Posted on 12/08/2005 12:21:37 PM PST by Rennes Templar
A passenger on Flight 924 gives his account of the shooting and says Rigoberto Alpizar never claimed to have a bomb
By SIOBHAN MORRISSEY/MIAMI
At least one passenger aboard American Airlines Flight 924 maintains the federal air marshals were a little too quick on the draw when they shot and killed Rigoberto Alpizar as he frantically attempted to run off the airplane shortly before take-off.
"I don't think they needed to use deadly force with the guy," says John McAlhany, a 44-year-old construction worker from Sebastian, Fla. "He was getting off the plane." McAlhany also maintains that Alpizar never mentioned having a bomb.
"I never heard the word 'bomb' on the plane," McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. "I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous." Even the authorities didn't come out and say bomb, McAlhany says. "They asked, 'Did you hear anything about the b-word?'" he says. "That's what they called it."
When the incident began McAlhany was in seat 24C, in the middle of the plane. "[Alpizar] was in the back," McAlhany says, "a few seats from the back bathroom. He sat down." Then, McAlhany says, "I heard an argument with his wife. He was saying 'I have to get off the plane.' She said, 'Calm down.'"
Alpizar took off running down the aisle, with his wife close behind him. "She was running behind him saying, 'He's sick. He's sick. He's ill. He's got a disorder," McAlhany recalls. "I don't know if she said bipolar disorder [as one witness has alleged]. She was trying to explain to the marshals that he was ill. He just wanted to get off the plane."
McAlhany described Alpizar as carrying a big backpack and wearing a fanny pack in front. He says it would have been impossible for Alpizar to lie flat on the floor of the plane, as marshals ordered him to do, with the fanny pack on. "You can't get on the ground with a fanny pack," he says. "You have to move it to the side."
By the time Alpizar made it to the front of the airplane, the crew had ordered the rest of the passengers to get down between the seats. "I didn't see him get shot," he says. "They kept telling me to get down. I heard about five shots."
McAlhany says he tried to see what was happening just in case he needed to take evasive action. "I wanted to make sure if anything was coming toward me and they were killing passengers I would have a chance to break somebody's neck," he says. "I was looking through the seats because I wanted to see what was coming.
"I was on the phone with my brother. Somebody came down the aisle and put a shotgun to the back of my head and said put your hands on the seat in front of you. I got my cell phone karate chopped out of my hand. Then I realized it was an official."
In the ensuing events, many of the passengers began crying in fear, he recalls. "They were pointing the guns directly at us instead of pointing them to the ground," he says "One little girl was crying. There was a lady crying all the way to the hotel."
McAlhany said he saw Alpizar before the flight and is absolutely stunned by what unfolded on the airplane. He says he saw Alpizar eating a sandwich in the boarding area before getting on the plane. He looked normal at that time, McAlhany says. He thinks the whole thing was a mistake: "I don't believe he should be dead right now."
"Boy, the kneejerk approval by some Freepers of this deadly shooting is surprising, to say the least."
My guess is the kneejerk reaction is to the liberal propensity for handwringing and second guessing.
The people who have to do the job have to make split second decisions. We have seen the results of hesitation in both Israel and Iraq. We live in a world where we can no longer give the benefit of the doubt to a man on a plane with a bag running through the aisle yelling.
I feel bad that the guy wasn't taking his meds, I know that many of them have undesirable side effects. But it is his responsibility to take them, which both he and his wife apparently abdicated. Both he and his wife then compounded it by putting him in a situation that exacerbated his precarious mental state.
I am going to side with the agent on this and give him the benefit of the doubt, even if he made a mistake.
Especially if I am sitting on the same aircraft.
I disagree 100 percent.
True, that conversation may have been on the flight from Quito to Miami.
Ever been on an aircraft? The quarters are too cramped for a long gun. And in that scenario, would be possible for someone to disarm the LEO.
Bottom line... This guy is lieing through his teeth.
My point was that the origination of that aircraft is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the thought process of the marshal(s).
Just as with the shooting in London, it has to be assumed that the marshal believed the man posed a threat - and that threat need not be a bomb, because the marshals have a duty to defend their own lives as well as the PAX and aircraft if they believe a threat exists be it from knitting needles, a knife, a gun, or other weapon. The shooter felt he was in a life threatening situation, and acted according to that belief.
And in all of that, as I pointed out, the origination of the plane that was being boarded is irrelevant. And as you pointed out, the Marshall likely don't know or don't care where the aircraft originated. This flight was protected because it was headed toward Orlando, and there is a belief that Disney World is a target.
I'm not saying that the shoot was a bad one. I'm just pointing out that some of the logic being used here is ludicrous.
The marshals were put in a tough situation and they responded in just about the only way they could. It was unfortunate, but it seems like they made the only call they could.
That being said, the guy had just come from the gate. If he had wanted to blow up the gate, he would have done it then rather than boarding the plane and then running out like a lunatic.
The guy was already on the plane so if wanted to blow up the plane at the terminal, he would have done it from his seat and not run around making a commotion.
I'm not expecting the marshals to think all of this out. I'm just calling people on BS rationalizations.
Hey, Doufus! Take the S&^t out of your ears. Wake up and pay attention
Actually, it doesn't.
He was confronted in First Class by the air marshalls and told to lie flat on the floor -- he refused and ran off the plane onto the jetway, stopped and turned toward the marshalls and started to get something out of his bag while being chased by the marshalls; they again ordered him down and he still refused and continued to open his bag.
Everyone had been told to keep down. He stuck his head up. If I'm a marshall, and this other stuff is going on, he's an accomplice. He's lucky he didn't get pistol whipped.
Most police departments are carrying .40 S&W. The popularity of 10's is decreasing. I'm guessing the former NATO round (9mm) is what the air marshalls carry.
Suggesting the man might not have understood english, blah blah blah.
This part may not be completely accurate. I'm not saying it's not, but just saying that the facts aren't all in.
Join the NRA, find someone who is well seasoned in firearm safety, proficient with firearms, and ask if you could go to the range with him/her.
How do you say bomb in Spanish?
susie
His whole story doesn't wash. They kept telling him to get down, he didn't. He was on the phone. And he was ready to break someone's neck............WHY? In case there were terrorists????? With a bomb????????
He made my baby fall in love with me.
Here's another headline:
Air marshal program: Is training adequate?
The shooting of a passenger in Miami followed protocol, but worries rise about 'mission creep.'
By Alexandra Marks | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Perhaps he wanted to detonate on the plane, but the marhsls pursuing him did not give him enough time to do it on the plane, so he ran outside, hoping to gain a least a couple of extra seconds to set off the device.
That happens in Israel quite frequently.
Yes. My major points that you disagree with are simply points that run counter to the second guessing of split second decisions made in response to lunatics. To the extent that you find them silly, it is because they are appropriate responses to silly reasons to second guess the marshalls.
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.