FEDS Drop Charges against America West Pilots...

[FN FAL]

Now all they have to do is get the state Breathalyser evidence challenged to the point of "shadow of a doubt" in front of a jury and it's "I'm...too sexy for my shirt" time.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0201pilots01.html

 

[satpak77]

not a surprise

we pretty much predicted this in an earlier thread

no, its not correct to fly "drunk", but everyone is entititled to due process and full legal rights, lets see what shakes out

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=36506&page=3&highlight=America+West

 

[FN FAL]

we pretty much predicted this in an earlier thread

no, its not correct to fly "drunk", but everyone is entititled to due process and full legal rights, lets see what shakes out

Blood-alcohol results were above the state drunkenness standard of 0.08 percent but below the federal standard of 0.10.

What I find amazing is how the media slipped in the term "state drunkenness standard". What the heck is up with that?

I'll buy that Arizona has the "standard" of .08 BAC for impaired driving...heck, it might even be called a "statute" in Arizona, but where the hell does the media get off calling it a "state drunkenness standard"?

There's an awful big difference between being "drunk" and being "impaired". I would love to see that difference pointed out during a supreme court case in the future, when a guy is arrested while washing his car in his own driveway because the neighbors called in a complaint that the boombox was too loud.

The cops get there and tell him to turn down the music and they say, "Oh, by the way, you appear DRUNKENNESS, beyond the 'State Drunkenness Standard'...would you blow into this breathalyser?"

The guy blows a .08, so they to take him away for exceeding the "STATE DRUNKENNESS STANDARD". Does anything like that exist in Arizona? Can someone please cite a reference to that law...or is it just a "standard"?

If anything, the news of the FEDS dropping the case against the pilots means that at least Cloyd and his Co-Cloyd won't have to be spending time in a federal prison betting the best 3 out 5 in a match of "fargalling" to determine who's going to be the husband and who's going to be the wife.

 

[satpak77]

From news article .....In state court, they face charges of operating an aircraft while intoxicated, driving a vehicle while impaired and culpable negligence. Arguments on motions are set for March 22, and a tentative trial date is set May 4.

Unfortunately the Florida govt web site is down, but it was my interpretation that Florida did not include aircraft under their definition of motor vehicle. So say bye-bye to charge #2. (no "vehicle" involved)

As far as "operating an aircraft while intoxicated", again the web site is down, but the prosecutors could be a little more successful with this one. "Culpable Negligence" will likely fly as it will be a jury trial and this term is so broad based it will be no problem convincing a jury of Florida blue-hairs that the pilots are guilty of this charge

my .2 cents anyway

 

[FN FAL]

Unfortunately the Florida govt web site is down, but it was my interpretation that Florida did not include aircraft under their definition of motor vehicle. So say bye-bye to charge #2. (no "vehicle" involved)

As far as "operating an aircraft while intoxicated", again the web site is down, but the prosecutors could be a little more successful with this one. "Culpable Negligence" will likely fly as it will be a jury trial and this term is so broad based it will be no problem convincing a jury of Florida blue-hairs that the pilots are guilty of this charge

my .2 cents anyway

Cool.

Yes, I jumped the gun on calling it an "arizona" law thing, but in any case, I never heard of a "state standard of drunkenness". Since it was an Arizona paper, I made an oversight into which state the laws were being refered to.

 

[satpak77]

web site back up



aircraft is not mentioned under "vehicle" / "motor vehicle" definition

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0860/SEC153.HTM&Title=->2003->Ch0860->Section%20153#0860.153

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0320/Sec01.HTM

"Bye bye" to driving a vehicle while impaired

As far as Culpable Negligence, here is the statute, yes, that charge is a slam dunk for a jury

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0784/SEC05.HTM&Title=->2004->Ch0784->Section%2005#0784.05

For operating an aircraft while intoxicated

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0330/SEC27.HTM&Title=->2004->Ch0330->Section%2027#0330.27

"Aircraft" is pretty well defined. As far as "while intoxicated" they have the BAC tests to articulate that one. Hopefully the defense can attack the evidence itself and get it tossed before it sees a jury

Note that both guys were fired and had licenses revoked. Maybe they will have better luck in the courtroom.

 

[sqwkvfr]

Now all they have to do is get the state Breathalyser evidence challenged to the point of "shadow of a doubt" in front of a jury and it's "I'm...too sexy for my shirt" time.

SCOTUS screwed up on this one.

It is ridicuous to subject pilots/operators to the laws of every two-bit city council or self-serving county or state.

This could get ugly.

 

[FN FAL]

SCOTUS screwed up on this one.

It is ridicuous to subject pilots/operators to the laws of every two-bit city council or self-serving county or state.

This could get ugly.

They won't need any new laws in the future...I have a feeling that technology is just around the corner that will detect your BAC without being intrusive. It's just a hunch, but I'm thinking there will be a sensor that detects odors stationed in every line at the security screening checkpoints. It will probably detect gun powder, possibly different metals, explosives, accelerants and alcohol.

I can't cite a reference right now, because I have to get back to writting a 2,500 word paper on technology and identifying criminals, but I saw something on one of the websites that indicates that they are making headway on being able to detect the who, what and where of smells.

 

[sqwkvfr]

They won't need any new laws in the future...I have a feeling that technology is just around the corner that will detect your BAC without being intrusive.

I'm not concerned about the BAC stuff...I AM worried about every city, state, county, and homeowners association passing stupid laws attempting to regulate aircraft operations in "their" airspace.

 

[deadstick]

Sqwkvfr

That avatar/quote is priceless !!



Have seen how those cowards responded to the election?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/01/iraq.hostage/index.html

Absolutely priceless...

 

[skytrucker]

It's interesting that the FAA doesn't really do "enforcement". They will take your license without any due process, but anything bad, i.e criminal, and nothing happens. Arizona repealed its Aviation Statues, so there is no state law governing aircraft here. The Fed's rarely get into any Aviation criminal act that I'm aware of.

What do you do with the old fart that fly's without a medical or license? Take away his license?

 

[sqwkvfr]

That avatar/quote is priceless !!



Have seen how those cowards responded to the election?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/01/iraq.hostage/index.html

Absolutely priceless...

Thank you.

Yeah, big, badass terrorists, huh? I think that once this is exposed, it's gonna help a lot of their "followers" and supporters to see what "paper tigers" these islamofascists are.

We couldn't have came up with more demoralizing propoganda if we tried.

 

[satpak77]

this case aint over yet. It could get tossed based on evidence handling or police procedures.

This wasn't the Highway Patrol DUI Task Force who handled this case, it was Airport Police, who deal with pax problems, speeders on Terminal Road, and other stuff.

It did NOT help that these two were (pretty thoroughtly confirmed) at a bar till 4 AM and put the drinks on their credit card, all captured by the bars security camera. The flight pushed back like 6 hours later.

again, lets see what shakes out

 

[Corona]

Now all they have to do is get the state Breathalyser evidence challenged to the point of "shadow of a doubt" in front of a jury and it's "I'm...too sexy for my shirt" time.

It's time for these two to celebrate! With drinks! How about an all-night party!?

C