American Airlines Flight Attendant Physically Detains Aviation Photographer
 

This is so beyond outrageous, the victim really needs to file charges of unlawful detainment and kidnapping and look at legal action against AA.

Personally I would have physically pushed my way past the crew member in self defense, especially if it was my last flight, there is absolutely no excuse for this.

https://www.johnnyjet.com/american-airlines-flight-attendant-physically-detains-aviation-photographer-until-he-showed-images/Jeremy writes: “I was off the plane and the FA had the captain prevent me from going further down the jetbridge and then brought me *back* onto the plane and took the phone out of my hands.”

What are the damages that would be recoverable in a legal action? None that I can see.

I would be ticked, but physically fighting back would not help. I'd either stand firm and await the police, who surely wouldn't do anything, or comply with the crew at the time but raise with AA after the incident.

The crew has no legal basis to detain anyone, certainly physically, so you are fully within your rights to push your way past them and escape. You have the legal right to escape a forced detention by a member of the public, which this basically was.

The damages here come to down to vicarious liability passed to AA by the illegal actions of their employees. You have various civil damages when an unauthorized person detains or kidnaps you, which is what this event comes down to.

It’s a very serious situation and I’ve already reached out to the victim through the blog that reposted their story to guide them on pursuing this matter.

What We Don't Have Here. . . .Is Any Sort of Context. . . .
 

. . . .and since it is third-hand we probably won't get any.

This is anywhere from a low-grade criminal assault, which should at least be reported to the airline by the aggrieved passenger if nothing else is going on, to a captain saying "Hey buddy would you please pull up the last few pictures so he or she the FA will calm down"? We don't even know what the FA was asserting happened--which would seem to have been really, really, really, really, relevant. (Although short of the FA believing something deliberately humiliating and possibly illegal (like upskirting) happened, I don't know how it could legitimize an on-ground "citizen's arrest"). But the crew do have personnel files. One off the wall action probably won't amount to much, and perhaps it should not beyond corrective counseling. But a repeated pattern of instability is of concern. Even to AA.

Assuming I will not be violating any Flyer Talk rules by posting the link, here is a five-year-old column from The Points Guy on taking photographs of other people in and around aviation:

What Can You Legally Film on Airplanes and in Airports? - The Points Guy

My summary of the column is you may have contractually waived your right to photograph. But nothing in a ticket agreement would seem to allow for random detention.

Here is the original source with an update from the photographer

PSA flight; AA has apologized profusely, will investigate, but no proactive compensation

The original post/share did not reference PSA, so the meat and potatoes of this issue is on PSA now from a liability perspective, but the crew involved really need criminal charges filed by the victim - this isn't about photography, but about being physically detained and potentially physically pulled back to the aircraft after deplaning and having one's phone forcibly taken and reviewed. NO airline employee has the right to do this under any circumstances or for any reason, even if they were photographed - their ONLY recourse is to escalate to the airport staff, but even then, nothing can stop the passenger from just walking away. AA still shares vicarious liability, so it appears their response to the victim is the start of some a---covering.

”Criminal Charges”?

Come on…

While it seems the crew overreacted in this situation, the idea that criminal charges should be filed is equally as absurd.

It sounds like AA/PSA should apologise, offer some compensation and take whatever disciplinary action they deem necessary against the employees concerned. But ruining someone’s life with criminal charges over this? Ridiculous suggestion.

You can't waive your rights (in most cases). AA has no recourse in such a scenario but to litigate or .... off. Try again, non-attorney.

Unlawful detention is a criminal matter. Period, done.

You should probably acquaint yourself with the law before deciding this issue. It is a criminal offense to physically detain someone except under the very strictest of exceptions, and this event fell waaaaay outside those two exceptions:

1. a shopkeeper can detain someone they witnessed shoplifting in their premises until the police arrive
2. a citizen may make a citizen’s arrest of someone they witness committing a felony - but doing so sets them up for civil liability and possible criminal charges depending on how they do it and whether or not there is clear evidence they directly witnessed the crime in question

This is clearly a matter where the victim can decide to press charges against all members of the crew involved in this mess, along with filing a civil suit against both PSA and AA for which I don’t see any realistic defense.

This is a slippery slope and with the ability for phones to zoom/photograph pretty much anything at any angle. I find it ridiculous a flight crew thinks they can police/monitor image capturing.
In one experience I eyewitness on UAL in premium class, a FA demanded a man (olive complexion) share/display his phone to verify he wasn't filming anything prior to take-off. It was embarrassing and really saddening as the summary of the situation is the poor chap simply had poor vision and had to keep his phone at eye level to view its content.
Now, would the FA make a similar request of a 10 yr kid who is on their first flight. A different circumstance, but flight crew either should enforce a no phone policy or no restriction phone policy but selective enforcement will result in this type of scenario (complaint, lawsuit, etc.) because it will always come across to the individual as if they are targeted or profiled. Another option, they would have to make the emergency announcement include the restriction on using a camera on the plane to verify no one is disobeying the rules.

AA used to have a restriction against photography on their planes in the Conditions of Carriage.I cannot find it now, but know it was there when I started my blog i had to write for permission.
This from 2015 - https://thepointsguy.com/2015/06/no-...allowed-on-aa/

It says this used to be in American Way:

“Further, American Airlines PR confirmed the policy with this statement today:

Not to excuse the actions of the crew in this, but I've been wishing for a long time a way to instantly sync photos and videos to the cloud if you have an internet connection and have a setting that doesn't delete it from the cloud even if it's deleted from the device. That's really the key, the ones I know of wipe it from the cloud too if you delete from the device.

There are a lot of places around the world that authorities will force deletion of pics they deem were taken against the rules, whether that's as simple as a museum or some heavy fisted country's airport. As fast as data is in most of the world now, it's not something that would be difficult to implement as long as the photographer has unlimited date or a large allowance.

I've seen too many situations where a vlogger on YouTube has gotten caught taking a pic or video of something they shouldn't,, but footage could have been saved with a cloud sync that doesn't delete automatically.

No matter the legality of taking photos on board, if the FA is demanding to see my phone, they're welcome to it.

In todays environment, with so many instances of over-the-top "you will respect my authority", the consequences are far more damaging. Loss of status, do not fly, loss of points.

All the best, James

It is, yes. But is this really worth a criminal complaint? IMO - no. People do stupid things, if there's no real harm caused, there's no reason to add yet another person to the criminal justice train. However, this is my personal feeling on the matter - I can understand the other side as well.

I probably would show it, because I don't care and due to my appearance, I'm frequently subjected to "random" screenings.

That said, this is a gross violation of privacy and as pointed out above, is unlawful detention. The FA was acting way out of line here.

I'm no attorney, but I'm pretty sure that property owners are permitted to prohibit photography while on their private property.