Virgin Pilot held on Drink allegations

[LanFranc]

News reports of a Virgin Atlantic pilot detained in Washington prior to operating flight. Flight 22 / 18th I believe. Suspected of being under the influence of alcohol. Looks like one way or another we are all in for increased scrutiny at security.
..Make that the 19th....

[Whispering Giant]

BBC news 24 are reporting that a Virgin Atlantic pilot is being held under the suspicion of being under the influence of Alcohol http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/default.stm


hopefully this will turn out to be false.

[Clear_Prop]

Whispering Giant:

The link you posted just took me to the main BBC news page, which doesn't seem to have a link to the article any more. Anyway, I dug a little deeper and found the article in "The Americas" section, so here's a link straight to that page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3336255.stm

Doesn't really say a hell of a lot though beyond your straight report of the story!

[Airbubba]

Tipsy Virgin pilot removed from plane

Dec 20, 2003

The captain of a Virgin Atlantic airliner about to fly from Washington to London was removed from the plane after he was suspected of being drunk.

Police at Washington's Dulles Airport were still investigating the incident involving a Boeing 747-400 jet, which was scheduled to carry 383 passengers.

"We haven't charged him with anything at this point," said Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority.

However, Virgin Atlantic canceled its Flight 22 to Heathrow, London's main airport, and rescheduled it for Saturday evening, an airline spokesman said.

"The pilot has been suspended with immediate effect and will face an internal inquiry," the spokesman said.

Virgin has put up the passengers at area hotels and promised them a free future flight, he said.

An airport transportation security screener alerted police that pilot might be drunk.

After an interview on the plane, the pilot was removed before any of the passengers had boarded, Hamilton said.

Reuters

http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,244361-1-9,00.html

___________________________

Pilot Detained After Alcohol Detected

Friday, December 19, 2003 11:06 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot was detained shortly before his flight Friday night after security screeners detected alcohol on his breath, according to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority.

Virgin Atlantic Flight 22, scheduled to leave Washington Dulles International Airport for London's Heathrow at 7:15 p.m., was canceled after the pilot was escorted off the plane by airport police.

Police responded to a call by the Transportation Safety Administration reporting suspicion of a pilot being under the influence of alcohol.

The pilot had gone through security screening and boarded the plane, said Tara Hamilton, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority spokeswoman. He was being held and questioned at the airport Friday evening.

Virgin Atlantic spokesman John Riordan said 383 passengers were scheduled for the flight. They are being accommodated at hotels and are rescheduled for an evening flight Saturday.

http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=807969&tw=wn_wire_story

[Khaosai]

Hi, thoughts with the crewmember concerned. Hopefully turn out as false allegations. Just checked my logbook and the IAD trip departs around 2240Z, approx 28 hrs after arriving.

[Willie Nelson]

Seems pretty cut and dry to me, I can't imagine a security guard having an axe to grind.................anyway time will tell.

There used to be a very good book going around that talked of the bad old days and pilots flying around drunk and high or on no sleep after the all night parties of old, can anyone remenber this one?

Willie

[Coconuts]

Khaosai

I'd like to think that you might spare a thought for his potential pax too. Or are they just mere SLF, not quite the same status as some of these god almighty pilots in their own mind?

If the allegations prove correct they could have had put their lifes put in danger by his selfish behaviour or do they really not matter in the equation, while you rally around your own regardless of the possible potential consequences of their indulgent, undisciplined, reckless behaviour. Poor drunk pilots me granny, I pity their pax & anyone else who has to put up with their irresponsible, childish behaviour & the sooner their weeded out of the industry ther better because we'd all be better off without them. If the allegations prove correct he deserves everything that's coming to him & more IMHO. :mad:

What is it with pilots & alcohol anyway? :rolleyes:

[ETOPS]

Coconuts

What is it with pilots & alcohol anyway?

Funny that - We quite often say " what is it with passengers & alcohol anyway?

[Khaosai]

Coconuts, whoa whoa chap, take it easy. I appreciate the professional aspect of the job, so yes drinking and flying don't mix. I think we need to wait and see what the outcome is. Your name conjures up memories of a deserted beach in the indian ocean........so chill out. Rgds.

[Coconuts]

ETOPS

Not with this pax you don't besides they don't have hundreds of peoples lives in their care so you can't make the same equation. Maybe there all tanking up before their flights cause there afraid it might be flown by some tanked up pilot, would you blame them?

(Oh & what's it with the weird homepage mate, thought that kinda thing was a no no on here)????

Khaosai

This subject has been bothering me for a long time, but I've been biting my lip each time it keeps up, sorry that you had to be sounding board for my pent up wrath, just the way you worded it mate.

[caniplaywithmadness]

There have been too many instances lately of pilots turning up for flights smelling of alcohol and these have been helthily debated on this site.

However, I can't seem to remember an occasion when a pilot has been arrested on suspicion of being over the limit for an evening flight, all the ones I can remember have been the 1st flight of the day.

Any pilot who turns up for an evening flight smelling of alcohol has either had one hell of a drinking session the night before or has bee totally irresponsible and neglectful of his duties by having had drinks in the afternoon prior to the flight.

I sincerely hope that these allegations are proved to be false but the fact remains that drinking and flying, like drinking and driving is something to be frowned upon and discouraged.

[FlapsOne]

What bugs me about this, and indeed some previous incidents, is why the 'security staff' or whoever, allow the Pilot they are suspicious of to get as far as the aircraft!

Indeed, in this case, they even managed to board 300+ pax before doing anything. There must have been 30+ minutes notice if this event, during which boarding continued and further disruption was assured.

This would have been far less public and newsworthy had the original suspicions been acted on immediately.

There is a hint of unnecessary delay here that elevated this allegation to headline status.

[Pressed On]

Coconuts - you don't have to look too far back when passengers ended up being responsible for hundreds of lives with devastating consequences.

If the allegations are true then the culprit should indeed be hung out to dry and let it be a lesson to anyone else abusing responsibility in such a way.

If, as Khaosi was suggesting, it's all a big mistake (which I hope it is) then my thoughts will also be with the person concerned.

If there is a big problem "with pilots and alcohol" then don't bite your lip spit it out and let's hear about it.

:confused:

[L337]

Coconuts.

What do you do for a living?

Besides being perfect that is.

L337

[LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK]

Coconuts,

What exactly do you do ?

Generalising that pilots and alcohol are inextricably linked is not true. The problem is miniscule when you bear in mind how many flights are operated in the world every day. If, and it is if, he has been stupid then he will pay the consequences of his actions, lose his job, probably be unable to find employment again in the industry and have to deal with the knock-on effects on his family and their lives this Christmas.

Perhaps if you were a pilot, you might begin to understand the stresses many have to suffer, being away from home, having to cope with time zone changes, disrupted sleep patterns causing fatigue and tiredness, night flying etc etc.

And don't think I am defending him if he is guilty because I am not, but I can understand why it happens. People jump into cars every day thinking they are fit to drive when they are not, endangering their lives and others. Ever done it yourself ?

[DB6]

caniplay etc. ,...or has just used an alcohol-soaked wipe to clean his headphones?

[Maximum]

Coconut The freedom of the internet is a wonderful thing on the whole, but the downside is it gives a disproportionate importance to the biased ramblings of people like yourself.

You say about pilots, you rally around your own regardless of the possible potential consequences of their indulgent, undisciplined, reckless behaviourThe thing is, this is just not true. Professional pilots are nearly to a man and woman amongst the most disciplined, self-controlled and responsible set of individuals you could find. The job demands nothing less - it's as simple as that.

The real fact is that the incidence of alcohol as a contributory factor in airline accidents is simply not statistically significant. But I guess that's just not exciting enough for you.

Why don't you go jump on another bandwagon.

[normal_nigel]

Willie Nelson


Seems pretty cut and dry to me, I can't imagine a security guard having an axe to grind

How can you possibly say that without knowing all the facts or are you a Washington Law Enforcement officer?

As for the security guards how much do you think they earn?

Prick

[Scottie]

The thing is, this is just not true. Professional pilots are nearly to a man and woman amongst the most disciplined, self-controlled and responsible set of individuals you could find. The job demands nothing less - it's as simple as that.

Haven't had such a laugh in ages :}

[Nigel Molesworth]

Hey, coconuts; have you never driven more than 30mph in a built up area? Never?!!?

And if the crew member is found innocent (i.e. not over the limit), then who pays the pax hotel bills - who refunds Virgin? And in this litignous world, can't we sue the authorities/"security" for delays, missed connections, etc ...??? :}

[Maxfli]

I would ask those contributing to bear the following in mind.

The Captain of the recent BA Oslo incident was hounded by the press for 11 days. The media were camped outside his house for the entire duration until his blood test returned with a result of zero alcohol in his blood, therefore no more headlines - story over. By this time the pressure was so intense he had resigned.

I would hope that those who are aware of this pilot's identity refrain from revealing it.

[maxalt]

until his blood test returned with a result of zero alcohol in his blood

Wow! Thats news to me Maxfli. And good news too!

So why hasn't THAT been publicised a little more? There wasn't a mention of it, even here, until you just made that post!

Where do you get your information? If this is true it needs to be highlighted a bit more, don't you think!

[bizflyer]

I'm just an interested passenger so I can't really understand this issue even arising. The question I asked on a similar topic about a BA pilot a few weeks ago was never really answered so here goes again.....

IF this chap is guilty - or just thinking about other proven cases in the past - the crews concerned must be aware that they are over the limit.

The limit is so low that if a security guard or anybody else for that matter suspects they have been drinking then they surely must be well over the very low tolerance levels allowed. Why don't they just call in sick?

OK, this would cause serious hassle for all concerned arranging a relief crew etc and delayed departures, but holding up in a hotel room for a few hours must be referable to throwing it all away? I know this would be dishonest but surely it's better than losing your job, possibly a lifetimes work or worse.

[ww1]

Coconuts
Why have you already decided the pilot is guilty? Not only that, you think all of us are drunks staggering from airport bar to airport bar. I can appreciate you having your own opinion but you have to have at least some support for what you say. Just because you say something doesn't make it so. Maybe you have a bone to pick with a particular pilot? If so, please know that there are those of us who are responsible and who respect the trust the passengers put in us.
peace

[Airbubba]

Pilot Suspected of Drinking
Virgin Atlantic Aviator Held; Dulles-London Flight Canceled

By Clarence Williams and Martin Weil
Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, December 20, 2003; Page B01

A pilot for Virgin Atlantic Airways was detained at Dulles International Airport for a possible drinking violation last night, shortly before he was to fly almost 400 passengers to London, authorities said.

"One of our pilots has been detained by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police on suspicion of being under the influence of alcohol," said John Riordan, a spokesman for Virgin Atlantic.

Amy von Walter, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, said a screener did "detect the smell of alcohol" at an airport checkpoint.

The pilot proceeded to the cockpit of the 747, where airline officials confronted him, then asked police to remove him, an airports authority spokeswoman said.

FAA regulations prohibit consumption of alcohol within eight hours of flying, an FAA spokesman said. He said the blood alcohol limit is 0.04.

The pilot's name could not be learned, and no information about his background was available. Late last night, the airports authority spokeswoman said that the pilot was being detained while an investigation was pursued but that no charges had been filed. The airline said the pilot had been suspended.

The flight was canceled before passengers boarded, and hotel accommodations were found for them. A replacement pilot was expected to fly them to London today, the airline spokesman said.

"We're all very upset," said passenger Martin Kind of Annapolis. He said that his wife and son were in London and that he had planned to join them there today. "Now I'm going to have to schlep all the way back to Annapolis or stay in the hotel."

Referring to the pilot, Kind asked, "What was he thinking?"

FAA and airline spokesmen said incidents such as last night's are rare. Riordan called passenger safety and security the airline's "number one priority" and said Virgin Atlantic followed a "strict no-alcohol policy."

Riordan said the flight, designated as VS 022, was scheduled to leave at 7:30 p.m., with 383 passengers -- almost a full load. The airliner was to land at 7:05 a.m.

Riordan said Virgin's duty manager at Dulles told the passengers the reason for the flight's cancellation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17005-2003Dec20.html

[Sick Squid]

Time and events overtook me on this post, hence the edit from my original.... I would request that people do not debate using information they have about this gentleman, as that may be prejudicial to his case and bring unnecessary distress to his family and friends. Remember; innocent until proven guilty. Debate generics by all means, and aspects of the case that are relevant, but please leave the personal for elsewhere.

Thanks.

[Jet II]

Sick Squid

As this poor guys name is plastered over practicaly every news site on the net, is it not a bit pointless to try and keep it secret on this site?

No. The fundamental difference on this site is that people can post with knowledge of the person, both with good intentions and with bad, as happened recently following the last allegations. Keeping the debate generic respects the gentleman's right to privacy and a fair hearing, and as a fellow pilot we owe him that even if other medias do not have that respect.

[Wedge]

He has now been charged by the Police in Washington with attempting to operate an aircraft while intoxicated which would suggest there is a reasonable body of evidence against him.

I agree Jet II, he has been named now by the BBC and is named in the links to news stories above, but if the moderators have requested he not be named he then that should be respected.

Hey, coconuts; have you never driven more than 30mph in a built up area?

I have, I do all the time, but I can't see how that is a comparable offence to turning up to fly a large passenger jet drunk.

Note: Notwithstanding the above, I am not presuming that this man is guilty. According to Virgin, he has been with the airline 14 years and has an unblemished record.

[Tandemrotor]

Only a question, but who can tell me, how many airline accidents have been CAUSED by drunken pilots?

More to the point, how many have been caused by pilots with 0.2 or 0.4 pro mill readings?

Fatigue is a FAR more significant factor than these levels of alcohol.

But of course politicians don't tighten the rules regarding fatigue, they slacken them. Fatigue is not easily tested, nor smelled on the breath, and airlines seem to want ever more work from fewer and fewer pilots!

Let's get these issues in perspective!

[WeLieInTheShadows]

While I can see Sick Squids point, Jet II has a valid one as well.

However...Took me 3 clicks from this page to find the guys name out. So if you really have to know, then it's out there on every other news site for all to find and therefore no real need to put it on here I guess.

I'm just amazed that Virgin pilots drink as well, I thought everyone else was T total apart for BA crews, however the papers still manage to put BA back in the spotlight in their articles. As has been said on here as well, forgetting to include the fact that people have been vindicated.:ugh:

Todays papers... tommorrows trash.

[ormonde]

On another tack: it does seem a pity that the passengers are subjected to such a long delay and Virgin incurs extra costs. Airlines have reciprocal technical agreements. Here comes a naïve question: — at a large airport like Washington would it be totally impossible to have a crewing arrangement which would allow for a type-rated replacement before the rest of the crew are out of hours? Does this already happen (but was not possible in this case)?

[DSR10]

The recent stranded Virgin passengers in Miami suffered the same fate....are tonights crew due for a slagging off as they walk to the gate....or will a "free" ticket cool them off.
You would think that economics would dictate a "standby crew"
on the East Coast within 3 hours of most Virgin locations.

[miss d point]

sorry to hear it, here goes the press again !
tried and convicted and you just know the lawyers are going to have a field day,
what with old miss's smith being so traumatised that she barely goes out anymore ! - ' maybe a stress payout will help her confront the terrible nightmares she is now suffering !!!
if the individual is guilty well he has no place in flying but we don't know that yet.

The press would be better off having a look at night operations where crews are so tired they are falling asleep.
Alot more common but hey doesn't fall under that big political umbrella called 'enhanced security' and therefore little less headline grabbing !

[Berenger Saunier]

Ladies and Gentlemen, please!

Could we perhaps refrain from reaching for the rope long enough to examine the human factors aspects of this report? Rather than the presumption of guilt, we would do well to reflect on the nature of long haul operations, and the ever increasing commercial pressure applied to these pilots that lend themselves to uncharacteristic behavior.
Rest periods are minimised to the letter of the law and time off between rotations is becoming less and less, its no wonder that people make judgmental errors.

Without prejudice to the Virgin Captain, and with a raised eyebrow as to the appropriateness of security staff making unqualified judgments as to the fitness for flight of professional airmen, I would suggest that regulatory scrutiny be applied in the first instance to the pilots duty hours for the preceding months, and the number of time zones and prime REM sleep period violations he’s be forced by his employer to endure.

We’re human beings, not robots.

[behind_the_second_midland]

Maxalt

I can categorically tell you that Captain McAuliffe's blood test returned negative. However this was not reported by the scum at the tabloid press. He resigned because he is a highly decent honourable man.

With that in mind why don't the sad little people on here who are so quick to condemn wind their necks in.

Just because the Virgin Captain has been charged doesn't mean he's guilty of an accusation by someone who could earn more at McDonalds.

However I suppose you haven't got anything better to do.

[Mach Buffet]

BoeingMEL, are you some sort of lowlife that writes for the tabloid press?

Who the ffuk do you think you are casting aspertions on a highly respectable professional who has been found to have had 0 - ZERO alcohol upon testing?

And what exactly do you mean by this fact being "... VERY different to the events which were reliably relayed elsewhere"?

Reliable - Where?
Elsewhere?

[hobie]

if you are prosecuted for Drink/Driving in a car you will probably screw up your life for a year or so .......

if you get caught drink/driving an aircraft (or attempting to do so) you are probably going to screw up your life for good !!!!

My brother in Law has his own rule ....... 24hrs before a trip - absolutely zero Alcohol !!!!! ..... no exceptions - period !!!!

it sounds tough but it works ....

[Spitoon]

Although I have no view on the Virgin incident - the Police etc will do whatever they do in cases like this and I hope that the allegations are shown to be groundless and then given the same level of media coverage - I do have an interest in aviation and alcohol.

