Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Abuse of Authority: Undeniable Proof

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post
    Says the supposed lawyer who won't use caps.
    neither did e.e. cummings and no one held it against him. it's an interwebz forum. i'm not getting graded on, well, anything.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by 3WE View Post
      Been fun to watch this- should have made some popcorn.

      I think TeeVee has an interesting point...it smells a little bit funny off to kick someone off for safety and then let them go on the next flight...

      "Undeniable"...well, let's start with absolute statements and then move to a possibly overly-self-important-celebrity, and maybe there is another side to the story.

      Bring in the media who sometimes seem to care nothing about facts...

      Would be fun to take this to court where facts and a good, strong argument (which aren't quite the same thing) and human jury bias will come into play.
      we never do have the "facts" since airlines rarely if ever disclose the facts as they see them. they rely on ridiculously overreaching contracts and even more ridiculously worded laws--laws that were never meant to address a passenger's failure to adjust the position of their effin suitcase!

      seriously folks--ATL"crew" included--do you really think any legislature anywhere in the world intended for pax to be kicked off a flight and or charged with a violation of law for refusing to move a bloody bag??????

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
        we never do have the "facts" since airlines rarely if ever disclose the facts as they see them. they rely on ridiculously overreaching contracts and even more ridiculously worded laws--laws that were never meant to address a passenger's failure to adjust the position of their effin suitcase!

        seriously folks--ATL"crew" included--do you really think any legislature anywhere in the world intended for pax to be kicked off a flight and or charged with a violation of law for refusing to move a bloody bag??????
        Well, most restaurants and other shops reserve the right to refuse admission and to kick your butt off if you become disruptive, even if that attitude doesn't entail a security concern. Go to a nice restaurant with soft lights, candles and soft ambient music and start singing "cielito lindo" from the bottom of your lungs. Or go to a cinema and stand in front of the screen.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
          Well, most restaurants and other shops reserve the right to refuse admission and to kick your butt off if you become disruptive, even if that attitude doesn't entail a security concern. Go to a nice restaurant with soft lights, candles and soft ambient music and start singing "cielito lindo" from the bottom of your lungs. Or go to a cinema and stand in front of the screen.
          most, nay, all restaurants are not subject to special laws as airlines are. there is no law that makes it a crime to "interfere" with a waiter's duties. and just in case you missed it, the point is abuse. if you went to a fine dining restaurant and refused to hang your coat the way you were told because you were too short to reach the hanger, i'd bet just about any amount you would not be thrown out.

          Comment


          • #20
            I just kinda doubt that’s the whole story.

            Body cams for all.

            Film or it didn’t happen.

            Question: how is the legal community responding to “photographic” evidence since editing is such a powerful tool?
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • #21
              several steps in the process of getting pics or vids admitted into evidence and each state has different rules. the good thing is, most editing software if not all, leaves detectable traces.

              i'm not an expert on the topic since most of the litigation i've done for the past 15 years involves contracts and statutes, and most of the evidence was documents (paper). there are entire treatises devoted to digital/electronic evidence and i'm certainly not an authority on the subject. i have twice successfully challenged the admission of digital pics in two cases where the parties promulgating the pics refused or were unable to produce the original digital file which of course has meta-data

              Comment

              Working...
              X