BPA Ltd, the PTOA letter contends that BPA Ltd are in breach of The Competitions Act 1998 concerning Anti-Competitive Agreements Abuse of a Dominant Market Position. That dominant market position has been facilitated by the CAA or by corrupt CAA officials whom some allege accept cash bribes from Tony Butler, who is authorised to draw up to £10,000 at any one time from BPA bank accounts without having to account for the money. CAA directors and officials have been observed at BPA/BS-run events accepting various kinds of corporate hospitality. There is no proof that any of them have accepted bribes, leaving observers to wonder why the CAA or certain CAA officials promote and protect the BPA monopoly with such dogged tenacity. Is there something more sinister involved?

CAA Official George Duncan: Butler's poodle?

As this blog previously reported, BPA Ltd forces its affliliated PTOs (and its membership) to purchase insurance policies that are overpriced, fail to provide the requisite cover and are in any case totally unnecessary. Tandem parachuting customers or 'students' are forced to buy BPA 3rd Party cover for £11 per jump, which is incorporated into the fees they pay their PTO of choice. However, these 'students' should be covered by their instructors' insurance. Some estimates suggest that this practice generates approximately £600k per annum for the BPA. Other sources amongst PTO operators claim the figure is far higher. 

In essence, BPA Ltd is acting as an insurance broker but forcing its affiliated PTOs to levy these insurance fees on their customers is likely to highly illegal. As one PTO owner said: "Any claim by one of our customers would obviously be against the instructor's personal insurance or the PTO as the employer of the instructor. Although it is a legal requirement, the BPA continually refuse to provide members and PTOs with a full and detailed copy of the insurance policy which they are forced to purchase.". This blog has already explored the topic of BPA insurance.

One of the PTO owners behind the lawyers' letter to the BPA said: "Every time I put a skydiver on a plane, I am losing £7, and that is just against the aircraft operating costs. This approach where the whole industry is subsidised by tandem students is totally unsustainable. Jump ticket costs will need to be more realistic moving forward. People have their life savings invested in these businesses and the only person getting rich is the BPA COO Tony Butler who is paid £120,000 plus benefits.  I for one can't afford to drive around in a Bentley like Butler, or anything like it. There is something fundamentally wrong here!".

The BPA has recently publicised its new Exposition with the CAA. As with the previous BPA-CAA Exposition, however, this new agreement remains secret. BPA and CAA officials will not even reveal who signed it for their respective organisations. In the past, CAA officials like CEO Richard Moriarty and Oversight Manager Jim Frampton have sidestepped questions about the regulatory powers given to the BPA by the CAA through these Expositions. One BPA insider, who expressed concern about company directors' responsibility for illegal practices by the BPA, said: "Apart from the dubious insurance-related activities that have upset the PTOs, the BPA is establishing and maintaining an illegal monopoly over parachuting in the United Kingdom. The revisions to CAP 660 in 2019 brought this monopoly closer to being total. 

The owner of one of the twenty-one BPA-affiliated PTOs preparing to take the BPA to court said: "The CAA charges the BPA around £30,000 a year for CAA-approved status, which amounts to the sale by the CAA to the BPA or British Skydiving of a monopoly. There is amply evidence suggesting that the BPA, aided and abetted by the CAA or a couple of its executive directors, has been weaponising charges related to parachuting permissions to prevent any potential rivals entering the market and to force everyone to work under the BPA and CAP 660. 

"If Butler and his cronies force this matter into court to protect their personal interests, disclosure rules will see the extent of any dubious BPA-CAA collusion publicly exposed. As our legal counsel remarked, the Monopolies and Mergers Commission charged the CAA with preventing legal monopolies like NATS [National Air Traffic Service] from abusing their position. This situation with the BPA is not the first time the CAA has been accused of facilitating an illegal monopoly. 

Coining it: Tony Butler
"The CAA was embroiled in the British Airways versus Virgin row and was heavily criticised.  Then there was the breakup of the BAA monopoly after government intervention in the face of the CAA failure to meet its obligations. The House of Lords Inquiry into the CAA in 2013 found that the CAA had been 'captured by a monopoly'.' And then there are the numerous lawsuits against the CAA for malpractice and abuse of power.".

There is a growing awareness amongst BPA members and associates of what has been going on over many years. As one concerned BPA Council member remarked: "The light bulbs are starting to come on.". A former BPA Ltd director said: "There is an unhealthy relationship between the BPA and the CAA and at its heart are suspiciously close ties between CAA Chief Executive Richard Moriarty and BPA COO Tony Butler, who is actually in charge of the BPA and has been so for a long time. While this does not necessarily mean that there is criminality involved, it does suggest dodgy deals behind closed doors, like this new Exposition that is not being shown to BPA directors and councillors who are not part of the ghost directorate Tony Butler rules over. We're wondering if this new Exposition even mentions BPA Ltd or if it is beween British Skydiving Ltd and the CAA.". 

BPA Watch has asked the BPA's two independent Council members responsible for overseeing BPA Ltd's adherence to corporate governance rules to comment but has to date received no response. Perhaps this new Exposition is not, as alleged, between BPA Ltd and the CAA but British Skydiving Ltd and the CAA. If so, this would indicate that CAA officials are even more complicit in BPA/BS malfeasance than previously suspected.  


BPA: MURDER COVER-UP?

 

BPA: MURDER COVER-UP?

British Parachute Association Ltd, trading since December 2019 as British Skydiving, narrowly escaped prosecution for corporate manslaughter over the death of John Ward in 1991. 

When Army Officier Cadet and keen skydiver Stephen Hilder fell to his death in July 2003 after a person or persons unknown cut through the risers of his main and reserve canopies and the bridle of his drogue parachute, Humberside Police launched a murder investigation.

Officer Cadet Stephen Hilder: a bright future

One of BPA Ltd's two National Coach and Safety Officers, Tony Butler, told the coroner's inquest into Hilder's death in March 2005: "I have investigated sixty deaths in the UK. The majority of these deaths were caused by collisions or by deploying the parachute too low. Never in all my years have I come across any incident like this.". 

Testifying as a parachuting accident investigator, Butler told the inquest into Hilder's death that the BPA inquiry had been working on the assumption that Hilder's death was murder. 

According to former BPA directors and council members, Stephen Hilder was seen as the driving force behind an initiative on the part of younger members to seek election to the BPA Council, take control and impose changes.

These changes would have included a more serious attitude to safety and greater safety-related spending by the BPA, whose published accounts declare a risible annual expenditure of £5,000 or less of the firm's millions. After Hilder's death. this initiative fizzled out and it was business as usual at BPA Ltd. 

Meanwhile, the annual death and injury toll through 'normal' accidents continued to rise as the BPA, aided and abetted by the CAA, continued its tenacious evasion of its legal obligations under The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and other legislation.

Tony Butler: sixty skydiving fatalities

Ten months into their murder investigation, during which Hilder's two friends and fellow skydivers were arrested, Humberside Police had suddenly changed tack, claiming that Hilder had committed suicide by cutting through his risers with a household scissors taken from the boot of his car by the police evidence gatherers. 

To support their assertion, the police said that the only DNA found on the scissors came from the dead man and that fibres from the severed risers were found on the scissors and on Hilder's jumpsuit.

Forensic scientist Peter Grant told the inquest that someone wearing gloves that left no DNA traces could have used the scissors. As for the fibres, Grant remarked that they could have been transferred to Hilder's jumpsuit as Hilder put his parachute on before his fatal jump. Grant also said: "I cannot exclude the possibility that someone else cut the straps.". 

Tests commissioned by the police on a replica of Hilder's skydiving rig found that the only tool capable of cutting easily through the risers was a double-bladed hook knife of a type carried by highly experienced skydivers specialising in canopy-stacking or formation displays. These tests were not discussed during the official inquest in 2005 or the British Parachute Association's internal inquiry.  

The investigating detectives had initially reported that Hilder's risers had been cut with "a hook knife". Ten months into the murder investigation, Humberside Police suddenly changed tack, stating that Hilder had cut his own risers with a pair of six-inch scissors found in the boot of his car. In other words, the police had concluded that Hilder's death was suicide.

Detective Superintendent Colin Andrews of the Humberside CID, who had been put in charge of the Hilder case, told the inquest that he did not believe that Hilder was murdered but added that he "might be wrong about that". To support their sudden contention that Hilder had taken his own life, D/Supt Andrews and his team suggested a number of possible motives. 

Hilder was said to be depressed because he believed that he had failed his annual exams at the Royal Military College of Science. After his death, it transpired that he had passed his exams. Police also cited the end of Hilder's relationship with his girlfriend Ruth W––––, who held a Master's degree in forensic engineering and science. Police said that Hilder had debt of £17,000, most of which involved the purchase of skydiving equipment.

Hilder is not known to have possessed a hook knife and police reports made no mention of any knife found with his equipment or his effects. D/Supt Andrews had told the inquest that his officers had searched for knives in the parachute storeroom after being told that it was likely that a knife, rather than scissors, had been used on Hilder's risers. 

As any skydiving specialist could have told the inquest, the household scissors found in the boot of Hilder's car could not have cut through risers made of double-thickness nylon webbing designed to support a 1,000 kilogram loading.

Tony Butler also told the inquest: "Anyone wanting to commit suicide would not go through all the drills that Stephen Hilder carried out.". Replying to Butler, North Lincolnshire Coroner Stewart Atkinson, in an apparent reference to the suicide theory advanced by the police, remarked: "Not unless you wanted it to look like murder.". 

