Telfes

To take up our space or to touch us?
To me, encroachment is annoying, whereas the other may require a sharper response.
Entitlement is certainly possible and in some cases a certainty. Sometimes I try to give the guys the benefit of the doubt. But only sometimes.

IrishRed

Ewww...all the gory details here

This is just scary, and sad.

Edited to add this site seems fairly popup friendly so have your blocker on.

Telfes

Gory is the word. Only a misdemeanor? I've been an Ambien fan, but this is almost enough to make me rethink the cost/benefit of sleepless flights.

I'm still very much of the mindset that there is NO comparison between men sprawling out in our space and this sort of vile & illegal behavior.
From the article:
"...When she jumped up, I could see I was touching her. It's possible that I committed a crime," Fox told the agents."
HUH?

JHattery

No, we're a lot simpler and more oblivious than is generally thought. Those jokes about what's going through a man's vs. woman's head are somewhat based in reality, at least the male part.

Edit: comment specific to encroachment. The fondling thing is just outright gross and should be considered assault.

Tsukiji

Wow - a story like this makes me really consider how lucky I was all those year traveling as an unaccompanied minor. What if a youngster had been next to him - 13-14 ? They might have been too scared to speak up.

What a bizarre person.

FWAAA

When I first saw this thread I thought it was a duplicate; after all, just three months ago there was a thread about someone sentenced to seven years in prison for almost identical conduct:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=460199

Horrible. Almost as distressing as the incident itself is the light punishment he faces. The guy in the link above got seven years. This guy faces a max sentence of six MONTHS?

IMO, the AUSA didn't do her job. Has to be a an appropriate felony with which to charge this loser. But she chose to prosecute a misdemeanor.

Lesson for bad guys: Do this on a flight landing in Mass. and you might get seven years in the big house. Do it on a flight landing in California and you might get six months max.

l etoile

Despite living here, I don't know - does California have a record for being soft on this type of crime? My first thought was that the difference in sentences had more to do with one being a legislator.

BearX220

Kind of a gross generalization about the species, don't you think?

Martinis at 8

Yes. CA is soft on crime - all crime.

The perpetrator is a creepo. The woman should have started hitting, scratching, eye-gouging, etc., as soon as this happened. Crew and/or other passengers would have stopped the melee, plus if she takes agressive defensive action, then it lessens any questions on whether anything really occurred or not.

Here's what I don't understand about the talk in this thread.

1. Why not ask the person next to you to get up out of their seat instead of doing the crawl-over thing if you are in a middle or window seat.
2. If in aisle, why not get up yourself if the person tries to crawl over and make it clear you don't like being crawled over. One can state this as soon as one sits down. I do this if I fly Y class, or on any WN domestic flight. Makes no difference that I am a male.
3. If "encroachment" is happening let the offender know to get the hell out of your territory. If a woman told me that, you can bet for sure I'd be more conscious of her personal space. Plus I think any creepos would get the message instantly. My wife does this regularly, and it also shuts up any creepos who might be flying in the seat next to her.
4. It's actually okay to be a beeotch when it comes to your space on the aircraft. In general being more agressive in the close confines of aircraft seating is justfiable self-protection.
5. If you'll notice on one of those men's forum thread debates, I even said a possible topic is "why NOT to sit next to that babe flying in F class". This thread demonstrates just one of those reasons.

M8

vickiburton

I'll admit that it might be; however, I've earned my hash marks over the years.

SPN Lifer

Wrong. Federal law is uniform throughout the United States.

The real lesson is that digital penetration is a felony, while touching the outside of another's underwear is a misdemeanor.

Prosecutors don't get a whole lot of credit or professional advancement for charging misdemeanors instead of felonies, or even for charging them at all, so this was undoubtedly a reflection of her commitment to justice and empathy for the victim. Next time, please don't be so hasty in condemning a hard-working federal prosecutor. That is the sin of "rash judgment."To answer your direct question, no. California is the home of "three strikes," and its prison population is the largest in the nation. There is a general view among the uninformed that CA has a lax penal code, but that is fostered by the anti-death penalty views of former Chief Justice Bird (recalled in 1987 after a decade in office), memories of the 1967 Summer of Love in San Francisco, and general public opinions of California or Hollywood whackiness rather than any analysis of the state's criminal laws. California is not lax on crime in general, or sexual crime in particular.

Be that as it may, however, since the offense occured on a US-flagged plane over international water, there was federal, rather than state, jurisdiction, as set forth in my earlier response.

All prosecutors, whether federal or state, are bound by the relevant canons of ethical conduct to make charging decisions solely on the evidence, without regard to persons. The misdemeanor charge reflects that he did not "go further" (though he says he only touched her hand, which is why some of his comments are being misinterpreted upthread, in light of what the judge actually found).As a matter of common courtesy, it is impolite to awaken a sleeping passenger. I often crawl over sleeping seatmates in Y rather than disrupt their sleep, and expect others to do the same, if possible.

Most men seldom or never wear kilts or skirts, and have not been trained since boyhood to keep their knees together. I dare say that for many men, those muscles are less well developed than women's. Also, when there is close seat pitch long legs jam one's knees into the forward seat back. So I dare say that most male open-leg behavior is unintentional. To the extent it is conscious, they probably figure that if the seatmate is not using the space, "why not?" Blame the airline, not your seatmate. A good way of reclaiming one's space, without having to say a thing, is to cross your legs so your foot presses against his leg, but still in your assigned area. As a male, I do this myself to combat territorial encroachment.

AC110

Since there's really only room for one arm, I presume this means you think YOU should get it. Sorry, first come, first served.

SPN Lifer

I always thought that was one of the few perks of being stuck in the middle seat.

When I am so positioned, if my seatmate desires to make an issue of it, I invariably indicate my willingness to trade seats if armrests are that person's highest priority.

However, most people's arms don't occupy the entire armrest on both sides, so there is usually some place to stick your elbow, hand, or foot. Sharing is a useful skill most of us learn in kindergarten.

AC110

<foot stamping on>But I want the WHOLE cookie!!<foot stamping off>

NancyW

HATE the invasion of space thing. It is rare that men don't seem to mind encroaching and touching. Have had two nasty situations - once a guy sitting next to me in coach was happily reading a porn magazine very openly. (I'm not talking Playboy, but hard porn.) Another flight, the man next to me spent most of the flight touching himself. Anybody who needs to adjust himself that often has a physical problem! Yuck.