In the UK there is now legislation that sets absolute limits for the amount of alcohol in blood for people involved in operating, maintaining or controlling aircraft. The CAA recently published the following words The “prescribed limit” for a maintenance engineer is the same as for a driver on the road, at 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. However, the limit for those in categories 1 to 3 is a mere 20 milligrams per 100 millilitres. The human body manufactures its own alcohol, and it is possible for the level of that ‘self manufactured’ alcohol to almost reach that 20 milligram level, so it would be prudent for anyone who is subject to the Act to think of the permitted level as equating to no consumed alcohol at all.Assuming this to be correct (it comes from GASIL (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_gad_gasil4of2003.pdf)), and in the interests of accuracy, claims that anyone's blood/alcohol result is zero must be suspect.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

For those of us who belong to BALPA (The British Air Line Pilots Association) the house journal 'The Log' thudded on the doormat this week. On page 23, in the General Flight Safety News section, under the heading 'Alcohol Testing in the USA', it details with chilling accuracy, the procedure which would appear to have been followed in this instance.

[Airbubba]

Yep, drug and alcohol testing, still somewhat novel in the UK, has been the norm in the US for years now. Under our system, the alcohol limits for mechanics, flight attendants and dispatchers are the same as for pilots (.02% removal from duty, .04% loss of license and major legal woes).

Also, under our system, if you apply for rehab, it does seem to give you some legal protection.

In the recent America West incident in MIA, the pilots jumped bail to go to rehab right away. It annoyed the judge but they were later able to cop a walk on some of the more serious criminal charges (see: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-723americawest.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines ).

[visibility3miles]

I assume the pilot was tested, and that the end result will not rely on what somebody thought they smelled.

Still, however it turns out, you have a bunch of pax heading out or home for the holidays who were stranded at the airport. They won't be happy in any case, and they will remember being stranded even if they do not know if the pilot was guilty or not.

[Speedbird48]

To clear up some of the generalizations seen on this thread I would like to add a little.
First lets hope he doesn't prove positive, although if they cancelled the flight it seems cut and dried as a breath test would have cleared him quickly.
The fact that he got past the screeners is the same as the America West guys in Miami and that is that they must be seen with the intention of flying before they can be stopped. It is possible for a crew, that are suspected of being over the top, to sit in the cabin, or wait at the gate, and say we havn't been drinking for 8hrs before attempting to get in the front seats. Yes, I know they would catch hell for delaying the flight but they just might get away with the police action.
Another point to remember is that at least two pilots have been accused by the screeners at Dulles in the past few weeks and they proved to be completely sober. One of those was accused 4 hours after he had passed security and had a pissing contest with a screener due to the crew having to go through the passenger line as there were not enough screeners to run the employee line.
These people are employed by the TSA and seem to be untouchable.
Lets hope this case works out OK but I have just heard his name in the TV news and he had been charged so it is not looking good.

[phnuff]

PPL making a comment here (sorry)


There have been a lot of comments about the alcohol 'policy' but may I just mention that zero tolerance of alcohol (or other chemical entertainments), is now normal in some UK organisations . I am currently on assignment as a consultant at Network Rail, and it is hammered into you from the day you walk into the place that this policy not only applies to people who get close to trains/signals etc., but to the tea boy, the computer jockey and the window cleaner. And, they do random tests ( I heard of 3 in London last week).


I hope like hell this turns out to be nothing more than a mistake because it seems to me that here is a guy(?) at the top of his game who has just booked himself a quick exit from a very good career. If he has turned up, stinking of booze for a flight at (7pm ish), he has either had a bender and a half the night before or has blatently disreguarded rules and common sense in the hours predeeding the flight.

[FlapsOne]

Rehab for a couple of drinks....... now I know it's time to retire!

Interesting that one report says the pilot was removed from the flightdeck BEFORE pax were boarded, but the interviews on SKY with some of the pax had them talking about how they were on board when the pilot was removed.

Someone's got it very wrong...................

I too have heard from, a very good source, that the BA skipper from the incident a few weeks ago, has official paperwork to say that he was indeed free from alcohol.

He has applied for another job somewhere else..........let's hope he's treated fairly.

If it had been me, I would want the certificate (or whatever) on the front page of every newspaper in the land!

[Airbubba]

>>I too have heard from, a very good source, that the BA skipper from the incident a few weeks ago, has official paperwork to say that he was indeed free from alcohol.

He has applied for another job somewhere else..........let's hope he's treated fairly.<<

If he was really innocent, why wasn't he reinstated with full back pay and seniority? Doesn't BA have a union?

[currawong]

The "smell" of alcohol or even a positive breath test do not necessarily mean the individual has been drinking.

Top marks for those towing the do not fly drunk line here but nowhere has it been established to be more than a suspicion.

Could be he had just used a popular brand of mouthwash.

Happens all the time. Makes headlines.

Matter is resolved. No headlines.

Wonder why....

[Airbubba]

>>Could be he had just used a popular brand of mouthwash.

Happens all the time. Makes headlines.<<

Don't know if it happens all the time but here's an earlier case involving breath mints:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79661

Also, here's another case where it appears the test was negative:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69849

[miss d point]

:mad: :mad: :mad:


bbc breakfast news have just reported the story again but this time linked it with the 'ba pilots accused of drinking in oslo'.
I read on this forum that the ba crew were clear ? is that definate ? someone should tell the bbc if it is .

7-0am news - sad i know !

[Devils Advocate]

w.r.t. If he was really innocent, why wasn't he reinstated with full back pay and seniority ?

Probably because he has brought the company name into 'disrepute' - regardless of whether or not he was under the influence of anything.

More often than not if you do anything which plasters your employers name across the 'news' you will very likely get the boot, either that or be invited to 'fall on your sword' - albeit that the end result is the same, reputation in tatters, and a strong likelihood of no job thereafter.

[Airbubba]

From the Sunday Washington Post, bowdlerized for PPRuNe:

Pilot Pulled From Dulles Flight Faces Charge Over Drinking

By Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, December 21, 2003; Page A14

A Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot who was removed from a flight at Dulles International Airport was charged yesterday with operating an aircraft under the influence of alcohol and ordered to appear in Loudoun County District Court tomorrow.

[redacted], 55, was taken to the Loudoun County Adult Detention Center in Leesburg just before midnight Friday, about five hours after he was to fly a Boeing 747 with almost 400 passengers to London, authorities said. Flight VS022 was canceled before passengers boarded, and another pilot was to fly them across the Atlantic last night.

[redacted], a U.S. citizen based in Britain who has worked for Virgin for 14 years, was suspended immediately by the airline and faces up to five years in prison if convicted of the felony charge. The Federal Aviation Administration said it would conduct a civil investigation that could cost [redacted] his pilot's license.

Federal regulations prohibit consumption of alcohol within eight hours of flying and prohibit the pilot from having a blood-alcohol level above 0.04. It was unclear yesterday where and when [redacted] had been drinking and what his blood-alcohol level was. A person familiar with the case said [redacted] had piloted a flight from London to Dulles that arrived Thursday night and had spent the next 24 hours here, staying at a hotel in the D.C. area.

"We're shocked and surprised," said John Riordan, a Virgin Atlantic spokesman. "This pilot has an unblemished record, and it's very out of character for him."

Riordan said the airline put all 383 passengers up at hotels and gave each a voucher for a free flight anywhere Virgin flies. Virgin CEO Sir Richard Branson wrote a letter of apology that was to be given to each passenger on the replacement flight to London last night.

The incident spotlighted what some airline safety experts say could be a growing problem in the industry. There have been at least five cases of pilots being removed from commercial aircraft in the United States for drinking in the past 17 months and additional examples overseas, said Barry Sweedler, the former head of the National Transportation Safety Board's Office of Safety Recommendations. He said it was unclear whether the numbers were increasing or whether more pilots were simply being caught by intensified security since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"It's not a major aviation safety issue, but it is a troubling one," said Sweedler, who now edits an aviation safety newsletter. "This is sort of a wake-up call to the industry. And the Dulles incident is very serious. He was very close to flying that plane."

William Shumann, an FAA spokesman, said the agency "obviously is treating this very, very seriously." But he noted that there were more than 60,000 licensed pilots in the United States. "If you have a few cases of pilots who are, if you will, flying drunk, that's a very small number."

If the FAA determines that [redacted] violated U.S. air regulations, he could lose his pilot's license if that license were issued in the United States, Shumann said. If [redacted] has a British license, the FAA would alert British authorities and leave any action up to them. Virgin Atlantic could not say yesterday what type of license [redacted] holds.

To obtain a U.S. pilot's license, [redacted] would have had to pass a medical regimen that includes physical exams every six months -- co-pilots get them only once a year -- and random drug and alcohol testing.

Law enforcement officials said the incident began when someone at the airport smelled alcohol on [redacted]. It was unclear whether a screener noticed the smell or whether it was picked up when [redacted] was near the ticket counter area.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police Department was contacted and notified Virgin Atlantic. Airline officials boarded the plane and spoke to [redacted] in the cockpit before summoning airport police, who escorted him off, said Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the authority. She said [redacted] was cooperative when taken off the plane.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17864-2003Dec20.html

[fireflybob]

Firstly no comment on this particular case since innocent until proved guilty and as far as the press are concerned I stopped buying/reading the newspapers over six months ago and do not watch the TV or listen to radio news!

I am now employed in the Railway Industry (because I cannot currently get a job in aviation but that is another story). Right from the outset at our induction much education and stress was placed on the Drugs/Drinks Rules and that if anyone was caught we would be offered the door. I can expect to be randomly checked at ANY time and checks are automatic following any incident or accident.

I cannot think of a reason why aviation should be excluded from this type of check/control. This would, of course, include all involved - flight crew, Air Traffic, Ground Staff etc. If it's good for other transport industries why cannot aviation be the same.

I am NOT saying that there is a culture of alcohol abuse in aviation - my personal experience is that aircrew are very sensible and obey the rules but in the current media frenzy pilots have to be seen as whiter than white. Also, as has been said above, there are other issues which are far more pressing from a flight safety point of view, fatigue FTL etc.

Finally, employers should be more proactive about teaching pilots stress management techniques and also providing recreational facilities whilst down route - such things as free membership of the local health club come to mind. I suppose the beancounters would baulk at such a crazy suggestion but they would, wouldn't they?

[FlapsOne]

Airbubba

He wasn't reinstated because he wasn't sacked!

He resigned.....big dfference.

Interesting potential headline though

"pilot brings airline into disrepute because he didn't do anything wrong but we had assisted in splashing allegations all over the media"

Give me strength!

[HotDog]

In a motor accident, both drivers are breathalysed as a matter of routine. Has anybody bothered to breathalyse the accuser (security screener) in this incident?

[paulo]

Assuming the prosecution are presenting tests as evidence, the condition and judgement of the accuser is irrelevent.

[HotDog]

Rumour has it that the pilot tested negative, in which case the prosecutor has lost his case. Perhaps the security bod smelt his own breath and made a false judgement?

[ILS27LEFT]

Alcohol vs Fatigue and mental aberration

Drunkenness and legal alcohol limit are not the same thing: it is totally wrong and immoral to use the term "drunkenness" for any case of traces of alcohol in the blood.
Knowing well the typology and mental capabilities of the US security screeners employed at US airports I seriously doubt that they could be as impartial and professional as a standard average European police officer.
Small traces of alcohol in the blood does not mean "drunkenness" as driving at 31mph in a 30mph limit area does not mean speeding.
Potentially if society would decide tomorrow to introduce a 10mph speed limit all over the country we would all be speeding. Suddenly we would all be breaking the law: similar logic could apply to the alcohol limits.
Introducing "zero level" policies in general does not help unless we decide all together within our society that we need to reach a "zero risk"society: this would mean for example the introduction of a 10mph speed limit all over Europe. Of course this would generate fantastic statistical figures for our governors with road related accidents and deaths close to the zero level. Then why shall we drive cars if we can drive at a maximum speed of 10mph? It would be a social aberration.
Alcohol zero limit is a good idea in terms of statistical trends and official figures but in reality does not bring any practical benefit to the safety of flying, especially when other major factors, which cannot be measured, are never taken into account, eg fatigue.
Unfortunately if we continue to reduce all "social risks" through zero level policies , our societies will soon end up without citizens, as all of us will be detained in a jail, either because we will be all speeding in a 5mph road or because we would be driving or flying
with a 0.000000001% of alcohol in our blood when the limit would be clearly set at 0.0%.
Very sad.
There should be a reasonable limit that would really affect performances, and not a ridiculous 0.0000....something% when other major immeasurable factors are not even mentioned (fatigue).

Honestly, I think this social trend is all terribly wrong and I feel sorry for anybody caught with minimum traces of anything in their lives who has suddenly seen his face on Sky News just above the title "Drunk Pilot"!...the aberration is already here!

[teifiboy]

I cant believe that in this day and age, that even though the guy hasn't been proved guilty, the guy's name, age and now where he lives is revealed (even on Ceefax). Of course he MUST be guilty. No-one has ever been wrongly accused eh?

[paulo]

Unpleasant though it is, this kind of reportage isn't new, nor is it unique to this kind of allegation. Relatively few people accused of anything have any kind of protection. The media are obliged to use qualifying words such as "alleged", "accused" or whatever, but otherwise can go quite far to painting a picture of guilt.

Sky News are saying he failed a breath test (???), whilst most others are using the term "drunk", but without substantiating it (e.g. directly quoting a witness who judged the pilot as being in that condition).

:confused:

[miss d point]

would be good if the test came back negative, would the press look silly, but bet they wouldn't say so, and what of virgin ? bad press - yes, but if he was innocent would they continue his employment ?
Does anyone know if BA offered the oslo crew their jobs back ? - false accusations are costing people their careers'

[hart744]

Bravo, Hotdog! Well said. :ok:

[Airbubba]

>>He wasn't reinstated because he wasn't sacked!

He resigned.....big dfference.<<

Well, if he suddenly decided that he didn't want to fly for BA any more I guess he certainly had that right. I am still a little puzzled that he would quit to demonstrate that the accusations were totally false. Sounds a little like an urban legend to me...

>>would be good if the test came back negative, would the press look silly, but bet they wouldn't say so, and what of virgin ? bad press - yes, but if he was innocent would they continue his employment ?
Does anyone know if BA offered the oslo crew their jobs back ? - false accusations are costing people their careers'<<

I agree, if the accusations were false, you would think that the union, if it is really a union, would get the jobs back with full back pay and seniority. I've seen it happen several times over the years in the U.S. In some of the U.S. cases the allegations were likely true but the paperwork was mishandled and the cases were overturned in arbitration on technical issues. But as has been explained here, I guess BALPA is to ALPA as Bollywood is to Hollywood.

[Tonkenna]

Well ITN have just tried him and found him guilty. They linked it to the Oslo incident saying that they had both resigned and been dismissed.

If journalists had said these kind of things that they are saying about this Virgin pilot in other cases I am sure that they would be in contempt, and certainly predudice a fair trial. ITN, what happened to innocent until proven guilty??!!

This kind of scare-mungering reporting sickens me. Don't get me wrong, I am all for a zero tollerence alcohol policy, but don't hang the guy until he has had a fair trial (not that that would happen in the UK after this kind of report).

ITN you report was :mad:

Tonks :*

[crewrest]

Hotdog, if the rumour is he tested negative, how come he's been charged?

[Bronx]

Some of the reports here quote a Dulles airport spokeswoman saying the security officials reported the pilot to a Virgin supervisor.

So how did the police get involved?

Did the supervisor call the police?
Would some supervisor have authority to do that without permission from someone in authority in the company?

Or did Virgin call the police?

Looks like it may have been handled badly at the Virgin end.

[Airbubba]

>>Did the supervisor call the police?
Would a supervisor have authority to do that without permission from someone high up in the company?

Or did Virgin call the police?<<

One version from today's Washington Post article:

"...Law enforcement officials said the incident began when someone at the airport smelled alcohol on [redacted]. It was unclear whether a screener noticed the smell or whether it was picked up when [redacted] was near the ticket counter area.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police Department was contacted and notified Virgin Atlantic. Airline officials boarded the plane and spoke to [redacted] in the cockpit before summoning airport police, who escorted him off, said Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the authority..."

[4PON4PIN]

Tonkenna ..et al
Could not agree more. Lead Headline news on TV referred to "Drunken Captain" or maybe it was pilot, (not sure), either way it was the use of the word "drunken" which so incensed me. What imagery does that conjure up in the general populace? I would suggest that such imagery is so far from the truth in this circumstance.
The courts and his Company will decide if and what action is necessary in due course.
In the meantime is there not one person who will join me in turning his/her thoughts to **** and his family for having to undergo such a traumatic ordeal at this time of year. Innocent or not, please find some charity towards all concerned and examine your own consciences. (Couldn't the press find a more fitting foto of the guy? Even the Pope would look a guilty mobster in a US police mug-shot)
Rules for crew are far, far more stringent than for motorists but consider if you were one point above the legal limit having consumed 2 pints of bitter having stopped at your local on the way home, would you accept an accusation that you were drunk ... methinks not. Had there been a minute residue from a few drinks the previous evening (Not at the club on the way home!) to tip a scale, or maybe a mouthwash following p.m.rest and shower,....whatever, its imagery you see in the reporting!
Drunken? ... total bollix!
As others have posted, great sensastionalism when accused but el zippo when proven innocent.:mad:

[Flying Lawyer]

Can someone familiar with the American legal system explain why the pilot is being kept in custody?
It seems unnecessary and OTT.

[Airbubba]

>>Can someone familiar with the American legal system explain why the pilot is being kept in custody?<<

I'm only a sea lawyer, but it is because he is facing felony charges and has not yet had an arraignment.

[bjcc]

This guy is not being charged with being drunk. Someone in an earlier post said clearly he's been changed with 'operating an aircraft under the influence of alcohol'. Not the same thing at all.

The mouthwash excuse is I'm afraid so much rubbish, been tried under Road Traffic law in the UK, failed. There would be no effect from mouth wash on an evidencial breath test machine 20 minutes after you had used the mouth wash (thats why you are asked in the UK by Police if you have used mouthwash and are required to take a breath test)

Other excuses used which failed are exessive eating of pickled onions and use of ciggaretts.

I assume the US system of Justice is much the same as the UK, in that before charging someone you need to have sufficent evidence to support that charge. In the UK, that would mean you had would have provided a specimin of breath on a calibrated evidenial breath test machine at a Police station. This would then produce a print out of the blood alcohol concentration, which is then the evidence used in court.

I agree there seems to be a problem with the press making a distinction between being drunk (assuming this guy was not) and having more alcohol in his blood than whatever the US use as a prescribed limit. However the fact he wasn't drunk is not the issue.

By the way 4PON4PIN, I wouldn't try 2 pints on the way home, as you may well find you are substantialy more over the limit than you think. The Home Office advice is 2.5 units of alcohol will put you over the drink drive limit, thats 2.5 half pints!

[paulo]

bjcc, minor correction: 2.5 'units' is 1.25 pints

[4PON4PIN]

BJCC /Paulo
No argument. Only trying to draw a comparison between 2 mins after a drink and 8hrs plus after a drink.
btw lowest vol beer with 1/3rd lemonade (dependant on size/metabolism/time/food etc,) should keep you within legal limits).
My post was not an endorsement to drink & drive, in fact I would not be averse to lower limits, but merely to
1.
raise the question if people would consider themselves "drunk"(tabloid) after consuming 2 pints. (am not talking about high vol stuff... 1/2 pint of that and i'm asleep anyway and missed the party!)

& Primarily
2. Think of the sensitivities of the family & friends of this guy at this time of year before posting condemnational judgements before the guy has had his day in court.

[Idunno]

It seems that there is a common denominator becoming evident in these recent incidents. Ground staff 'smelling alcohol' on the breath of pilots, jumping to a conclusion, and pilots being wrongly accused of being drunk (zero blood alcohol now reported in the two most recent events).

I'm not being facetious when I say this, but perhaps a handful of TicTacs on the crew bus might have saved some careers.

Not excusing drinking before flying mind you, not at all, but since a mere allegation now seems sufficient to bring down swift and final judgement....I'll be carrying my Polo Mints in future...just in case.

[bjcc]

Paulo...Ops...maths was never my strong point..I stand corrected!

Idunno
What exactly do you want people who smell alcohol on a pilots breath to do? Ignore it because they are flight deck crew? The accusation is easily made, and sometimes made for non too pure motives... However its easy to refute, just one continuous breath of between 10 and 30 seconds into an approved machine, game over...if no drink has been consumed no harm done... if he has been drinking ... Well only one person to take the blame. I really can't see why you are blaming the guy from security?????

[Jet II]

Idunno

Ground staff 'smelling alcohol' on the breath of pilots, jumping to a conclusion

I'm not being facetious when I say this, but perhaps a handful of TicTacs on the crew bus might have saved some careers.

Not excusing drinking before flying mind you


So what are you doing? - either the guy was drinking and over the limit or he was not. Its not rocket science.


If the ground staff suspect that a member of the flight crew is pissed what do you expect them to do? - the police/judiciary are the correct people to decide on this particular matter - if they are trusted to decide on whether you are drunk in charge of a car, why not an aircraft?

[Fangio]

If an incident occurs in Germany, however minor involving an aircraft, the pilots are automatically subjected to a breathalyser test. I have been witness to the police breathalysing a crew. The captain involved had consumed a whisky minature in his hotel room and was taken aback when the German police arrived later in the day at the hotel and demanded that he provided a breath test. The test of course proved positive, but fortunately he had a witness to confirm that he had had the drink in his room and no further action was taken and thankfully the press didn't get to hear about it or it would have been another case of "A drunken pilot"

[amanoffewwords]

You know the accident in Linate a couple of years ago was partly attributed (*) to the controller not questioning the responses of the pilot of the GA aircraft which crossed the runway at the wrong point.

Similarly, if a security person failed to react to suspicious circumstances such as those reported in this case and an accident happened you'd all be up in arms against him/her.

Ditto if he/she had failed to report a drunken passenger that went on to commit air rage.

You can't judge (as many of you are) the case in question unless you are directly involved in it, neither should you be speculating as to the causes, circumstances or final outcome, if anything to let the legal aspect take their course.

In short, as the saying goes you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

(*) Allegedly, the case is probably still being investigated.

[BlueDiamond]

is 2.5 units of alcohol will put you over the drink drive limit, thats 2.5 half pints!

bjcc, minor correction: 2.5 'units' is 1.25 pints

They're exactly the same ... 2.5 half pints = 1.25 pints.

:confused:

[Taras Bujlba]

My dear PPRuners

let me to make some conclusions or rather analises from everything I read from these 6(six!!!!) pages!!!Oh,my,oh my
what had happened to ,in my opinion,most atractive human activity in which I had been participating for 43 years!!!Of that 33 years as profi or 25 Years as Capt.Now,after all what I read,I am very hapy to be retired!!What kind of aviation is this,a?
Firstly : NO SMOKING!No more Davidoff Magnum ,now they are introducing .45 Magnum all together with steelreinforced doors!
Sec:No more fiddling with STW-Sexual harasment accusation are very serious!Specially if your wife heard about it!
Thrd:No MORE drinking!Not even a miniatures in hotel room!So,next step is - empty room minibar with mousetrap in or even worst CREW IN A ROW IN FRONT OF SECURITY STAFF,WITH JARS FULL OF URINE FOR MORNING ALCO TEST(Sorry for rude language!)
Forth:I do not dear to say this - but now I have to gaveup some of old habits because of present of different gender in cockpit.Even COCKPIT has to change name because "cockpit is small place in wich COCKS fights!"
Sorry,my intentions are not to insult oposite gender in FLIGHT DECK or throw around some MALE PILOT CHAUVINISTIC RUBISH!
When I did started my carier as F/O the first my instructor told me ,after I refused to "chears with W..",was:"If you could drink and fly GAVE UP FLYING!"
Of corse this is joke but do not forget- EVERY JOKE IS HALF THRUTH!

Yours faithfully
Taras!Soorry if any mistakes,you knoww...AGES MY DEAR PPRUNERS!

:{ :{

[Anthony Carn]

Baffles me why all pilots don't just turn tea-total.

No risk of misjudging intake. End of problem.

You'd think that alchohol was an essential component in sustaining human life, the way folks carry on. :rolleyes:


*Ducks below parapet, based upon previous experience of the reaction to come*

[Paterbrat]

... as a veritable hail of empties comes his way.

As has been noted by the gallary the culture has changed, our life has become more complex, faster and very much more crowded. Our indulgences in former times are no longer acceptable and are being rigorously scrutinised and legislated. Anybody who does not cast a fleeting thought towards these matters as he raises his particular beverage to his lips is guilty of a failure of judgement, and that in our profession is sternly if not always fately dealt with.

Tea? Certainly sir, Darjeeling or Long Island?

[DSR10]

"think that alchohol was an essential component in sustaining human life"

Very boreing life without it.....perhaps ALL commercial pilots should become members of the Taliband, Muslim Fundamentalists
etc.
An international strike to enforce working hours that would allow for a reasonable social life might be the answer.

Who are these failed PPL's and baggage handlers working as so called security anyway?

[FEBA]

The sad thing is that he's a real nice guy. I was shocked to see his picture in the Sunday Telegraph. Are they able to get away with this?
FEBA

[You splitter]

Just some thoughts after reading thru all this lot.

1. What ever happened to innocent before proven guilty?
2. Media sensationalsium yet again!
3. :mad: disgusting that once proven innocent sudenly the media
forget all about it.
4. Dont blame the ground staff and start questioning their
intelligence or how much they earn. What the hell has that
got to do with it. If you suspect someone of drinking before
flying then you have a duty of care to ensure the safety of
the aircraft and its pax too!
5. The meaning of the word "drunk" is completely differant to the
meaning of "above the legal limit".

All in all I guess we just have to wait for the facts and for the the authority to make their case. Same as every other process of criminal law. BTW has anyone actually seen any documented proof that the Oslo crew member was under the limit. Has it been reported anywhere? If so I reckon letters/emails/faxes should be direct at the media to ask why the fact this man is now in the clear has not been reported in the press. Surely the inital stories have bought his character into question!