Of the suggestion that Hilder had cut his own risers with the scissors, Hilder's girlfriend Ruth W–––– said: "If he was going to stage [his own death], then he wouldn't just chuck the scissors in the back of the boot.". 

She and Hilder had been in a "light-hearted, relaxed relationship for around five months", said Miss W––––, contradicting police assertions about romantic problems in Hilder's life. Asked by Stewart Atkinson if she believed that Hilder had committed suicide, Miss W–––– replied: "There is no way, there is just no way!".

Paul Hollow, the BPA-rated Chief Club Instructor running the programme at Hibaldstow that day, told the inquest: "[Hilder] pulled every handle available to him. I believe that he made every effort to save himself.".    

Hilder was just twenty years old when he fell to his death in a cornfield near Hibaldstow airfield in northern Lincolnshire on July 4th 2003. Hilder had exited the aircraft at 13,000 feet with Adrian B––– and David M––– a fellow army officer cadet at the Royal Military College of Science in Shrivenham, Wiltshire. The three skydivers belonged to the Black Rain skydiving team.  

M–––– said afterwards: "[Hilder] seemed excited when we were doing the last jump. He was like that the whole way down. In formation skydiving you want to make eye contact. Just making eye contact he seemed as happy as all of us. The jump hadn't started well but then we got things right and we were performing really well.". 

The three skydivers performed various manoeuvres together before separating at 4,000 and opening their parachutes. Neither Hilder's main nor reserve parachutes opened. Hilder's risers –– the double thickness nylon webbing straps to which the rigging lines of each parachute were attached –– and the bridle of his drogue parachute were found to have been cleanly cut through. 

Stephen Hilder's equipment had been sabotaged yet Coroner Stewart Atkinson recorded an Open Verdict. Atkinson said that there was no proof that Hilder had been murdered but that he remained unpersuaded that Hilder had committed suicide. Atkinson's verdict struck many observers as incomprehensible. Given the deliberate sabotage of Hilder's skydiving rig, how could a coroner rule out murder or suicide?  

Atkinson was unequivocal regarding his rejection of the police suicide theory. Before he announced his  Oper Verdict, Atkinson said: "There were a number of issues in [Hilder's] life but that does not persuade me that he killed himself.". Some observers wondered if Atkinson had been pressured by Humberside Police into ruling out murder as the cause of death.

Humberside Police had arrested David M–––– on suspicion of murder. Adrian B–––– was also arrested as an accessory and also on suspicion of making a snuff movie because he had videoed the jump. In fairness to Humberside Police, M–––– had not done himself any favours by composing a humorous draft obituary about Hilder, which police found on his computer. M–––– later said: "I think, after the hassle it has caused, I would prefer not to have written it.".

M–––– had also testified to the inquest about pranks he and other members of the team played on Hilder. A fortnight before Hilder's death, M–––– and another team member had removed a retaining pin from Hilder's parachute rig. 

M–––– told the inquest: "I assumed that he would have seen what had been done straight away. It was a way of highlighting that his kit had been left in a completely unsafe area. What we did meant he would have to unpack and repack his kit which would take him about fifteen minutes.". M–––– also said that he and B***** found Hilder annoying because he followed the British Parachute Association's safety manual to the letter. M–––– said: "Stephen was very safety-conscious.".  

Paul Hilder, father of Stephen Hilder, told the BBC and other media: "Stephen's life has been dissected and examined in great detail and we still do not know why he died. We do not know why anyone would want to kill him, nor is there evidence that he took his own life.". 

One of the CID detectives on D/Supt Andrews' team commented anonymously to a Yorkshire Post reporter: "Nothing we have discovered during the investigation and no-one we have interviewed has said anything to suggest Stephen may have been contemplating killing himself.". So, not all of the police detectives involved in the murder investigation agreed with the improbable suicide theory. 

D/Supt Andrews: witness intimidation

Investigated a few years later by his own force's anti-corruption unit and then by anti-corruption officers from Durham Constabulary, Colin Andrews was prosecuted and jailed for twelve months in 2015 for harassment, aggravated stalking, common assault and witness intimidation. Andrews was, however, cleared of rape.

Andrews had forced his attentions on two women despite their objections, citing his rank and power when telling them that nobody would believe their word against his. Manchester Crown Court heard that the thirty-year police veteran had "sociopathic tendencies" and was "a controlling, manipulative bully.".

Former Detective Chief Inspector Mark Oliver told the court "Officers were concerned about the dirt Mr Andrews would raise if he was prosecuted. Chief Superintendent Heaton was worried about the reputation of Humberside Police and worried specifically about salacious details that Colin Andrews knew and whether they would be used as mud-slinging to defend himself.".

