Posted on 04/27/2017 12:39:16 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
United Airlines has a reached a settlement for an undisclosed sum with the passenger who was dragged from a Chicago flight earlier this month in an incident that sparked international outrage, an attorney for the passenger said on Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Till the Police officers did what any reasonable person would have realized they were going to do.
Once it became clear that the police had been called, it was time to comply. When the police are clear in their intent to evict you, you are going to get evicted even if it takes force to do so.
The man could have gotten his neck broken. He could have gotten a brain hemorrhage from the injury. Why would anyone risk that by resisting the police for no other reason that they might miss their flight?
It is foolish to resist "the thugs" for no better reason than this, especially if "the thugs" have no intention of hurting you so long as you cooperate.
And he might be right. On the other hand, he might not be right. I've seen plenty of examples where "experts" are just wrong. Look how many "experts" predicted Hillary would win. That it would be a slam dunk. That Trump never had a chance.
Even if the Law Professor is correct, it still doesn't address the fact that the Flight crew were operating in good faith, meaning they believed at the time that their orders were lawful, and so did the police.
The Flight Crew may have been wrong according to civil law, but the police are certainly not. Removing unwanted guests is a routine process for police officers, and they don't have to split civil law hairs to take action.
Once a passenger is designated an "unwanted guest", the officers have the legal right to remove him.
I think the question boils down to "Do they have the legal authority of police or not?"
I find it irritating that people will throw out smokescreens like "They are not the police, they are private security guards" and such.
If someone wants to make a point that hinges on a particular fact, they ought to make sure at least that the particular fact their point hinges upon is true.
I also find it unlikely that the "Aviation Police" won't have the legal authority to remove passengers designated as unwanted or disruptive. That would make no sense to me.
Haven’t really been following the story, but the alderman in charge of the investigation said “my understanding is they may not be allowed on a plane.” Probably there’s a tangle of FAA and other regulations, but that seems to have sealed the firings and settlement.
’It is only Dr. Dao that decided to throw a screaming fit and resist.’
This is the lie. Dao remained calm and firm, merely remaining in his seat as he was legally entitled to do. Despite your twisted interpretation, others who have watched the videos—including the FAs—confirm that Dao never resorted to violence or threatening behavior.
Other than you and the self-serving thugs, there is no one claiming Dao self-inflicted his injuries. They resulted from the use of excessive force:
“Here’s the law, real simple: If you’re going to eject a passenger, under no circumstances can it be done with unreasonable force or violence,” Demetrio said during a press conference. “That’s the law.”
You’ve been politely asked to explain the scam. You are unable to do so
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’ve already explained the perp’s intended scam several times to you in terms that even a normally intelligent grade-school child could understand. Which number is greater, your age or your IQ?
Please provide a brief biographical sketch so I will know whether I’ve been conversing with an intelligent person or wasting my time with some clown masquerading as one.
You just found it unlikely then. They have no authority to make arrests. They have limited authority to detain. They are not authorized to carry weapons or firearms. Their authority to remove someone stopped when the passenger said no. They probably were authorized to board the plane, ask the passenger if he would voluntarily give up his seat and leave the plane. The passenger said no, he would not. That should have ended their involvement in the incident. But it did not. They took it upon themselves to assist him off the airplane. As a result thus far, the three that helped him off the airplane are on suspension waiting to hear if criminal charges will be filed against them, their boss is out of his job, and United Airlines wrote a check with a bunch of zeroes to the right of what was probably a double digit figure. And the doctor will probably be able to tell the changes in the weather for the rest of his life. Who won? In my opinion, only the lawyers. Could it have been prevented? Definitely. There probably were many other passengers that would have gladly accepted the offer made to the doctor, but in the view of the three thugs that thought that they were sworn police officers and later learned that they were not when their superior said to them,”You are suspended until further notice”, the doctor had defied them and had to be taught his place. Three elephants should never engage in a shitting contest. Very little good ever becomes of it.
Here’s a thought: why not just scream more F-bombs?
After all, it’s what you do best.
Imagine that...
Guess “justice” has a price.
Here’s a thought: why not just scream more F-bombs?
After all, it’s what you do best.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is all you can come up with in reply to my most recent post to you? My goodness, have you finally run out of “intelligent” things to say in defense of the good doctor’s misbehavior for the purpose of scamming the airline? You disappoint me, Fantasywriter!
The aviation officers who dragged Dr. David Dao off the United Airlines lane—are not police—they do not carry guns and that day at least one of the officers had the word police on his uniform.
City Proposes Removal of Word 'Police' From Aviation Department Security
Why the sudden shyness about showing off your lovely vocabulary? You weren’t bashful earlier, when you were *screaming* the F-word. Why now?