[Capt.KAOS]

Pilot's Union blocked random alcohol tests (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/story.jsp?story=475418)

[keepitlit]

I do think there are a few ground staff in certain countries would only be too pleased to spill the beans on crew if they got the chance to,even though I dont drink below 10hrs I still worry about this to the extent that I dont enjoy a drink on a nightstop any more,resulting to the fact that no drinking is best and even more so for the next few months.
The reasoning of this is, when they bring in the testers in the UK you can be sure that just like the pionts system for motorists they will be out in force trying to catch out as many as possible.
If they want to dictate our lifes in our periods free from duty i.e. with the limit being so low that its a risk for even one drink,then they are dictating our lifes,rest included,
Compamies should bear the cost of this in flight pays and/or saleries and not the token hourly rates that are currently payed.


Rgds K.I.L.

[Daysleeper]

I'm not making any comment on the current case in NY, however it may have some bearing on the previous case in Norway where the crew had a positive breath test and (according to previous posts on PPRUNE) some or all had neg blood tests.
If you do get breath tested, be it for whatever reason, dont have it done in the cockpit. The breath test machines are not shielded from electrical interferance. So there is a chance that radio transmissions be it from acars or wherever could give a false positive. My advice is insist on a
private room off the aircraft.

Bit of a ramble and before anyone asks no i dont have any proof of this other than anecdotal evidence from a police officer friend of mine who says his machine always goes straight to red if he transmitts on his personal radio while the suspect is doing the test.

Daysleeper
Bingle Jells all the way.

[bjcc]

Daysleeper,

Yes a Personal radio can have that effect, and I presume so could some of the wiggly amp thingies on a flight deck. However that breath test is only a screening test, certainly in the UK, and gives reasonable grounds to suspect that someone has a blood alchol limit above the prescribed limit.
In the UK you would be arrested (which is not saying you are guilty) and taken to a Police Station. There you would take a further breath test on a calibrated machine which gives a print out admissable in court. That is then the evidence of having the blood alcohol concerntration above the prescribed limit. In other words even if something does interfere with the initial screening test it would not lead to an appearence before the magistrates for nothing.

[Denzil]

FEBA, I'm with you here, a "nice guy". But sadly in life stuff like this will always happen to the "nice guy". I also agree that it was sad to see the guy in a prison suit, is this the Americans out to show the world how they now police the air as well as everything else!!

What of the rest of the crew, it would be nice to think that the F/O would have stepped in to say something! How many crew are on a B744, over 20 in total and nobody thought to say something. Not saying it's right IF this was as reported, but it must have been able to be kept in-house.

[DSR10]

Step out of line and suffer the wrath of RB....noooooooo chance.

[Old Man Rotor]

Been around the International Circuit for years, but a little closer to the ground than most.

With all the Media Photo's and Police Interviews on the International Media, surely the % of so called liquor would/should have been splattered all over the front pages.
Why not then?

I have a feeling there is much more to this sick story than is in the papers and news.

Lets hope this guy is just sitting back, and sues to crap out of these jerks.

[Old Man Rotor]

You squeezed in before I could edit my previous blurd.

Remember the Poll by the Bulliten Magazine.....listing the most respected professions in order from the top?

Airline Pilots #1 [Hope that included Helio Guys as well]
Paramedics #2
Firemen #3
>
>
>
Politicians #49
Drug Dealers #50

Wonder where the New Age Security Tossers fit in that?

[Iron City]

Law in Virginia is that by driving a motor vehicle there is an implied consent to be breathalized if required by state or local law enforcement authorities. Flinking that gets you arrested, but getting convicted requires a blood test and rules of evidence if you go to the mat with the prosecution and really choose to fight it.

[bjcc]

Moosp
You obviously don't like security guards? OK, who does? But that really isn't the point. If you drink before you drive/fly/drive a train or do anything else that requires concentration then you have NO ONE else to blame but yourself if you get caught.

Presumably you would be quite happy for everyone to ignore a taxi driver who had been drinking and let him drive your family about? How would you feel if such a taxi driver had an accident after you smelt drink on him and you did nothing about it, and as a result someone else was killed or injured!

Or perhaps you think that a pilot who drinks wouldn't have an accident?

I am not prejudging this pilot, but I am sorry, some of you have to face a couple of simple facts here, one of which if he is found guilty it is totaly down to him and no one else.

[luoto]

AS it has been reported that the BA captain accused of being "drunk" was later found to be clear, why did his resignation need to be "taken up" and, if it was already processed, surely BA could say "come back old chap!"

I cannot understand why he needed to resign (honourable man or not). Sadly nowadays more people appear to resign before they get the sack (especially "corrupt" police officers who manage to go on pension.

FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT I am not suggesting that the Captain referred to is corrupt, but I cannot see why if he knew he had had no drinkies and that he would be exonerated, what resigning would achieve-

(edits.. I see that elements of my query have already been answered).

[Old Man Rotor]

Just looked at your profile.

Do you a swap, show me how to fly that tank to EGLL, and I'll show you how to get onto an Oil Plaform on a dark night after a Rig Radar Approach.

MMMm, on second thoughts, I think its safer to be in London!

[miss d point]

i think something should be done pronto about this let's face it - confusion-
yes,yes,yes we all know the legal limit is a quarter of the drink driving limit etc,etc,etc - what the **** is that ? do i have a beer or two the night before a flight, at least if it was the old 8 hrs before report that was it, now we have this situation where it's a free for all to 'bag a pilot', maybe we should all go through security and accuse someone of not doing their jobs correctly- maybe been drinking ? or even just plain drunk ? and insist on a test.

Don't mean to single out security but this just stinks, we are a self govening profesion- my peers sign my licence - my collegues on the flight deck check my performance - we make decisions every working day - we have always been trusted to do our job to the best of our ability and that includes not breaking the rules on drinking - the powers that be should have seen this situation coming as soon as a numerical limit was applied, am i not to have a beer all through the summer ?
why was i supplied with a beef and ale pie as my hot meal the other day ?? - where do we stop ?

And final rant - do the french still have a glass of wine with their crew food ??

[Daysleeper]

bjcc

That is kind of my point. I'm suggesting that the problem may be that an initial positive (caused by electical interference.) may lead to arrest and a blood test under caution. I dont know how long a blood test takes to come back with the results of an alcohol test, but even if its 48 hours then thats long enough to have your flights cancelled, passengers incovenienced and your face plastered (sic) across the news of the screws.

I would say I in no way condone any form of drinking and driving/train operating or flying. Nor do I have any knowlege of the specific circumstances surrounding these cases.

luto
If you were faced with even a nagging doubt as to the possible result of a blood test and the airline was saying if you resign you keep your pension if you fight this and create more bad publicity for the airline you get nothing, what would you do?

[bjcc]

Daysleeper,
I don't know about the US, but in the UK you wouldn't get a blood test.

The point I was making was that there is a second breath test at a Police Station on a Calibrated machine (its the size of a kitchen unit) and that provides the evidence in the form of a print out of the amount of alchol in your blood (apparently its proportional to the amount in your breath hence the test is done on breath).

There is no blood or unine test because they are not needed. The calibrated machine in the Police Station is tested to make sure there is nothing that will mess with it.

So in the UK its not 48 hours, its less than 48 minutes.

As I said I don't know about the US, I would assume that they are at the same level of development as us, and therefore they use the same sort of machine. Thats an assumption based on the fact that this pilot is appearing in court today. If there was no read out of his blood/alcohol level there really wouldn't be much point in him appearing in court at this stage. However I am willing to be shot down on the last point by someone who does know something about the US Judicial system.

[Daysleeper]

bjcc

fascinating, I always though there was a sort of blood/breath/urine pop quiz. I agree that in the UK a case would not make it to this stage on an initial test only and things do not look good. But it will all come out in the wash.

[BillHicksRules]

Dear all,

Several points have struck me from the last 7 pages.

1) What is the problem with pilots becoming alcohol free during the working week or even better at all times? I am greatly concerned by the seeming need of many on here to have a drink during their downtime. The seeming inability to “relax” without an alcoholic beverage smacks of institutional alcoholism.
2) If pilots want an easy way to regain the respect of the public that they crave I have a simple way to achieve it. Make an announcement that all their pilots will be required to refrain from alcohol. Have the airlines and the unions appear on the same podium at the press conference.
3) Maybe the time for pilot self regulation has come to an end. The technology they are talking about introducing in cars that requires a breath test before the engine immobiliser is released would be easily applied to airliners.


Fireflybob,

If, as you say, you read no newspapers and refuse to catch TV or radio news programmes how do have any clue as to what is going on in the world? As good as it is Pprune is not a suitable substitute.

Cheers

BHR

[ptarmigan]

Why, oh why, don't you highly intelligent, skilled people that command so much respect, admiration (and personally speaking, envy,) for the job you do, appreciate that, in the eyes of the media, you have allowed yourselves to become a sitting target for stories that boost circulation figures. One of your own - and I am referring to the BA Oslo incident in this case - gets hung out to fry and then dry, but nowhere, either pre- or post-judgement, is the alternative to the 'guilty, guilty, drunk, drunk' media hype put forward in a professionally presented and argued way. You're letting the media set the agenda - which will always be the sensationalist, and which will only get worse - and until BALPA or PPRuNe or whoever, gets real to the need to put together a media relations function that is prepared to put forward reasoned arguments in support of aviation issues, then you're simply giving the media an open, unopposed field which will always result in bloody defeat. If the media - particularly here in the UK - had their way, they'd destroy companies and industries in the interests of sensationaism, journalists' egos and media magnates' bank balances. For goodness sake, get together and work out a way of protecting your reputations as an industry rather than having to vent your spleens on forums such as this!

