Another pilot arrested for nothing

The FAA gave them "permission to move the aircraft from the field".

Hey Tony... Better call the FAA the next time you land out. Wouldn't want you getting in trouble for putting it in your tailor without permission from the FAA.
 
i prefer to not get any govt entity involved when i land out. i'm pretty sure the "permission to move the aircraft" was Barney Fife calling the local FSDO asking what to do and the inspector saying they didn't care, move it if they want to. not an accident or incident not their problem.
 
steingar said:
So much for the 5th. If the founding fathers could only see...
Click to expand...

The SCOTUS just held that not answering questions could be used in court as implied evidence of your guilt. :confused:

The pilot was required by FARs to provide a copy of his certificate and medical(?). But you don't get arrested for FAR violations.
 
Okay, hold on. Maybe I'm going to get shot, here, but as a reminder, here's the text of the 5th amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...
So: Grand Jury indictments for big crimes, no double jeopardy, no self-incrimination, and due process of law / compensation before your stuff gets yanked or you get stuck in jail.

Where does it say that you're free to refuse to cooperate with reasonable requests from law enforcement ("What's your name, sir?") without suffering the consequences? That's part of "due process of law".

What other outcome do you envision? That the cops would just get bored and leave?
 
Last edited:
mikea said:
The SCOTUS just held that not answering questions could be used in court as implied evidence of your guilt. :confused:

The pilot was required by FARs to provide a copy of his certificate and medical(?). But you don't get arrested for FAR violations.
Click to expand...

Sounds like he did give them. The article said the cops got his name from his pilots license.
 
What I don't get, is when there is a plane accident, we all laugh in hysterics at how the media gets the story roughly 98% incorrect to the point we understand not to base any conclusions on this.

We then read an article about an arrest and we take the facts as given and start declaring the end of our civilization. I think our civilization is ending on the same rate that its impossible for a brand new pilot of 40 hours to try to land a plane without a Glide Slope.

(Not that we shouldn't investigate and stay on our toes...)
 
marcoseddi said:
maybe drunk? who knows
Click to expand...

Cops are well trained to recognize that and i'm sure it would have been mentioned in the article if they thought he was drunk.

Miranda rights: Police must inform suspects of their rights once being detained and before any interrogation can take place "You have the right to remain silent"
 
Folks, a bit of empathy here, empathy for law enforcement. If the pilot had been injured, information would have been shared, help would have been forthcoming and all would have been good. Since it was just an outlanding, the pilot knew nothing had happened except that his misfortune involved a passing officer. The officer doesn't know an outlanding from an accident or a terrorist incident ,and he/she is going to treat it the same - who are these people, what happened, what's needed.

I have almost 50 outlandings under my belt and several crash scenes. Some have involved law enforcement. I quickly learned the best thing I could do is show them my drivers license... they all understand driver licenses. None of them ever asked for or wanted to see my pilot's license. Follow that with smile and an explanation of what's going on and the biggest problem is keeping them from trying to help when all you need is for your crew to show up.

All this talk about rights and the 5th is BS. The only worse thing than a cop who is a wannabee federal agent (see glider pilot flying near reactor in NC) is a citizen who is a wannabee cop (see you know what). I don't like any of it and have no soft spot for law enforcement but they can usually be managed.

The pilot screwed this one up the minute he decided that silence was the best policy when there was no possible guilt involved. Pretend like you may need help, give him some who, what and where so he doesn't have to think what to do, and recognize that law enforcement will try to help even if asked not too. Then blow him off and get on with the next day's task for chrissakes.

I have a great story about a crash where I almost blew it because I didn't know who all the law enforcement types in civvies were. Fortunately I figured it out before getting arrested. I'll save that one for another time.

Anyway, soaring pilots don't get shot as the result of flying or landing somewhere...yet. Let's keep it that way.
 
Last edited:
Timmer said:
What I don't get, is when there is a plane accident, we all laugh in hysterics at how the media gets the story roughly 98% incorrect to the point we understand not to base any conclusions on this.

We then read an article about an arrest and we take the facts as given and start declaring the end of our civilization. I think our civilization is ending on the same rate that its impossible for a brand new pilot of 40 hours to try to land a plane without a Glide Slope.

