SWA f/o arrested for intoxication

[Secret Squirrel]

He very well could have violated the 8 hour rule, etc etc. But for FEDERAL CRIMINAL PROSECUTION I don't think its gonna happen.

They can proceed and go to court and 3 years later they will come to the point we are at now, a dismissal or not-guilty verdict.

We have yet to see if the officer using the breathalizer had undergone formal training with the device, or if the batteries were fresh, not old, etc etc.

These were FBI agents, who broke off from their Enron inside trading sales investigation, and Airport cops, who got called away from the Starbucks, who gave the tests. Not the State Highway Patrol DUI task force. Sure, the local $299 Express-Lasik doc could laser your eyes, and it probably will be fine, but the $5000 per eye doc at John Hopkins or Mayo Clinic might do it better.

Maybe the model Breathalizer they used had a service bulletin (yes I am serious) last year and needed extra calibration or a part replaced. Maybe it was not complied with. Etc

LOTS of angles yet to be pursued by a good defense attorney. Thats why a good DUI attorney charges $10,000 to "make it go away." How bad do you need the DUI dismissed? Yes, we take American Express. etc etc

As far as FAA, company regs, etc etc, that is another topic.

Hopefully his attorney at this point told him to stop making statements about grenades of vodka and how he did this and that, etc. NO STATEMENTS. More people have been sent to prison by their own mouth its sad.

Anyway....My position is that a successful federal criminal prosecution is not possible.

Thats right, it is always somebody elses fault. Take no responsability for your actions, it was a faulty tester yada yada yada. I think I would really give the guy more credit if he gave a press conference and said I am an alcoholic and I made a huge mistake instead of standing behind some $hitbag lawyer crying that the tester had old batteries.

 

[skiandsurf]

Cecil Ewell the former AA VP of Flight Ops hired him at AA in the 90's. His reasoning was that everyone deserves a second chance.

Cecil Ewell is a great man. Too bad I never got to work for him.

Back to this SWA guy...

First, Herb K is a pro alcohol guy, so that is good for this pilot.

Second, it is my understanding that at all (most) of the SWA hotels, they get $1 draft, $2 hors duerves (?), and $3 well drinks. If this guy gets fired, he should sue SWA for putting him in a "drinking environment".

Third, better him than me.

 

[Itsallsogood]

How many pizzas and free rides has the Southwest PR given to keep this out of the Arizona Republic in Phoenix?

 

[PunchTheClown]

Flying hungover is considered to be flying under the influence. Which is a crime.

 

[PunchTheClown]

The fact that this guy showed up still smelling of booze meant that he had a pretty fun night. The problem being why did he do that? Didnt he watch, or at least see the reruns of the court tv sentencing of the AWA pilots last year? IF he is guilty of this then he'll get whats coming to him and I wouldnt be suprised if its the maximum. Its not like he hasn't been given a crystal clear warning.

 

[ivauir]

The police pulled him off the flight and made him blow. If he was clean then there would be no story. Fact is he is in jail now for blowing over the limit.

Doubt he is wrongly accused.

You are wrong again.

 

[Frontier1]

Agree that the federal criminal prosecution is probably not going to happen.

But, one thing I've learned about the court system in the U.S. -- nothing is open and shut.....In this case, we do not know what is going to happen. Lot's of politics and media potential involved with this case..... and when those ingredients are included; it's anyone's guess how this is going to go.

.039 is below the limit, so no conviction--open and shut. Well not exactly. From the news reports, it is going to a Grand Jury -- in UTAH (of all places). Chances are the jury will include people who do not drink and never have. They will be told he was a danger to the public; he could have killed dozens of people; a potential mass-murderer. They will call the TSA guy a hero; he will testify. He may say he saw staggering; who knows? Anyway, the pilot will not be able to present a defense. Unless a judge throws it out, on grounds that the charges don't apply, the Grand Jury may indict him. Remember, it's a jury of people and people's opinions and views are unpredicatable.

Then it's off to trial. Here he is able to provide a defense. Flip a coin here. .