Look at it this way. The good conservatives at FR would normally have to visit DU to hear moonbats screaming their vulgar words. But as long as you’re here, we can hear gutter talk without ever leaving FR.
‘Part of the settlement was that he could not sue the police.’
Exactly right. But in Demetrio’s own words, United “hit a home run,” with their settlement figure. When a guy like Demetrio, who has a billion dollar award on his resume, speaks of a “home run,” the number of zeroes on that settlement check must be dazzling.
My, dropping that F-bomb really hung you out to dry, didn’t it? Moreover it provided you a good opportunity to redirect the discussion away from the one in which you were doing so poorly. And you haven’t even thanked me! Did you graduate high school, or are you still working toward that goal?
Every now and then a closet liberal outs themselves. Unless you’re now arguing that screaming the F-word is the newest conservative value/practice at FR, you outed yourself.
And who then should have taken it up? If you are postulating "these aren't the guys with the authority", then please answer the question as to where were the guys with the Authority, and why weren't they called?
Are you suggesting "the guys with authority" wouldn't be called? That they wouldn't "assist" Mr. Dao off the plane?
Tell me where you are going with this, because you haven't explained anything.
This is a stupid quibble about whether or not these guys had the authority, and whether they did or didn't, (i'm thinking they did.) someone who did have the authority was going to come along and eject Mr. Dao.
Or do you believe the Airline was just going to say, "Okay, we are just going to do what you want Mr. Dao. We give up! You have the right to control our passenger manifest and flight crew. Sorry we bothered you."
Not a good idea for people to carry guns on aircraft. Air-Marshall's do it, but they are specifically authorized and have special training.
and that day at least one of the officers had the word police on his uniform.
Which tells me that so far as anyone knew, they were a valid legal authority.
So are they being charged with impersonating police officers? If they aren't officers and then pretend that they are, that is a criminal offense, and one which cannot be ignored by law enforcement.
City Proposes Removal of Word 'Police' From Aviation Department Security
Your link doesn't work. Interestingly enough, the title of it implies that it is normal for the word "Police" to be on the uniforms of the Aviation Security Department.
In fact it is so normal that the City has to propose to remove it.
Every now and then a closet liberal outs themselves. Unless you’re now arguing that screaming the F-word is the newest conservative value/practice at FR, you outed yourself.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well shame on me for outing myself as a liberal, especially since I have voted for Republican candidates in every local, State, and Federal election beginning with Barry Goldwater in 1964. So lighten up old boy (or is it old girl?). I’m not the first Conservative and Freeper who has “screamed the F-word” and I’m sure I’m not going to be the last.
United offered a $200 voucher to have the bunny sent to a taxidermist
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL. Now that there is a funny remark! There can never be too much humor expressed on FR.
To which you replied.
This is the lie. Dao remained calm and firm, merely remaining in his seat as he was legally entitled to do. Despite your twisted interpretation, others who have watched the videos—including the FAs—confirm that Dao never resorted to violence or threatening behavior.
What I said is not even slightly a lie. Dr. Dao did in fact throw a screaming fit and he did resist. That he didn't do it at first is irrelevant. He did it when they came to get him off the plane.
When you say "Dao never resorted to violence or threatening behavior." you are moving the goal posts of the point in dispute. I did not say Dr. Dao resorted to violence, I said he resisted. I did not say he threatened them. I said he threw a screaming fit and resisted.
Other than you and the self-serving thugs, there is no one claiming Dao self-inflicted his injuries.
Which means what? That we decide our "facts" based on what the most people say? I'm an immutable truth sort of fellow, and I think facts should not be decided by consensus, but should instead be decided on the basis of whether they are objectively true or not.
You are also moving the goal posts of this point. I didn't say Dr. Dao self inflicted his injuries. He certainly didn't intend to slam his own head into the arm rest. His head being slammed into the arm rest was a consequence of his grip being released and his forward momentum made it inevitable that he would be propelled in that direction. It was no one's intention that his head should hit anything, it was merely the inevitable consequence of the struggle he put up not to be moved.
“Here’s the law, real simple: If you’re going to eject a passenger, under no circumstances can it be done with unreasonable force or violence,” Demetrio said during a press conference. “That’s the law.”
That may or may not be the law, but what they did does not strike me as "unreasonable force" in any case. They pulled on him, when his grip slipped, he was catapulted into the arm rest of the chair across the aisle.
I see no evidence that either of the men grabbed him by the back of the head and shoved his face into the arm rest. It looks like it was entirely the consequence of his momentum from being pulled, and in no way intentional by the police officers trying to remove him.
They did not punch him in the face. They did not club him in the head, what it appears they did is grab his arms and try to pull him out of the chair.
Not an unreasonable method of removing him at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.