Update on Mocek v. Albuquerque et. al.

Old Oct 1, 12, 8:15 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1,438
Update on Mocek v. Albuquerque et. al.

Hi, all. My federal civil rights lawsuit against the police officers and airport security guards who were involved in the 2009 incident when I was falsely arrested at ABQ is making its way slowly through the court. I'm awaiting a response from the judge to the TSA defendants' motion to dismiss. There is no set timeline on which this must occur.

The Identity Project have posted an informative update on the civil suit along with a new FAQ about it.
pmocek is offline  
Old Oct 2, 12, 9:17 am
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: Gate Louse Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,164
Thanks for the update. Are there any hearings set for motions, etc?
Superguy is offline  
Old Oct 2, 12, 12:21 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Omaha, NE, USA
Posts: 1,376
Go Phil!
NoClu is online now  
Old Oct 2, 12, 2:03 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 574
Go get em, Tiger.
The people need to be treated with respect, instead of
the sheep-to-the-slaughter doom and gloom of modern US airports.

I videotaped this Sept 24, and the Mocek case was in my mind,
as inspiration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL36COSE0gs

Thought I'd stick up for my rights, and all hell broke loose.
yandosan is offline  
Old Oct 9, 12, 8:37 am
  #5  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1,438
Originally Posted by Superguy View Post
Are there any hearings set for motions, etc?
No. To my knowlege, no further action is yet scheduled.

Last edited by pmocek; Oct 9, 12 at 9:04 am
pmocek is offline  
Old Oct 9, 12, 10:16 am
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 37,333
Go get'em, Phil!! We need more update. We will keep in touch.
N830MH is offline  
Old Oct 9, 12, 11:01 am
  #7  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 13,899
Originally Posted by yandosan View Post
Go get em, Tiger.
The people need to be treated with respect, instead of
the sheep-to-the-slaughter doom and gloom of modern US airports.

I videotaped this Sept 24, and the Mocek case was in my mind,
as inspiration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL36COSE0gs

Thought I'd stick up for my rights, and all hell broke loose.
I'm interested to know what happened to the guy right at the end of the clip who was trying to do a self-directed opt out through the metal detector. I got a glimpse of what I thought was the clerk pointing him in the direction of the cancer box. Did he opt out anyway or place himself in a higher risk category?
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Oct 11, 12, 1:53 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 105
I did not even read their motion to dismiss and I knew what would claim.

Qualified Immunity (most, the vast majority, of Cops and TSA personnel, will state unequivocally that the Constitution does not apply at a airport; why they think this I do not know.)

And

You interfered with the screening process by talking back. (which is such a vague and arbitrary standard that it should be deemed unconstitutional.)

The only First Amendment (free speech) at an Airport comes from Hare Krishnas suing about collecting donations at an airport. The Supreme stated in essence that people don't want to bothered, business would be affected, etc. However, that case should not be read as an blanket tossing out of the Constitution or the First Amendment.

Good luck, Phil, through in some "Houston v. Hill" into your defense, Houston v. Hill stands for the right to talk back to police.
FatherAbraham is offline  
Old Oct 11, 12, 4:01 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Programs: DL MM, DL DM, Marriott PP
Posts: 561
Say the TSO is video taped etc saying about the Constitution not being applicable at the airport. Does that qualify to be treated under Bivens actions umbrella? Seems to me as a clear intent to deprive of the Constitutional rights.
MAMOHT is offline  
Old Jan 25, 13, 9:22 am
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1,438
Exclamation Mocek v. Albuquerque et al: TSA defendants dismissed

"Judge Dismisses Defendants in Passengerís Suit," by Scott Sandlin, Albuquerque Journal, January 22, 2013, page C1, http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2013/...gers-suit.html

It begins:

A Seattle man charged with disorderly conduct after refusing to show his ID at an Albuquerque airport security point and filming the reaction was cleared of criminal charges in Metropolitan Court in January 2011.

The civil lawsuit Phillip Mocek filed against Transportation Security Administration officers and the city of Albuquerque aviation police, however, hasnít fared as well.

In a 125-page opinion filed last week, U.S. District Judge James O. Browning dismissed the federal defendants from the lawsuit, and included language helpful to the cityís defense.

Mary Lou Boelcke, Mocekís attorney, said she expects to appeal the ruling, either before trial or after Browning decides other issues regarding the city.
Judge Browning's order (PDF; 2.5 MB) is available from the RECAP archive. The Identity Project maintain an excellent FAQ.

Last edited by pmocek; Jan 29, 13 at 9:50 pm Reason: fix broken link to judge's order
pmocek is offline  
Old Jan 25, 13, 10:53 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 35,765


Thanks for the update Phil. Just shows the judge is as crooked as the cops in ABQ.

Last edited by essxjay; Mar 22, 15 at 11:17 am Reason: readability
chollie is offline  
Old Jan 25, 13, 1:18 pm
  #12  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 22,661
Link for the judges order not working for me.

Last edited by essxjay; Mar 22, 15 at 11:18 am Reason: readability
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Jan 25, 13, 3:35 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
Programs: AA lifetime Gold , DL Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 572
Phil, from what I read of the short statement, the charges still stand against the ABQ police, what did the judge include in the dismissal of the federal charges that helps the police?

Mr. Elliott
Mr. Elliott is offline  
Old Jan 25, 13, 3:48 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 642
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
Link for the judges order not working for me.
Here you go Boggie Dog.
jtodd is offline  
Old Jan 25, 13, 4:25 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott LT Titantium Elite
Posts: 144
Originally Posted by yandosan View Post
Go get em, Tiger.
The people need to be treated with respect, instead of
the sheep-to-the-slaughter doom and gloom of modern US airports.

I videotaped this Sept 24, and the Mocek case was in my mind,
as inspiration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL36COSE0gs

Thought I'd stick up for my rights, and all hell broke loose.
This is more like taunting, and is ridiculous IMO. There's a difference between wanting to photograph/videotape for a reason, and then doing it just to see if you can get a reaction to post to YouTube. No different than walking around calling people jerks to their faces with a video until you can get someone to get mad and punch you. Ridiculous. OK, so you found someone that didn't know that part of the law - congratulations, you're a real American hero. Find a better use of your time.
Eryeal is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread