Haunting beyond-the-grave obituary of Indiana man who predicted his own death
Gary Wolfelt, 72, was killed on May 5 after his 'beloved' single-engine Express 2000 FT plane that he spent 17 years perfecting crashed in Ashland, Ohio.
People rarely get the chance to write their own obituaries, but the Lafayette native had his ready to go because of 'several close calls' he experienced in his life.
'Hello. I am Gary. I am completely dead now. I am surprised that it took this long to happen,' the late pilot joked in the opening of his obituary.
'I had several close calls throughout my lifetime. I guess that I was just lucky that something didn't get me long before now,' he added.
Not only did Gary mention that he believed he should have been dead 'long ago,' but he also shared examples of just how close he had come to the end of his life.
One of his oldest memories was when he got whacked in the head with a fly ball during a baseball game as a little boy. Sadly, his injury did not pay off for his team, who went 0-20 all season, he quipped.
When Gary was in his 20s he was kicked by his sister's horse directly in his gut, and he claimed that if the animal had aimed any higher his 'heart probably would have stopped.'
A decade later he was hit by a car, an incident that he said was completely his fault.
'It was my fault as I was crossing against the light. It really knocked me hell bent for election. But I got up and brushed it off and went home with a torn up coat and kind of sore,' he recalled, adding: 'Lucky me!'
While demolishing an old neglected building in his 40s, the structure came crashing down on Gary while he was inside tying off a cable, he said.
Luckily for him, a massive brick chimney that fell down just missed him by approximately 10ft.
After about 40 years on earth, and several close calls, Gary said he started to believe there wasn't 'any more room in heaven or hell for me' so he had to be 'stuck in purgatory for a while longer.'
Just when he thought he was safe, he was pinned to the floor after falling down 19 stairs at his office when a 100lb safe landed directly on top of him in his 50s.
Gary said: 'That one was the worst! I didn't get any body parts broken and no internal injuries. But I couldn't even pick up my own feet to get into bed for about a week. Thank god for pain killing drugs!'
In his 60s Gary, who was the owner and president of Wolfelt Electronic Security for 27 years, fell backward 10ft off a scaffold and cracked his skull open on the pavement.
He got checked out at a doctor's office after, where he found out he had prostate cancer.
Fortunately, the cancer was caught early enough to be treated, Gary said, adding that he 'dodged another bullet.'
The treatment only lasted so long, as he had to have his prostate removed in his 70s.
Although the surgery went well, Gary unfortunately developed an 'internal leak' that nearly took his life.
'One more close call late in life!,' he said, noting that he has no idea what will actually kill him.
'I cannot tell you here what sort of event actually killed me as I wrote this obituary before I was completely dead. Someone else will have to fill in the details later on I guess,' he continued.
After detailing his many near-death experiences, Gary kept the rest of his obituary light-hearted, apologizing to those he 'might have offended or mistreated.'
'The truth is that I was far from a perfect human, although I did try to learn from my mistakes and short-comings as I grew older,' he went on.
Gary made sure to mention his family, including his wife Esther Chosnek, who he met 'sometime in January of 1982 in Las Vegas, Nevada,' he wrote.
He noted that he did not want a funeral and asked people to take themselves out to dinner in lieu of flowers.
At the end of his unique obituary, he let Esther get a word in. She added some of his accomplishments, including her late husband being a graduate of Purdue school of Aviation Technology.
A celebration of life is set to be held for Gary on May 19th.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Investigators to wrap up public hearings into fatal midair crash between Army chopper and airplane
The National Transportation Safety Board on Friday enters its third and final day of public testimony over the fatal midair crash between an Army helicopter and commercial jet in January. Two previous days of testimony underscored a number of factors that likely contributed to the collision that left all 67 people aboard both aircrafts dead, sparking Board Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy to urge the Federal Aviation Administration to 'do better" as she pointed to warnings the agency ignored years earlier. Some of the major issues that have emerged so far include the Black Hawk helicopter flying above prescribed levels near Ronald Reagan National Airport as well as the warnings to FAA officials for years about the hazards related to the heavy chopper traffic there. It's too early for the board to identify what exactly caused the crash. A final report from the board won't come until next year. But it became clear this week how small a margin of error there was for helicopters flying the route the Black Hawk took the night of the nation's deadliest plane crash since November 2001. The January incident was the first in a string of crashes and near misses this year that have alarmed officials and the traveling public, despite statistics that still show flying remains the safest form of transportation. Worry over military helicopters The board focused on air traffic control and heard Thursday that it was common for pilots to ask to use visual separation or relying on their eyesight just as the Army Black Hawk's pilots, who were wearing night vision goggles, agreed to do the night of the crash. FAA officials also said controllers relied heavily on pilots using visual separation as a way to manage the complex airspace with so many helicopters flying around Washington D.C. But Rick Dressler, an official with medevac operator Metro Aviation, told the board it is difficult to identify other aircraft in the night sky around Ronald Reagan National Airport, especially if a key onboard locator system was switched off, as Army choppers routinely did. Dressler said that he and other civilian helicopter pilots in the area have long been concerned about the Army and Air Force helicopters flying around Reagan airport. 'I don't like saying this. I'll say it again on the record,' Dressler, a former Army aviator and retired Air Force officer, said. 'I'm speaking for my group there. We we are all very uncomfortable when those two units are operating.' The Department of Defense referred questions about Thursday's testimony to the Army, which did not immediately respond. Army officials at the hearing did ask Dressler to elaborate on his concerns and consider visiting the Pentagon to share them. Dressel said part of what worries him is the relative lack of experience of the military pilots who may have only been in the area a short time and don't understand the complex airspace around Washington D.C. 