[Flying Lawyer]

bjcc

"But that really isn't the point" and "..... some of you have to face a couple of simple facts here, one of which if he is found guilty it is totally down to him and no one else."

I don't think anyone's said the buck doesn't stop with a pilot if he's guilty. In most cases, that's the bottom line.

Does that mean others aren't open to criticism?
Does that mean people shouldn't be interested in other points as well as what you call "the point"?

eg (In no particular order, and raised by various people):

How did the police become involved?
Why didn't the security man raise his concerns with the pilot or other member of the Flight Crew at the time?
Or with the company?
Who tipped off the Press?

Isn't it disgraceful his name was given to the Press before he was even charged? (He might not have been, but the damage is done.)
Isn't it disgusting that, regardless of whether he was charged, and regardless of whether he's guilty or innocent, the police (or someone else in authority) gave the Press a photograph taken for official purposes whilst he's in custody?

Isn't it terrible that someone gave his home address to the Press?
Isn't it outrageous that UK journos and photographers surrounded his home when he's (absurdly) locked up in jail in America? What do they hope to achieve? A photograph of his distressed family? To ask his family how they 'feel'?

Isn't it outrageous that he's been pilloried in the press/media as a 'drunk' pilot?
Isn't it hypocritical of the Press/media to make melodramatic comments about passengers' confidence being shaken when it's the media which is stirring things up?
And for the media to go on about crashes and 400 people being put at risk etc etc when, even if he is proved to be guilty, we don't know whether he was way over the limit or fractionally?

Come to think of it, isn't that what you were doing with your analogy with people being killed or injured in a taxi driven by a driver who'd been drinking?

[chiglet]

From my No1 son [a Copper, GMP]
The local police prosecute above 39mg/100. betweem 41-50mg you have the "option" to take a blood test [It's more accurate apparently]
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Jet II]

WHERE'S THE INDUSTRY'S VOICE?

Well it seems to be shooting itself in the foot at the moment - at the precise time this story is splahed over the front pages, BALPA are refusing to allow its members to be subjected to random alcohol and drug tests despite three years of lobbying by British Airways.

Many professions with a lot less responsibility than flight crew are subject to random testing - what sort of message does this send out to Joe Public?

Link (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/story.jsp?story=475418)

[miss d point]

BillHicksRules

"1) What is the problem with pilots becoming alcohol free during the working week or even better at all times? I am greatly concerned by the seeming need of many on here to have a drink during their downtime. The seeming inability to “relax” without an alcoholic beverage smacks of institutional alcoholism.
2) If pilots want an easy way to regain the respect of the public that they crave I have a simple way to achieve it. Make an announcement that all their pilots will be required to refrain from alcohol. Have the airlines and the unions appear on the same podium at the press conference. "


fool !

[ptarmigan]

OK, BALPA are doing a c**p job on your behalf. Reinforces the point that someone should be speaking up collectively for the views of those at the sharp end (no pun intended). I earned my living from protecting corporate reputations, and can't quite believe what I read, see and hear about such a high profile and emotive (when things go wrong) industry as commercial aviation. Don't leave it all to RB's offer of free flights and his e-mail address. If journalists and media owners get it wrong, tell 'em and tell 'em again. But they'll only listen if you do it in a language they understand - and that's what you're not doing at the moment. Because silence isn't heard. And don't think, please, that I'm touting for business - golf has replaced PR. I'm just so frustrated at the lack of a corporate voice for your profession.

[FlapsOne]

Jet II

That's what the Independent says.

Quote from Balpa web site (not included in the newspaper of course!)

‘BALPA’s policy is well known – zero tolerance of any misuse of alcohol or drugs. In fact we have urged the Government to do more. We are advocating a system used in the United States called ‘peer intervention’ so that any pilot who has any suspicion about a colleague’s behaviour can have that colleague entered into a programme which is managed by, and supported by, both the union and the company. ‘

Can't find any reference at all to balpa refusing to allow anything!

[Idunno]

bjcc

What exactly do you want people who smell alcohol on a pilots breath to do? Ignore it because they are flight deck crew?

Do as you like bjcc, I simply pointed out that by removing a smell I remove your gripe....right? I mean, if I'm staggering around thats one thing...but your sense of smell seems to be too sensitive. More so than even the alcohol detectors used by the authorities to assess levels of blood alcohol! Can you explain how alcohol was smelled, but not actually detected? Perhaps it wasn't alcohol that was actually smelled at all, eh? Meanwhile someone lost his job based solely on your security mens mistaken suspicions.

Hand me the Polo Mints! :ugh:

JetII

"Not excusing drinking before flying" So what are you doing? - either the guy was drinking and over the limit or he was not. Its not rocket science.

You can tell that just by sense of smell?

Pass me the TicTacs. :ugh:

[bjcc]

MMM..Interesting points Flying lawyer.

Some of which are well made.

My analogy with a Taxi driver who had been drinking was used to make the author of the comment think what he would do in similar circumstances, rather than to jump to the conculution the guard was wrong.

It seems to me grossly unfair to slate a security guard for doing what in the UK should have been a Public duty ( If my recollection of Judges Rules is correct, albeit they have been replaced by PACE, 'Every Citizen has a Duty to Assist Police).

Of course had he not done anything, and it later come to light he had not reported anything, I wonder what the reaction of everyone would have been?

I agree with many of your other points regarding the way this has been treated, and especialy the non granting of bail. But then perhaps you and I are viewing that with regard to the UK system which sometimes goes to the other extreem, which is of course a different argument.

Idonno...

I may have missed your point, but it seems to me you are saying that your mythical person has been convicted on the evidence of the security guard and nothing else. I think you will find that there is a bit more required before anyone is sacked and definatly before any court would convict.
By the way, tic tacs, polos or any other mints arn't very good at hiding the smell of drink!

[Jet II]

Idunno

You can tell that just by sense of smell?

Well someone obviously could smell booze (or what they thought was booze) on the guy - and they did the correct thing - handed it over to the cops to sort out.

This is what we pay the cops for - if someone is over the limit, then it is for them, and them alone to take action.

I assume that the guy was over the limit as he has been arrested and charged?


Flaps One

I note that the BALPA web-site does not talk about 'random testing' - only 'peer intervention'.

[fireflybob]

If this really is BALPA's stated policy I am very surprised.

They need to get real and realise that it is in the interests of all concerned to embrace random testing. If it's good for the railway industry then why not aviation?

[Idunno]

In the Oslo incident it now appears he was not 'over' any limit!

Arrested and charged = Guilty! You assume too much perhaps!

[bjcc]

Ahh..Now you make sense Idunno....But the question remains,
What would you want the person smelling what they think is drink to do? Ignore it?

Would you ignore it on the breath of a Taxi driver?

As for the Arrested+Charged = Guilty .. No not at all,

I would arrest someone because I had sufficent evidence to do so, in your example a positive breath test. The calibrated breath test would give sufficent evidence to charge someone and its the courts buiness if they convict, not mine.

If my memory is correct the Oslo BA Pilot wasn't charged.

[Wino]

BHR,

There are many problems with Aviation that are not being discussed here that are actually VERY relavent.

The circadian rythm disruptions are BRUTAL. To try and force their bodies into the new rythm in short order one of the few "LEGAL" things available to a pilot on layover may be alchohol.

The most brutal layovers are not the short 8-12 hour ones. by far the most brutal layovers are in the 24-32 hour range. This may sound odd to you, but what happens is you arrive at the hotel after having already been awake for 24 hours (16 hours of duty, plus travel time to work and travel time to the hotel is usually in this range.) hit the hotel and crash out for 8 to 10 hours. Sounds great. So you are 10 hours into you 24 hour layover and now wide awake. Its not possible to go back to sleep easily. The most likely result is you will be awake for 14 hours strait (feeling pretty good) right up till show time for your next 16 hour duty period leading to fatigue right as you show up to work for your next duty period, continuing on to truly crushing fatigue. So by the time you set the brakes back in your home base you have been up for 30 plus hours. NOW you get to drive home...

Its a regulation problem as much as a money problem. A long over water flight cannot usually be followed up by a 10-12 hour layover which might actually be ideal for circadian rythm problems (and even if they were possible legally, commercial pressures as in what time the aircraft leaves might make it impossible)because of rest requirements that forbid flying x number of hours in x period of time. (rules that are sensible and VERY necesary for short haul, that are vicious and harmfull in this situation)

In the golden days of aviation this was less of a problem because long haul frequencies were often only one or two flights per week. so the layover lengths would usually be well on the far side of 48 hours (enough time to acclimate to your next reporting period) because another aircraft wouldn't arrive at the station till several days later. Or, the other thing that might happen is the aircraft might simply park till the crew was rested, so a SHORT layover would result. The commericial pressures were also much less (not as much competition in the idustry).