(Not that we shouldn't investigate and stay on our toes...)
Click to expand...
Excellent point. Gotta be more to the story than what was reported.
 
dell30rb said:
Cops are well trained to recognize that and i'm sure it would have been mentioned in the article if they thought he was drunk.

Miranda rights: Police must inform suspects of their rights once being detained and before any interrogation can take place "You have the right to remain silent"
Click to expand...


Yes, you have the right to remain silent, and the officer the right to lock your butt up if you refuse to provide adequate indentification. Providing indentification is not self incrimination. Even after reading Miranda the police may solicit basic information such as name, adress, DOB, employment ect.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Yes, you have the right to remain silent, and the officer the right to lock your butt up if you refuse to provide adequate indentification. Providing indentification is not self incrimination. Even after reading Miranda the police may solicit basic information such as name, adress, DOB, employment ect.
Click to expand...

Define "adequate" A place of employment is not required. Nobody has to have a job. Name, address, DOB covers it. Of course if we are flying then we have to be willing and able to produce valid government issued photo ID along with pilots certificate and perhaps a medical. Note that if we aren't flying or operating a motor vehicle then chances are we don't have to produce any type of ID, our word is all that is required. Of course there are penalties for providing incorrect information.
 
I am not a lawyer, and do not pretend to know everything, however, it is my understanding that you can be detained for not giving your name to law enforcement. Refusing to give your name would certainly be alarming to police. It is certainly not like they just pulled him out of his house and started interrogating him.

I am sorry if I offend anyone, but if I landed my plane off field and the local barney fife, or other law enforcement agency asked me for my name and identification I would find it hard not to give it to him. I realize we live in the US where freedom is paramount to the founding of this country, but sometimes we do have to act like responsible adults, and if we do not then we should expect there to be repercussions. So for me I have to wonder what is the harm in giving the law enforcement authorities your name and identification, unless you are trying to hide something. There are fights to fight, and sometimes there are fights that are just not worth fighting. This to me seems to be one of those times.
 
None of this is ever going to stop until politicians start losing their jobs. That will never happen with an antipathetic voter base.

We are effectively voting away our Constitution, then we have the gall to complain.

-John
 
Bill Watson said:
Folks, a bit of empathy here, empathy for law enforcement. If the pilot had been injured, information would have been shared, help would have been forthcoming and all would have been good. Since it was just an outlanding, the pilot knew nothing had happened except that his misfortune involved a passing officer. The officer doesn't know an outlanding from an accident or a terrorist incident ,and he/she is going to treat it the same - who are these people, what happened, what's needed.

I have almost 50 outlandings under my belt and several crash scenes. Some have involved law enforcement. I quickly learned the best thing I could do is show them my drivers license... they all understand driver licenses. None of them ever asked for or wanted to see my pilot's license. Follow that with smile and an explanation of what's going on and the biggest problem is keeping them from trying to help when all you need is for your crew to show up.

All this talk about rights and the 5th is BS. The only worse thing than a cop who is a wannabee federal agent (see glider pilot flying near reactor in NC) is a citizen who is a wannabee cop (see you know what). I don't like any of it and have no soft spot for law enforcement but they can usually be managed.

The pilot screwed this one up the minute he decided that silence was the best policy when there was no possible guilt involved. Pretend like you may need help, give him some who, what and where so he doesn't have to think what to do, and recognize that law enforcement will try to help even if asked not too. Then blow him off and get on with the next day's task for chrissakes.

I have a great story about a crash where I almost blew it because I didn't know who all the law enforcement types in civvies were. Fortunately I figured it out before getting arrested. I'll save that one for another time.

Anyway, soaring pilots don't get shot as the result of flying or landing somewhere...yet. Let's keep it that way.
Click to expand...
I took a vacation near yellowstone a couple years back. While riding a snowmobile on forest service trail outside the park my fiance rode off the trail into a tree and injured herself bad enough to spend 4 days in an ICU. I was the only witness; she was the only person involved. I called for EMS evacuation but before they showed up a park ranger showed up and asked questions of what happened. I didn't think anything of it as neither she nor I was doing anything wrong. A month or so later she received a citation in the mail for reckless operation with a few hundred dollar fine. So no, despite my own father having been a CHP, I do not see the police as protecting and serving me and no I would not want to speak with them after setting down off airport.
 
