My wife doesn't exaggerate. She is scurrilously honest in her descriptions. Obviously I am a hearsay relator. I made it clear that I was a hearsay relator. If it is hearsay, however, it is admissible hearsay since it was still brought on with the excitement of the event and would be admissible as an excited utterance. Further, there are a number of cases that would allow a statement 1/2 an hour after the event in as an excited utterance exception to the ban on the hearsay rule, but either way I would be a horrible witness. I am her husband.

My wife is platinum and has lived in crowded cities. She knows a bump from a ram and in this case I believe that the stewardess did as well. I also think that the guy waiting for her in the jetway to scream at her again negates the claim that it was a bump of the nature that everyone on this forum has experienced.

The statute 19 USC 46506 extends federal jurisdiction to airplanes and my read of the statute does not end the jurisdiction at the gate. The fact that he would deny it makes it a fact question, but in my fact pattern the stewardess saw the incident and if witness statements were taken others would have presumably been taken as well. Since the assault would be a class B misdemeanor, I don't believe that there is a right to jury trial (six months or less), but he has a right to a trial by judge on the issue if he wants. Failure to take action encourages this behavior.

I know nothing can be done now, but I wasn't exaggerating. I was careful to cut things the other way.