One thing to remember is you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor's table, not the pilots. The pilot can sit there and laugh all day and night and the prosecutor must show that he intended to fly drunk. With .039, the .04 does not apply--no matter what. If he staggered adn slurred, the prosecution must shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the cause of the staggering was his drunkeness. Good luck.

The fact that they have called on a grand jury to look into this should show you they are lacking evidence to charge him. When they find lack of evidence, the judge will end up tossing it.

 

[satpak77]

Flying hungover is considered to be flying under the influence. Which is a crime.

"What is a crime" is specifically outlined here.

If you meet it, you "committed a crime", actually you are "guilty" if the prosecutor can prove to the jury that you did.

Anything before that and you are innocent until proven guilty.

Period, end of story.

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/342.html

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/343.html

 

[FN FAL]

The fact that this guy showed up still smelling of booze meant that he had a pretty fun night. The problem being why did he do that? Didnt he watch, or at least see the reruns of the court tv sentencing of the AWA pilots last year? IF he is guilty of this then he'll get whats coming to him and I wouldnt be suprised if its the maximum. Its not like he hasn't been given a crystal clear warning.

Watch or at least see? Watch or at least see? Meow meow meow meow meow meow meow. If you can sing the meow mix song, you can be a meow mix song sing a long ding dong.

 

[RockyTopFlyer]

Has Anyone suspected a TSA employee of being intoxicated at work? Just curious.

 

[Metro752]

Has Anyone suspected a TSA employee of being intoxicated at work? Just curious.

nope, just high

 

[canyonblue]

Has Anyone suspected a TSA employee of being intoxicated at work? Just curious.

They stole all the beer out of my bag. No good theives.:smash:

 

[Yahtzee]

ski and surf....nice post. NOT.

 

[twepilot]

Has anyone ever suspected the TSA of doing any work...me either.

RV

 

[Benjamin Dover]

A350....

Why don't you tell people who comment about Lyle Prouse, what he did afterwards... That guy has more integrity respect than most. I admire the guy.

While the other two guys are rotting in jail, Lyle finished his career in the left seat of a 747. Tell the full story and you'll shut down the commentators...

Good old Lyle the hero. Maybe the other two guys "rotted in jail" and did not get their tickets back because they did not have Lyle's "genetic predisposition to alcoholism" due to his American Indian/alcoholic parents - as his lawyer effectively argued. Lyle knew the rules and grossly violated them - blew over the limit after the first flight -and he was the captain and senior man, yet he was only one to go back to work for Northwest because of his "genetics" and his mea culpa speach tour to school kids after he got busted. Noble effort in the life turnaround, but kind of sounds like Clinton getting real sorry after he got caught with his pants down. Oh, that's right...Lyle was on Slick Willie's pardon list before he left office. Funny how it all works out .... for some.

 

[MalteseX]

One thing to remember is you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor's table, not the pilots. The pilot can sit there and laugh all day and night and the prosecutor must show that he intended to fly drunk. With .039, the .04 does not apply--no matter what. If he staggered adn slurred, the prosecution must shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the cause of the staggering was his drunkeness. Good luck.

The fact that they have called on a grand jury to look into this should show you they are lacking evidence to charge him. When they find lack of evidence, the judge will end up tossing it.

In America, yes, you are presumed innocent. And the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

However, the prosecutor did indeed charge him.....according to the newspaper in SLC.

Don't know what you are talking about when you say "because it's going to the Grand Jury show they are lacking evidence"-- not sure what you mean here.......

My point is..... all it takes is for a jury to say you are guilty...and they are unpredictable.

This guy is not guilty with a .039.....but it is not open and shut.

 

[ferlo]

why is there so much interest in this? Just because he worked for SWA really isn't that important. This isn't the rarest of all events.

 

[FN FAL]

Don't know what you are talking about when you say "because it's going to the Grand Jury show they are lacking evidence"-- not sure what you mean here...

The grand jury is required for the for the federal prosecutor to get an indictment. There's no determination of guilt or innocence at this grand jury hearing, this is how federal prosecutors charge a defendant...through a grand jury.

Because of the Fifth Amendment, the federal legal system has to use grand juries to bring charges, at least for certain offenses.

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that charges for all capital and "infamous" crimes be brought by an indictment returned by a grand jury.

