Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID

Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID

Old Sep 9, 2010, 5:44 am
  #766  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
My name is Carnac the Magnificent. The envelope, please.

"May 25, 2011"

The question is, "When will the notice of claim be served on every JBT and JBA involved in this fiasco?".
n4zhg is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 5:53 am
  #767  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
Any estimates on the the expenses so far for the prosecution?
IslandBased is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 3:49 pm
  #768  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,295
Originally Posted by pmocek
My jury trial is now scheduled for December 7, 2010. There's a different district attorney on the case now. I don't have his name yet.

Trial date: Wednesday, December 7, 9:00 a.m.
Court: Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court
Is that new trials date to be set on December 7, 2010? Why I wait for another 3 months? If your new trials date is subject to changes without notice. Shoudl I have to be attendance at the court?
N830MH is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 6:51 pm
  #769  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,509
Originally Posted by N830MH
Is that new trials date to be set on December 7, 2010? Why I wait for another 3 months? If your new trials date is subject to changes without notice. Shoudl I have to be attendance at the court?
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public. It is amusing to me that people are willing to support his "cause" on PayPal without knowing exactly what happened other than that he pissed off a bunch of cops.

It never crossed anyone's mind around here that he might be guilty of one or more of the charges despite the fact that contempt of cop was a huge element in this thing? The tapes make it pretty clear that Phil thought the proper place to vindicate his rights was on the street and not in a court of law.

I think sympathy from the jurors will be very hard to come by when they hear the tapes in court . . . it sounds as though he made a scene when his "rights" were violated rather than dealing with the issue in a productive manner.
Ari is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 7:03 pm
  #770  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 321
Originally Posted by Ari
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public.
As any defendant would, I guess, be advised to do in a criminal case.
Travelsonic is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 8:28 pm
  #771  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Catania, Sicily/South Jersey (PHL)/Houston, Texas/Red Stick/airborne in-between
Programs: United Global Svs, AA PlatPro, WN RR, AZ/ITA Freccia, Hilton Diam, Bonvoy Gold, Hertz Prez, IHG
Posts: 3,535
Originally Posted by Ari
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public. It is amusing to me that people are willing to support his "cause" on PayPal without knowing exactly what happened other than that he pissed off a bunch of cops.

It never crossed anyone's mind around here that he might be guilty of one or more of the charges despite the fact that contempt of cop was a huge element in this thing? The tapes make it pretty clear that Phil thought the proper place to vindicate his rights was on the street and not in a court of law.

I think sympathy from the jurors will be very hard to come by when they hear the tapes in court . . . it sounds as though he made a scene when his "rights" were violated rather than dealing with the issue in a productive manner.
exactly. Yet one demands people answer ones constant feckless diatribe questioning with ones multi OCD threads on the same topic.

I'd actually like to give money to the prosecution. Not based on the ID "issue" but based on the audio tape and poster's attitude here. I'll see if I can donate somehow to the city DAs of ABQ tomorrow.

Ciao,
FH
FlyingHoustonian is offline  
Old Sep 9, 2010, 8:43 pm
  #772  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,509
Originally Posted by Ari
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public.
Originally Posted by Travelsonic
As any defendant would, I guess, be advised to do in a criminal case.
He has provided other public information to us, so why stop now? Why post here at all? To solicit money? Give us updates? I am having mixed feelings on the topic right now and will expand on them later.

Originally Posted by FlyingHoustonian
I'll see if I can donate somehow to the city DAs of ABQ tomorrow.

Ciao,
FH
Print out this thread and all of Phil's other posts around here and send them over to the DA; that would be the best "donation" of all!

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Sep 10, 2010 at 1:04 pm Reason: merge consecutive posts
Ari is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 1:35 am
  #773  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,347
Originally Posted by Ari
Print out this thread and all of Phil's other posts around here and send them over to the DA; that would be the best "donation" of all!
I am guessing that they are aware of it's existence.

FB
Firebug4 is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 7:24 am
  #774  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,723
Originally Posted by Ari

It never crossed anyone's mind around here that he might be guilty of one or more of the charges despite the fact that contempt of cop was a huge element in this thing?
That contempt of cop is such a huge element is enough to make me support Phil, regardless of innocence or guilt on the other charges. I feel that contempt-of-cop arrests/charges are despicable and should result in harsh punishment against the cops to help level the playing field between LEOs and citizens.

As for guilt on the charges, how is it criminal trespass to be in an airport holding a paid-for plane ticket? Disorderly conduct and resisting/obstructing are contempt-of-cop charges for asserting his right to remain silent, and in my opinion, concealing identity is bogus given that a boarding pass with his name was being passed around.

The tapes make it pretty clear that Phil thought the proper place to vindicate his rights was on the street and not in a court of law.
Have you seen/heard the tapes? Have they been made public? If so, I would encourage you to post a link here. I did not think they had been released, but maybe I missed something.

I think sympathy from the jurors will be very hard to come by when they hear the tapes in court . . . it sounds as though he made a scene when his "rights" were violated rather than dealing with the issue in a productive manner.
The great thing about jury trials, assuming the tapes are available and played to the jury, is that the jury can clearly sort out the differences in the two sides of the story, one of which claims Phil just tried to assert his rights and the other of which claims he made a "scene." I've served on a jury in a criminal trial that resulted from a landlord-tenant dispute. The testimony from the sides was hugely contradictory, but both sides allowed the many months of email exchanges between the parties to be admitted into evidence. The emails made it very clear which side was correct on which issues at which times.
studentff is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 8:43 am
  #775  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,347
Originally Posted by studentff
That contempt of cop is such a huge element is enough to make me support Phil, regardless of innocence or guilt on the other charges. I feel that contempt-of-cop arrests/charges are despicable and should result in harsh punishment against the cops to help level the playing field between LEOs and citizens.