'They don't get the seasoning here to really, truly understand how the airspace works,' said Dressel, who also complained that the Army helicopter unit no longer participates in regular meetings with all the other aviators in the area to discuss issues. The Air Force also did not immediately respond to questions about Dressler's remarks. The American Airlines jet arrived from Wichita, Kansas, carrying, among others, a group of elite young figure skaters, their parents and coaches, and four union steamfitters from the Washington area. Final moments Testimony covered much ground, including the final audio communications from pilots aboard the Army chopper. The Black Hawk's crew had been communicating with the airport's control tower, although the helicopter pilots did not fully hear the controller's instructions. The Black Hawk pilots told the tower twice in the minutes before the crash that they had the American Airlines passenger plane in sight and would maintain proper separation. But when the controller instructed the pilots to 'pass behind' the jet, the crew didn't hear that instruction because the Black Hawk's microphone key was pressed at that moment. Just before the collision an instructor pilot aboard the helicopter asked the pilot at the controls to come left. But it wasn't clear if the pilot had time to maneuver the helicopter before the crash. 'Kinda come left for me ma'am,' the instructor said. The pilot responded: 'Sure.' Concern about distances between planes and helicopters John Cox, an aviation safety expert and retired airline pilot, said the hearings are headed in the right direction to determine what happened and to prevent similar accidents. His main concerns focus on the Black Hawk helicopter, including why it was above the 200-feet (61 meters) elevation limit for that particular helicopter route. Another question is why the Black Hawk wasn't closer to the east bank of the Potomac River, where it would have been further away from landing airplanes. 'I've passed helicopters underneath me over the east bank of the Potomac a lot of times,' said Cox, who flew commercial airliners for 25 years. 'And there's always been plenty of separation. It's not a lot because the space is so constrained. But you're dealing with professional pilots and it's not been a problem.' Investigators said Wednesday the flight data recorder showed the helicopter was actually 80 feet to 100 feet (24 to 30 meters) higher than the barometric altimeter the pilots relied upon showed they were flying. ___ Associated Press writers David Klepper, Mike Catalini, Leah Askarinam, Ben Finley and Rio Yamat contributed to this story.
The Guardian
7 hours ago
- The Guardian
My father finally acknowledged my stepmother's cruelty. How do I ask him to reconsider their marriage?
I have a stepmother who my brother and I really despise. She has made our relationship with our dad really hard, and has tried to stop him seeing us at points. She has resented us since we were little. My dad has recently admitted that he thinks she is jealous of us and has a lot of regret for the way we were treated in the past. The trouble lies in the fact that he has said if anything happens to him (ie if he dies first) we would need to make an effort with her will-wise, to ensure we were treated fairly, as he doesn't quite trust she would do the right thing. It feels incredibly hard to acknowledge this and agree when he has essentially admitted he doesn't trust her with his dying wish. I also find it really hard to deal with the fact he is finally acknowledging how cruel she has been, but still insists we have a relationship. It makes me think he's a coward. I really want to bring this up to him, but have no idea how to say: 'Do you not think you should reconsider your marriage, based on the way in which you have shown you don't trust your wife, and believe she is jealous of your children?' Eleanor says: First non-philosophical thing: if you haven't already, I think you should get legal advice about the will. Is it that he might die intestate, and he's hoping you'll all sort it out? Or has he made arrangements, but worries she might challenge them? Legal advice would clarify what can be done now to avoid a horrible tangle later. That's hard – nobody likes to get into the details about their dad's death. Or indeed their own. But it'll be so much harder, emotionally and legally, if your first advice about a possible estate conflict only comes after he's died. To your question. You said you weren't sure how to say what you wanted to say. When we say 'I can't figure out how to say such-and-such', I always think the answer is to just say the such-and-such. You wrote it: 'Do you not think you should reconsider your marriage, based on the ways you don't trust your wife, and believe she's jealous of your children?' A heady thing to say, for sure. But it's not the word choice that makes it heady. You'd be asking your dad why he's still married. You can soften the phrasing, but it's the content of that question that makes us flinch, not the way of asking it. More frightening still is the fact that he might have an answer. Through your (and my) eyes that question is almost rhetorical: why stay married to someone you don't trust and who's mean to your kids? However, the fact that they are still married and that he wants you to have a relationship with her means that, for him, there might well be an answer. He might have considerations on the other side of the scale that outweigh the fact that she's mean to his kids. Maybe he likes her enough. Maybe he doesn't want to be alone. Maybe he thinks he's too old, he's not willing to make the change. Maybe he thinks the conflicts between her and his kids aren't his concern. Maybe what look like obvious dealbreakers to you are just some considerations among many for him. The point is, your real question for him might be an even bigger flinch. Not just 'why won't you act on your judgment?', but 'why isn't it your judgment that you should leave?' It's possible he has bona fide answers – things that, to him, are more important than the way she treats you. It is hard to say which would hurt more: him not being brave enough to act on what he values, or this being exactly what it looks like when he does. I truly don't know which of these it is. I feel for you the same in both cases. I don't know whether you should ask him either question out loud; I don't know how conversations with him tend to go, or whether his answer would make you feel better. I do know that when someone isn't acting on what they say they see, it isn't always that they lack the courage of their convictions. Sometimes they're showing us their convictions through inaction.
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
This is EXACTLY what French men do that leaves women weak at the knees. The licentious little phrase my date whispered in my ear was so arousing... and says it all: JANA HOCKING
It's 2am and I'm tossing and turning in bed, nursing another heartbreak. This time from a man whose idea of romance began and ended with a three-word text: 'Hey, you up?' After a disastrous few months of on-and-off dating with this guy – who couldn't even commit to dinner plans – I was done.