The amendment has been interpreted to require that an indictment be used to charge federal felonies, unless a defendant waives his or her right to be indicted by a grand jury.

The Supreme Court has held that this part of the Fifth Amendment is not binding on the states, so they can use grand juries or not, as they wish.

If a defendant waives his or her right to be indicted by a grand jury, the prosecutor can charge them by using an "information." An information is simply a pleading that accuses the defendants of committing crimes, just as an indictment does.

The difference between an indictment and an information is that a grand jury must approve an indictment, while a prosecutor can issue an information without the grand jury's approval or, for that matter, without ever showing the information to the grand jury.

Since most federal prosecutions involve felony charges, grand juries play an important role in enforcing federal criminal law.

 

[OrionFE]

I don't know....I'm thinking, if you smell like alcohol on your way to the airport to fly an airplane full of passengers, like maybe my wife and kids, you might think about calling in sick. It is one thing to have a glass of wine or a beer up to the 8 hour limit (12 hours at my company), it is another to be totally sh*t faced at the 8 hour mark. Chances are you won't be in tip top shape for that V1 engine failure today. Where was his partner prior to getting to the airport?

 

[satpak77]

In America, yes, you are presumed innocent. And the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

However, the prosecutor did indeed charge him.....according to the newspaper in SLC.

Don't know what you are talking about when you say "because it's going to the Grand Jury show they are lacking evidence"-- not sure what you mean here.......

My point is..... all it takes is for a jury to say you are guilty...and they are unpredictable.

This guy is not guilty with a .039.....but it is not open and shut.

remember we are talking about the GRAND JURY, all they do is indict or decline to indict. Re 9-11.101:

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/11mcrm.htm#9-11.101

....the grand jury's principal function is to determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain Federal offense within the venue of the district court. Thus, it has been said that a grand jury has but two functions -- to indict or, in the alternative, to return a "no-bill." See Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, Criminal Section 110.

Unless the defendant enters a plea, he is entitled to a TRIAL BY JURY which will determine guilt/innocence.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

TSA
I was listening to Boortz this morning. A commercial airline pilot called in. He said TSA stands for Too Stupid for Arby's.

Boortz then related a story about a DEA agent who a couple of years ago declared to TSA that he was a federal agent and he was bringing his gun on board his flight. TSA correctly allowed the agent to keep the handgun. However, they confiscated his nail clippers.

 

[LarryinTN]

Nice story but nail clippers have never been banned.

 

[Dizel8]

Not sure about nail clippers, but shortly after 9/11 they actually took my little hotel sewing kit. And no, I am not kidding

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Right after 9/11 they were saving the world from flight crews... it was out of control....

 

[FlyAuburn]

Nice story but nail clippers have never been banned.

They have torn the little "knife" that comes with the nail clippers. They are still stupid for doing it...

 

[LarryinTN]

The TSA was not created immediately after 9/11, it took some time for them to be formed and for them to take over the screening. There was a period immediately after 9/11, but before the TSA had been formed, where nail files were prohibited. Nail clippers which built-in nail files had to be left behind or have the nail file portion broken off. The ban on nail files was lifted rather quickly BEFORE the TSA took over.

Nail clippers themselves have never been banned. In fact, they have been specifically ALLOWED on the TSA permitted/prohibited items lists for as long as the list has been in existence.

 

[Cloudroller]

I cant believe that i wasted my time reading this thread. First they stoped him on the walkaround, made a big deal out of it. its rumored that one of the TSA guys is trying to make a name for himself. Made him blow twice, because he was below the limit. they never should of thrown him in jail. and SWA is 110% behind the guy. dont jump to conculsions unless you know the whole story.

 

[OrionFE]

its rumored that one of the TSA guys is trying to make a name for himself. dont jump to conculsions unless you know the whole story.

Oh, ok!

 

[FN FAL]

Chances are you won't be in tip top shape for that V1 engine failure today.

Like it's that hard to rest a foot on a rudder pedal and fly a v-speed in a straight line until 1,500 feet.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Like it's that hard to rest a foot on a rudder pedal and fly a v-speed in a straight line until 1,500 feet.

How many have you done?