Whilst the question of murder or suicide was examined, nobody raised the question of negligence in the failure to impose basic safety checks on Hilder and his equipment before he emplaned. At no time during his testimony did BPA Ltd's National Safety Officer Tony Butler or any other experienced skydiver challenge the police contention that Hilder was able to cut through his four risers with the scissors. 

One former BPA Ltd director and councillor of twenty-seven years' standing told BPA Watch: "The BPA has evaded negligence lawsuits and corporate manslaughter charges over and over again through dirty deals, out of court settlements and non-disclosure agreements. 

"CAA senior management don't want to rock the boat because of the history fatalities, accidents and cover-ups like the Stephen Hilder case. And the John Ward case in 1991. The BPA has evaded negligence lawsuits and corporate manslaughter charges over and over again through dirty deals, out of court settlements and non-disclosure agreements.".

BPA Watch asked Tony Butler –– now BPA Ltd's Chief Operations Officer –– if the suicide theory advanced by Humberside Police suited BPA because it placed the blame squarely on Hilder, thereby reducing the possibility being sued by Hilder's family. As in other cases, Butler did not respond. 

Butler has spoken of his involvement in investigating sixty skydiving-related fatalities since 1982. Like Butler himself during his testimony to the Stephen Hilder inquest, experienced BPA skydivers and instructors attribute most of these fatalities to bad canopy handling skills, which they attribute in turn to the lack of suitable training and retraining courses. 

BPA: Murder cover-up?

In an unrelated discussion with BPA Watch, a prominent Parachute Training Organisation operator who has clashed with BPA Ltd's directorate in the past over the Association's troubling safety record said: "The BPA spends shockingly little on safety and safety training every year. Just look at the annual returns. There should be far more emphasis on training and annual retraining of BPA instructors and examiners.". 

In 2018-2019, BPA Ltd spent £208,975 on "operating costs" in addition to £333,449 on "staff costs", which include the six-figure salary reportedly paid to Butler who is widely seen as BPA Ltd's ghost CEO. Conversely, BPA Ltd spent £2,129 on "safety". A further £1,395 was spent on "manuals, safety information and badges".  

An experienced BPA-rated parachute instructor, who asked to remain anonymous to protect his BPA ratings, told BPA Watch: "Steve Hilder allegedly cut his pilot chute bridle with a pair of cheap-o scissors, both of his reserve parachute risers, and steering toggles and Velcro in one go, some quite heavy-duty webbing, tucked everything into his rig and proceeded to jump in a 3-way competition. 

"Observers state it was the best jump the team had completed, with the descent captured on video. The cameraman was arrested for making a snuff movie but these charges were later dropped. One thing is sure, though: if Steve and his kit had been properly checked outside and inside the aircraft, he would not have died that day.". The inquest into Hilder's death was told that Hilder refused to let anyone check his equipment. 

On its website, BPA Ltd trading as British Skydiving confirms that it "controls all aspects of skydiving on behalf of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).". One former BPA Council member said: "The business relationship between the BPA and the CAA is run behind closed doors by Tony Butler and the CAA's Gordon Duncan. It's been that for years. Duncan signs off on anything Butler puts in front of him. And Duncan is protected by his bosses.  

CAA manager George Duncan: BPA poodle?

"The BPA is allergic to Health and Safety regulations and Butler has openly said that they want no dealings with the Health and Safety Executive. The CAA management from the top down knows this because they've been warned about it but they do nothing. They're complicit. Just read the latest CAP660 from March this year: where's the Health and Safety stuff you find in other CAPs? ". 

Why was the murder investigation dropped? Were there two many potential suspects? Did the police realise that they had failed to observe basic crime scene procedures when they arrived at Hibaldstow? Or was there a cover-up to protect someone and, if so, who was covering up for whom? 

Whether ex-Detective Superintendent Andrews was ordered to quash the murder investigation or did so on his own initiative may never be known but it seems clear that someone wanted Hilder's murder written off as suicide. None of Hilder's relations or friends objected openly to the strangely-worded open verdict rendered by a coroner who seemingly came under pressure to validate the suicide theory. Is it possible that they were subjected to intimidation by Andrews?  

Why did the British Parachute Association fail to object to the fantastic police assertion that young Stephen Hilder cut through four 1,000 kg nylon risers with a set of household scissors? Did D/Supt Andrews have  "dirt" any of the BPA directors and, if so, what kind of dirt?

Coroner Stewart Atkinson said that Hilder's death was neither murder nor suicide and had the cheek to tell Hilder's family that he hoped his open verdict would bring them peace and closure. But someone cut Hilder's parachute straps that weekend. Perhaps Hilder was not the intended target but if it was not suicide, then it must have been murder, even if Hilder might not have been the target. 

Don Canard

HSE EXEMPTS BPA FROM H&S LAW?

BPA exempted from the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974? Are HSE Memoranda of Understanding a legal paradox or simp...