The article states he refused to answer questions. So by refusing the police can take that lack of information and interpret it any way they choose. Maybe they thought he stole it, but refusing to speak they can say they have reasonable suspicion a crime was comitted.
 
FORANE said:
I took a vacation near yellowstone a couple years back. While riding a snowmobile on forest service trail outside the park my fiance rode off the trail into a tree and injured herself bad enough to spend 4 days in an ICU. I was the only witness; she was the only person involved. I called for EMS evacuation but before they showed up a park ranger showed up and asked questions of what happened. I didn't think anything of it as neither she nor I was doing anything wrong. A month or so later she received a citation in the mail for reckless operation with a few hundred dollar fine. So no, despite my own father having been a CHP, I do not see the police as protecting and serving me and no I would not want to speak with them after setting down off airport.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, there are unsympathetic law enforcement people in the world, but is it any different from the person driving his car off the road and hurting himself and then getting a ticket for reckless driving. This happens all the time. I would like to believe that most of the time law enforcement is there to protect and serve, but unfortunately there are a few bad ones out there, but also there are three sides to every story, you version, their version, and reality.
 
Law Enforcement has their unions, organizations, protections and Fox (ha,ha) news err a, entertainment.

If AOPA does not rigorously protect SAIL PILOTS then they need another organization which will. Every incident should be investigated by the organizations attorney, media reps, and executive management.

Rights are lost in bits and pieces so subtly that we hardly notice until they are gone.

Even much less subtly such as our rights to privacy such as the NSA, Carnivore or Echelon programs and fusion centers.
 
Last edited:
douglas393 said:
I am not a lawyer, and do not pretend to know everything, however, it is my understanding that you can be detained for not giving your name to law enforcement. Refusing to give your name would certainly be alarming to police. It is certainly not like they just pulled him out of his house and started interrogating him.

I am sorry if I offend anyone, but if I landed my plane off field and the local barney fife, or other law enforcement agency asked me for my name and identification I would find it hard not to give it to him. I realize we live in the US where freedom is paramount to the founding of this country, but sometimes we do have to act like responsible adults, and if we do not then we should expect there to be repercussions. So for me I have to wonder what is the harm in giving the law enforcement authorities your name and identification, unless you are trying to hide something. There are fights to fight, and sometimes there are fights that are just not worth fighting. This to me seems to be one of those times.
Click to expand...

How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
 
pikespeakmtnman said:
How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
Click to expand...

but what if he was a terrorist going to ram that glider into a Nuclear plant or worse if he had cocaine? We must be protected!@#$%
 
douglas393 said:
Unfortunately, there are unsympathetic law enforcement people in the world, but is it any different from the person driving his car off the road and hurting himself and then getting a ticket for reckless driving. This happens all the time. I would like to believe that most of the time law enforcement is there to protect and serve, but unfortunately there are a few bad ones out there, but also there are three sides to every story, you version, their version, and reality.
Click to expand...
True but now that you mention driving car off road...
Less than a year ago she was driving interstate in VA when another driver texting drifted into her lane as she was passing. She hit the brakes and swerved losing control and exited the freeway backwards into a ditch. While she waited for a towtruck a trooper came along. She told him what happened. He ticketed her for failing to maintain control of her vehicle. An ambulance had come along and pulled over though she did not need them as there were no injuries. The trooper then left her there on the side of the freeway with the ambulance to wait on the towtruck. She had to take time off work and drive a few hours from home to appear in court on that one.
 
FORANE said:
I took a vacation near yellowstone a couple years back. While riding a snowmobile on forest service trail outside the park my fiance rode off the trail into a tree and injured herself bad enough to spend 4 days in an ICU. I was the only witness; she was the only person involved. I called for EMS evacuation but before they showed up a park ranger showed up and asked questions of what happened. I didn't think anything of it as neither she nor I was doing anything wrong. A month or so later she received a citation in the mail for reckless operation with a few hundred dollar fine. So no, despite my own father having been a CHP, I do not see the police as protecting and serving me and no I would not want to speak with them after setting down off airport.
Click to expand...


