Originally Posted by
DaveReidUK
Yes, that's one explanation. She decided knowingly to risk her Global Entry status, and a potential $1000 fine, so that she would have something to munch on her connecting flight.
It's equally feasible that, being caught in possession of said illicit piece of fruit, she offered the excuse that she thought was most likely to get her off, and decided that "I forgot I had it" wouldn't cut the mustard. Having instead offered the explanation that Delta had given her it, which clearly didn't work either, she can hardly now backtrack and claim that if she had remembered, she would have declared it.
There is nothing in the reported facts that disproves either hypothesis.
Oh, there's plenty she's said to support she isn't bright enough to foresee the consequences of her own actions...
1. She stated she thinks the most important part of the story is that Delta gave her the apple and didn't warn her, so we know she's flippant about her own responsibilities when it comes to knowing what a Global Entry passenger should know.
2. She imagines she's been "treated like a criminal", so we know her sense of reality is skewed.
3. She imagines she has a court case because Delta provided her the apple.
Most people who make an honest mistake give an honest answer. Your hypothesis isn't supported by anything the woman has said, and indeed it involves supposing she purposely told an outright lie to the Agent in an attempt to cover up what is a....as it's been repeatedly pointed out by oh so many.... common, human mistake of omission. Which brings us to...
4. Your hypothesis suggests she lied herself into being at odds with her declaration answer, whereas if she had indeed forgotten the apple and then told the truth to the Agent, her answer would accurately reflect the situation. The declaration says simply "I am bringing in any fruits..etc etc". and she answered 'No". If she had merely forgotten she had the apple and she answered the Agent honestly "I forget I had it", then her explanation backs up the incorrect answer "No" on the declaration. In this scenario the woman hasn't lied, she has merely made a mistake for whatever reason.
In your version she has likewise forgotten she had the apple, but then inexplicably lies in a way that tells the Agent she knew she had the apple all along. Whether she's blaming Delta or not, admitting she knew she had it at odds with what she had just answered on the declaration at the kiosk minutes before. So not only does she make a mistake, she lies for good measure while the agent is standing there listening to her say things that while she may believe sounds like a good excuse to his ears, at the same time means she knowingly lied at the kiosk she was just at. Furthermore, she elaborated on the lie in a way that pointed to her not knowing she couldn't "save it for the next flight" even as a Global Entry. And still she's persisting in her lie, not only to the media but has indicated she plans to pursue repeating the lies to a judge in a courthouse as. Highly unlikely.
I maintain, and go by her statements. If she had just forgotten, she would have said so. The "she forgot" hypothesis is now resting on her imagined lies that not only make her look dumber and put her in hotter water, but that she'll pursue media attention using them and legal action to tell her lies to a judge instead of just paying her fine and shutting up.