Originally Posted by
guv1976
The purpose of my post was to show that just because the vast majority of intoxicated people do not commit sexual assaults does not mean that they are welcome aboard U.S. commercial flights.
Whether the assailant here was intoxicated or appeared intoxicated at time of boarding is something we do not know. Nor do we know whether he was served alcohol on board before the sexual assault occurred. Presumably, those are matters which the OP will discuss with her attorney.
There might be other FTers who read this thread who do not know what the FARs say, and they might find the information illuminating.
Yes, and that is 1/2 the reason for my suggestion that it might be fair to pump the brakes here a bit.
The other half is a reflection on the original post. The victim is frustrated that AA hasnt reached out to her, and as a result is considering lawyering up. AA's actions after the incident and if the drunk in question should have even been allowed to board are two unrelated issues.
I'm not necessarily arguing for or against any particular course of action here, other than trying to avoid a knee jerk response. Thats why I asked in my initial reply 'what do you expect AA should have done'? Obviously the OP thinks 'communicate better' at the very least, but that would not have changed the seating of the accused in 8C