As for guilt on the charges, how is it criminal trespass to be in an airport holding a paid-for plane ticket? Disorderly conduct and resisting/obstructing are contempt-of-cop charges for asserting his right to remain silent, and in my opinion, concealing identity is bogus given that a boarding pass with his name was being passed around.



Have you seen/heard the tapes? Have they been made public? If so, I would encourage you to post a link here. I did not think they had been released, but maybe I missed something.



The great thing about jury trials, assuming the tapes are available and played to the jury, is that the jury can clearly sort out the differences in the two sides of the story, one of which claims Phil just tried to assert his rights and the other of which claims he made a "scene." I've served on a jury in a criminal trial that resulted from a landlord-tenant dispute. The testimony from the sides was hugely contradictory, but both sides allowed the many months of email exchanges between the parties to be admitted into evidence. The emails made it very clear which side was correct on which issues at which times.
I believe Mr. Mocek posted links to the tapes in this thread.

FB
Firebug4 is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 11:58 am
  #776  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Regardless of what you think of Phil's case, can someone tell me how a person can get to a court of law without taking a stand in the "streets" first? You have to be harmed by a law in order to file a complaint in court - it's how our system works. If you go thru and comply, you're hard pressed to make a case of harm because nothing happened, even if their action was illegal.

I don't see how if you don't stand up in the streets first and get smacked down how you can challenge a law's validity outside of getting states' or federal legislative bodies to make the change.
Superguy is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 12:12 pm
  #777  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: FLL
Posts: 393
Originally Posted by Superguy
Regardless of what you think of Phil's case, can someone tell me how a person can get to a court of law without taking a stand in the "streets" first? You have to be harmed by a law in order to file a complaint in court - it's how our system works. If you go thru and comply, you're hard pressed to make a case of harm because nothing happened, even if their action was illegal.

I don't see how if you don't stand up in the streets first and get smacked down how you can challenge a law's validity outside of getting states' or federal legislative bodies to make the change.
Exactly. If you want to challenge the constitutionality of a law, you pretty much have to get arrested for violating it first. Otherwise, you have no standing, and any challenge you attempt to bring to the law will be summarily dismissed before a single argument is heard in court. It's the same reason that, until recently, it's been nearly impossible to challenge the no-fly list: Since you had no clue who was actually on the list, nobody had standing. Also note how quickly the government has worked to remove the "No-Fly" status of the plaintiffs in that case in order to make the suit moot.

People intentionally getting arrested to challenge the constitutionality of a law isn't exactly a rare thing. It happened all the time, for example, during the Civil Rights Era.
wildcatlh is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 12:47 pm
  #778  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
cross-reference posts about public information

Originally Posted by Ari
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public.
I think I've been quite liberal in my discussion of public information. I'm not going to talk here about discussions with my attorney.

Originally Posted by pmocek
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Pmocek, is it wise to hash this out here before your court date?
I don't intend to hash anything out. I can't stop other people from discussing public information, and I'm comfortable posting, as I have, information that anyone could receive by filing a public disclosure request or by querying the court's Web site.

As I've repeatedly stated, I'm not ready to talk about my personal experience. To avoid any confusion over this, I'm going to bow out at this point.

I'll provide updates as I'm able.

Originally Posted by ND Sol
Phil is just providing info he has received through discovery
The information I posted was received in response to public disclosure requests.
Originally Posted by ND Sol
I know that Phil can answer on his own, but from what I have read, Phil is just providing info he has received through discovery and the language of the laws he has been charged with violating. By providing that info, we can act as back benchers and discuss the aspects of his case. Perhaps he might even find a nugget or two from our discussions.
Regarding the public disclosure materials, see posts 585 and 590.
pmocek is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 1:06 pm
  #779  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike...
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,339
Originally Posted by Firebug4
I believe Mr. Mocek posted links to the tapes in this thread.

FB
The audi tapes are available here.
Xyzzy is offline  
Old Sep 10, 2010, 2:29 pm
  #780  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
Originally Posted by Ari
Phil refuses to answer virtually any questions about the case including information that is public. It is amusing to me that people are willing to support his "cause" on PayPal without knowing exactly what happened other than that he pissed off a bunch of cops.

It never crossed anyone's mind around here that he might be guilty of one or more of the charges despite the fact that contempt of cop was a huge element in this thing? The tapes make it pretty clear that Phil thought the proper place to vindicate his rights was on the street and not in a court of law.

I think sympathy from the jurors will be very hard to come by when they hear the tapes in court . . . it sounds as though he made a scene when his "rights" were violated rather than dealing with the issue in a productive manner.
Is this what society has come to? The point where "rights" need to put in quotes, since they don't really exist? And of course, asserting them is "making a scene"?

Anyway, would love to hear your suggestions for alternate means for getting the courts to address this issue -- are you honestly ignorant enough to believe that if he had been polite, co-operative, and deferential, that he could have still pushed this issue into the court system? Your whole post seems to originate from a parallel universe in which cops don't overstep their bounds and courts are willing to accept cases based on what didn't happen.
polonius is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.