Nobody's calling nobody a liar, any way up.
But the story, as reported at the head of this thread, and re-reported in The Grauniad today, is told from one side only - that of the aggrieved passenger and her US lawyer. Bear in mind that US lawyers are not ethically bound to stick to the truth. There is only the briefest response from US law enforcement (in The Grainuad) concerning a possibly-different state of affairs than what the suspect described. In other words, this stream of outrage at the awful violations visited upon an innocent passenger is based solely on what she says happened to her.
Apparently, there is surveillance video of the security breach which sparked the incident. Let's wait and see what that shows, shall we? She claims that she was "waved through" security checks by security personnel, something I have an awfully hard time believing. But the tape will tell the tale.
The strength and vehemence of her protestations about her treatment after her arrest leads me to have suspicions. There seems to be an awful lot of concentration on the alleged indignities of her incarceration (welcome to jail, folks, you're not in Kansas anymore) and a tendency to gloss over exactly what happened that caused it.
If it is found (as I suspect) that she slipped through a security checkpoint because she was in a hurry, I wonder how big and bold that will play in the newspapers?
llater,
llamas