Posted on 04/26/2017 7:44:23 PM PDT by SarahPalin2012
Newly released police documents claim that Dr. David Dao, the passenger who was shown being dragged off a United Airlines flight on April 9 in widely shared videos, behaved violently toward the officers removing him, but his lawyer dismissed this account as “utter nonsense.”
The phone videos taken by other passengers set off waves of criticism and multiple statements from the airline, each more apologetic than the last.
The police reports were released Monday afternoon in response to a freedom of information request filed by The New York Times and other news organizations. The releases included audio of the original call to the Chicago Department of Aviation police, personnel reports about the officers and an incident report that appeared to blame Dr. Dao for his own injuries.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Show me the teeth and I will be on his side.
I googled "Dr Dao teeth blood" and got basically nothing.
That means nothing. Big government and big corporations are notorious for PC moves these days. Chicago Dept of Aviation will do anything to look PC & CYA.
The pilot’s union does not represent UA it represents the pilots. This little stunt on their part is to fluff up their image. The only thing they consider as UA is the part controlled but their union and anything else is not UA.
“That means nothing. “
If by “nothing” you mean everything, then you’d be correct. UA has conceded. The only discussion remaining is quantity of zeros on the check.
“He was trying to enforce justice with physical altercation’
How can you possibly be this far into the discussion, and not know that this is a false statement?
See Post #152.
There are several mind readers on the thread. They claim to be aware of Dao’s mental state and intentions at the time of the incident.
I could help out on this, but I’m not going to. Your anti-Dao bias is too strong. No matter what evidence you see, you’ll find a way around it. Sorry you hate him so much, but it is what it is
Saw that. It is indeed very interesting. I’m assuming those two are the uniformed guards?
It's easy to talk tough from a keyboard on the Internet.
Your post says it all. Only Dao and God know what was in the former’s mind. When anyone else states with certitude that they know his innermost thoughts and motives, you know they’re too far gone. Facts and evidence mean nothing to them; their ‘insider knowledge,’ of the inner workings of Dao’s mind trumps anything and everything more objective.
You've seen Dr. Dao's missing teeth?
I was on a white water rafting trip in CA back 20 years ago.
Part of the trip was an evening BBQ.
My group was made up of 15 single adults.
Another group of about 40 was made up of police officers, retired police officers and their wives.
I was told (forcefully) that we were sitting on the wrong table. As we got up to move, one police officer jumped over the picnic table and attacked me.
I side-stepped him and pinned him to the ground, but never did anything violent to him.
As I left, another police officer held out his fist and said “Do you want a piece of this?”.
I said with my hands next to my side, “No” and turned to leave.
The police officer began beating me with his fists as the wives cheered him on.
OK, there is your story.
Believe us now?
See my prior post to you. I explained the situation in clear, simple terms.
If I had been those 2 officers, I'd have written: "Everything was fine until the guy's face was smashed by dickless here."
Nope,not a physician...I was an ER administrator for years at a large,world renowned,hospital.I saw enough while there to allow me to write a book.
What would be your reaction to dragging a person with facial injuries and a possible concussion without stabilizing his neck?
OK,we've established that I'm not a physician.I'm also not a lawyer.However,I would think that the standards of conduct for a "civilian" would be a lot different than for a physician/nurse/EMT.Surely his lawyers would demand that he shouldn't have been moved but given what I've seen/heard/read I,as a juror,would reject such a claim.
Bottom line....unless I'm missing something very,*very* important here (possible but highly unlikely) my attitude is that even if United violated a contractual agreement....company policy...or even Federal law I wouldn't award this guy (or his ambulance chaser lawyers) a nickel simply because his behavior was so beyond the pale that he has nobody to blame but himself for his injuries.
In that *very* same situation *I* would have calmly and quietly walked off that plane when ordered to do so....and would not have returned after having left.But the next morning I very probably would have contacted a lawyer to see what legal recourse,if any,I might have against the players involved.
That's what rational people would do.OTOH,the typical convicted felon who illegally provides narcotics to his boyfriend would probably handle it just the way this clown did.
Irrelevant story because the police officers were not on official duty, but rather just having a picnic.
Again, any law/rules/regulations authority on official duty asks you to do something, you will come out ahead following instructions. You will not win a physical altercation with them.
Grow up. What would being violent get you other than maybe jail time?
You are so uninformed on law. Anyone who resists arrest or orders from an authority on official duty, will be subjected to whatever force is necessary to make him/her obey the authority.
For example when police come across a non-obeying individual, he is taken down flat on the ground with his face in the dust, his arms behind his back and the officers knee on the offender’s neck. I have seen this scene a thousand times or more on real time video’s.
And the offender has no legal standing to sue for the harsh force used because he was non-compliant of orders.
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.