Hmmm... Tell me more about that incident...
 
You could not be more wrong. You DO NOT have to provide ID. You most certainly DO NOT have to provide place of employment LOL.
If you are driving, you need to provide a DL or you will get a ticket. You DO have to provide name and address, verbally is ok.
We do still live in the USA.

Clark1961 said:
Define "adequate" A place of employment is not required. Nobody has to have a job. Name, address, DOB covers it. Of course if we are flying then we have to be willing and able to produce valid government issued photo ID along with pilots certificate and perhaps a medical. Note that if we aren't flying or operating a motor vehicle then chances are we don't have to produce any type of ID, our word is all that is required. Of course there are penalties for providing incorrect information.
Click to expand...
 
pikespeakmtnman said:
How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
Click to expand...

Knowing the guy's name is probably not going to have any effect on the situation in the end. However, what is the harm in giving the name, and I am sorry, if it offends you sense of the universe, but if you act suspiciously expect to be treated suspiciously. I personally do not feel that if I landed my plane off field that being asked to give my name and identification really falls under the category of harassment and intimidation. When I was 16 I was getting into my car to drive to the store. A police officer saw me getting into my car, and before I could even start the engine, knocked on my window, and asked me for my driver's license. Now, I was not doing anything wrong, and he had no suspicion of me doing anything wrong. I pulled out my wallet, gave him my license, and he looked at it, and gave it back. Why did he do what he did? I did ask. He told me I did not look old enough to drive. This was over 30 years ago, and to tell you the truth, I never thought much of it. Could have I refused to give him my license, yeah. But what was the harm.

You can deal with law enforcement two ways, you can cooperate with them, or you can be defiant. You will probably get more help by cooperating with them. If you did nothing wrong, you probably will get on your way faster, and cheaper by cooperating. If you did something wrong, do you really think by not giving them your name and ID it is going to make it less likely they are not going to figure out you are trying to hide something?

We all complain about the high cost of flying, yet some of are willing to spend thousands of dollars on legal fees, because we find it offensive that a police officer asks a simple question such as you name. As much as the founding fathers believed in freedom, and as much as I believe that they would be very saddened and disturbed by how their grand experiment is turning out, I do believe that the consequences of not giving your name to the police is something that would terribly bother them. I could be wrong.
 
pikespeakmtnman said:
How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
Click to expand...
True enough but that's the way people work. Cops ID people, I've learned to comply with a smile.

Times are always changing but when I was a YOUNG black male moving about in 'white' America, standing on my rights or principle had a price. The second time I spent a sober night in the drunk tank I started to see some light. So many DWB stops I can't remember them all. I learned to not wear a hat when driving, I stopped wearing jeans for 37 years and dressed up when traveling even if my travel mates dressed down. I finally figured out that if I was driving with a white person, I would only be stopped to make sure they were alright. I finally stopped getting stopped. Now I'm probably just too old.

I try to treat them as I would treat any other service provider - with respect and empathy. It now usually works for me rather than against me.

The world is not fair or kind. America is a special place but I'll leave arguments about amendments and rights to the courts with a judge. I'll deal with law enforcement as they are, that is as an armed service provider with important friends, and do so very carefully.
 
N801BH said:
Hmmm... Tell me more about that incident...
Click to expand...
Not sure if it was 2009 or 2010. We flew into KJAC, spent a couple days there. Then we drove to West Yellowstone and and took a couple days guided snowmobile trip on 4 strokes in the park. The next day we rented 2 stroke sleds and departed out of West Yellowstone to the South on one of the trails. We did not have a guide outside the park. The trail narrowed down and I think her sled was too much for a novice (and tiny) girl. I noticed her not behind me so I went back and found her off the trail stuck in powder. I got her sled back on the trail (I had lived in Maine previously and had some experience with snowmobiles). She then took off in front of me not fast at all but went off the side of the trail again into a tree. EMS pulled her out on a sled, then ground transport to nearest facility about 60 or 80 miles south (rexburg?). They transferred her to Idaho Falls.
 
pikespeakmtnman said:
How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
Click to expand...

You never know if you're dealing with America's most wanted. Always ID.
 
tonycondon said:
i prefer to not get any govt entity involved when i land out. i'm pretty sure the "permission to move the aircraft" was Barney Fife calling the local FSDO asking what to do and the inspector saying they didn't care, move it if they want to. not an accident or incident not their problem.
Click to expand...

Yeah I forgot the smiley. ;)
 
Didn't the article say that they had his name from his certificate?? It would be interesting to know what else they were asking for.
 
Jim_R said:
Okay, hold on. Maybe I'm going to get shot, here, but as a reminder, here's the text of the 5th amendment:

So: Grand Jury indictments for big crimes, no double jeopardy, no self-incrimination, and due process of law / compensation before your stuff gets yanked or you get stuck in jail.

Where does it say that you're free to refuse to cooperate with reasonable requests from law enforcement ("What's your name, sir?") without suffering the consequences? That's part of "due process of law".

What other outcome do you envision? That the cops would just get bored and leave?
Click to expand...

Houston, I think we've found the problem. ^^^^

Mind = blown.
 
pikespeakmtnman said:
How is the cop knowing the guys name going to change anything? Landing a glider in a field isn't illegal, so there is no reason for the cop to ID the pilot...all the cop has to do is help the guy out. Seems like most LEOs have forgotten that their mission is to "protect and SERVE" not harass, intimidate and arrest.
Click to expand...

SCOTUS has upheld numerous times that police are not required by law to protect anyone. Period. End of story.

Serve? That's a political issue.

But "Protect and Serve" is Marketing material only, printed on the pretty cars with flashy lights.

The catch-all law most people are charged with when Officers feel like detaining someone with no other law to cite, is the vague "Interfering with a Police Officer" laws that most jurisdictions have.

And without a recording device, it's your word against theirs.
 
Lots of things to be outraged about in this world. A poorly written article with incomplete facts from Central Washington doesn't rise too high on the Outrage Needed Scale.

Likely much more to the story.
 
denverpilot said:
SCOTUS has upheld numerous times that police are not required by law to protect anyone. Period. End of story.

Serve? That's a political issue.

But "Protect and Serve" is Marketing material only, printed on the pretty cars with flashy lights.

The catch-all law most people are charged with when Officers feel like detaining someone with no other law to cite, is the vague "Interfering with a Police Officer" laws that most jurisdictions have.

And without a recording device, it's your word against theirs.
Click to expand...

LEOs are serving someone, it's just a question of whom.

Unless we live in a police state, the mission of law enforcement should be to at least serve the population, according to the will of the population, not the government. For that matter, that should also be the mission of everyone who works in government. That USED to be the mindset of law enforcement and the courts. I'll leave it to others to opine on how well that's working out these days.


JKG
 
Last edited:
So the guy landed off, cops show up to "investigate" not that they have the expertise to know what they are even looking at, the guy presets his license, says he doesn't want to talk to them and is arrested?!

I never talk to cops, here is my license and "I mean no disrespect however I have nothing further to say to you".

Welcome to China!
 
NineThreeKilo said:
So the guy landed off, cops show up to "investigate" not that they have the expertise to know what they are even looking at, the guy presets his license, says he doesn't want to talk to them and is arrested?!

I never talk to cops, here is my license and "I mean no disrespect however I have nothing further to say to you".

Welcome to China!
Click to expand...
I am not sure from my reading of the article that is how it went down. It seemed to me that the article suggested that he refused to say anything to the police, they arrested him, they found his pilot ID, and that is how they discovered who he was.

As bad as it is here, I still think we have more rights than the average mainland Chinese citizen, though sometimes I do wonder.
 
what is the big deal? police get called by a passerby, they don't know if it is an accident or not. Once they go to the scene they have to write up a report of some kind, their world runs on paper just like everyone else's. Talk to the guy and help him put some accurate facts on paper. What is so hard about that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top