Now with high frequency flying and a strict eye on the bottom line combined with deteriorating employment contracts the pressure is on to make crews more "productive". What happens in a large number of 24-32 hour layovers.

In desperation the crews will try anything to go to sleep. A beer or two or 3 might seam like the solution, but its a slippery slope frought with peril, but there is often no other alternative left to the crew member. So 12 hours before departure you try and have a drink to go to sleep... maybe it works, maybe it won't, maybe that 2nd one will do the trick...

But Pilots are being ground up by the modern scheduling practices and this is just one of the symptoms.

Cheers
Wino

[behind_the_second_midland]

Airbubba

You can believe what you like about Oslo however I repeat.

Captain McAuliffe's blood test was negative. Not rumour not urban legend. Fact.

This is still an ongoing open case as other crew members have to answer to other authorities so any more detail of why Willie resigned would be inappropriate and may prejudice any case.

Both pilots have had and still have the support of BALPA to help them deal with whatever the future holds and they couldn't have a better rep from BA and Principal Negiator looking after them.

[DSR10]

"and have a drink to go to sleep"

What happened to Melanomin etc.

[FlapsOne]

fireflybob

If this really is BALPA's stated policy I am very surprised.

You'll find Balpa's official stance on their web site.

There is no reference whatsoever to stopping anyone from taking a test.

From the literature I can find, it seems the Independent made this one up to satisfy a headline.

Very glad to hear the the BA guys are getting all the support they deserve from Balpa- that's what the fees are for.

The same will apply, I'm sure, to our colleague from Virgin.

[Wino]

Some aviation agencies have not approved melatonin.
Generally all medications even over the counter ones, when used for flying the guide line is not to be taken within DOUBLE the effective period. So if you want to use an 8 hour lasting cough suppressant, you can't do it less than 16 hours before flying.

Just because something is over the counter does not mean you can take it and go fly a jet.


Furthermore, the results on melatonin vary from person to person and doesn't seam to last even if it did work for you initially... (hope I didn't just destroy a placebo effect for you)


Cheers
Wino

[Ranger One]

Captain McAuliffe's blood test was negative. Not rumour not urban legend. Fact.

OK. Said captain must have had a certain confidence concerning his level of alcohol consumption, if his test returned a negative result within *Norwegian* limits. In other words, he must have known he hadn't drunk significantly if at all prior to reporting.

So why resign? It seems no-one can say just now. Wasn't there a first officer & cabin crew involved in the Oslo case also? What were their blood test results? Is it just barely concievable that it's a case of knowingly turning a blind eye to other crew members drinking? It's an old dilema, best answered (in the short term) by the old answer: 'call in sick NOW... (unstated: or else)'.

R1

[Flying Lawyer]

bjcc

I'm not sure which of my points you think wasn't well made.

I can't pretend I'm too young to have been at the Bar when the 'Judges Rules' applied but, not having had reason to look at them for almost 20 years, I don't remember them in any detail.
However, assuming your recollection is correct, a "Duty to Assist Police" doesn't mean there is a duty in law to report all suspected offences to the police. There may in certain circumstances be a moral or civic obligation to do so, but that's a different matter.

Even if the pilot is guilty, that doesn't mean many others involved aren't deserving of criticism.

I'm curious. Your profile says your occupation is 'air traffic' but you seem to have a 'police constable' approach. :confused:

[BillHicksRules]

Wino,

I hear everything you say and agree with the logic and reasoning. This is an issue that the whole industry has to look at. For those pilots who are using alcohol or drugs (OTC or not) are simply delaying the inevitable crunch. As long as the airlines keep getting more and more from the pilots they will keep taking more and more. A line in the sand has to be drawn for everyone's safety. I do not think it will be easy. It will take a number of very courageous individuals but the time to sort it is now before we have a major accident. Do you ( and the others ) agree?

Fireflybob,

No response ?

Miss D Point,

You missed your own point, I think.

Cheers

BHR

[Airbubba]

Pilot accused of being drunk held on $25,000 bond

12/22/2003

By CANDACE SMITH / Associated Press

A pilot accused of showing up drunk to fly a plane from Washington to London was ordered held Monday on $25,000 bond and told not to leave the country.

[redacted] was dressed in an orange jail jumpsuit when he appeared on a closed circuit television link from jail, where he has been since late Friday, when he was arrested at Washington Dulles International Airport.

Security screeners alerted Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police after detecting alcohol on [redacted]'s breath, an airport spokeswoman said. Officers escorted [redacted] off the plane and questioned him at the airport before charging him with attempting to operate an aircraft while under the influence of an intoxicating drug or alcohol.

An authority officer testified he approached [redacted] about two hours before his plane's scheduled departure. The officer said no passengers were aboard, and the flight attendants were readying the cabin.

[redacted], 55, spent the weekend at the Loudoun County Adult Detention Center in Leesburg, about 40 miles west of Washington, D.C. The 14-year Virgin Atlantic veteran remained suspended by the airline, which said [redacted] is a U.S. citizen who lives in London and had a spotless record with the company.

[redacted]'s lawyers tried to persuade Loudoun County Traffic Court Judge James Forsythe to allow their client to return home.

"He's not doing well. He has a medical condition — a heart condition," lawyer Thomas Hill told the judge, adding [redacted] needed to see his cardiologist in London. Outside court Hill declined to elaborate about the heart condition.

"He's a model of stability in terms of his life," Hill told the judge. Hill said his client has been married 25 years, and his wife and two children live in London. "He's not a flight risk at all."

Prosecutors were against any bond because [redacted] lives overseas.

"Once a defendant has crossed that border it is very difficult to get them to come back," said Forsythe, who moved the case to the criminal division.

The 383 passengers and crew of 17 on flight VS 022 were put up Friday night at area hotels, with their flight finally leaving Saturday night more than 26 hours late. Passengers received a voucher for a free flight on the airline.

The Federal Aviation Administration said it would carry out a civil investigation along with Virginia's criminal investigation. The FAA licenses pilots to fly within the United States.

http://www.wvec.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D7VJKCT80.html

[BEagle]

What a truly dreadful state of affairs. How can it possibly take 6 weeks to bring about a mere preliminary hearing... I know we're talking about Spams and their blood-sucking lawyers (sorry, Tudor!), but surely even they can sort this out with a bit more speed? And what made that judge presume that the 'veteran aviator' would not return?

What was the result of the independent blood test? There was one, I presume..?? I just hope that he's proved innocent and then sues for a fortune!

[Idunno]

Bjcc,
But the question remains, What would you want the person smelling what they think is drink to do? Ignore it?

No, that's not what I said. I actually stressed (twice) in my original post that I was not condoning drinking and flying. Also I told you to feel free about whatever action you think is right.

I think you're missing my point. It's really a very simple one.

If you don't smell alcohol on my breath, and I am not falling down drunk, then patently I am sober enough to fly and you have no grounds on which to question my fitness.

Ergo, the simple application of a Polo mint will avert all this strife.

Reducto ad absurdum.

[bjcc]

Flying Lawyer,

Your point I don't think was well made was that others may be open to critcism. I don't see why. The main mud slinging seems to be directed at this security guard. Why? Because he reported the matter to the Police? I see no reason why he should be the butt such venom. Maybe he has an axe to grind obout pilots, maybe he hasn't but the point is that the local Police turned up and presumably found enough evidence to arrest, as they did.


I was a Police Officer by the way and as for Judges Rules, like you I haven't had reason to look at them for a while, so I was relying on memory. In any event, I looked it up and it reads as follows:

'Judges Rules General Principles.

A. That Citizens have a duty to help a police officer to discover and apprehend offenders.'


I would read that as clear, although irrelevent as 1. they have been replaced by PACE and 2. The security guard is in america.

[Flying Lawyer]

"blood-sucking lawyers"
:mad: :*

BEagle my old chum. We've known each other for more than thirty years so I hope I can safely assume you don't think I merit that description.
Coincidentally, minutes after reading your post, I was asked to comment on the case by one of the nationals - what a good thing I don't go in for that sort of sweeping generalisation about professional pilots. ;)

bjcc
No argument with the general principle expressed, but I don't think that made it a legal obligation breach of which was a criminal offence.

Not a bad guess about your previous incarnation. I suspected you might be, or might have been, one or the other.
Guess old habits die hard. ;) ;)

[Flying Bean]

Sorry. But am I missing something here.
I have read the whole thread and now the prelim hearing report, but I do not see anywhere where the pilot was breathalised or blood tested. Just that he 'was questioned and then arrested'. Where was the actual determination made that he was under the influence apart from the initial report by the security screeners.
Or is it automatic that suspects are breathalised? And evryone assumes (the reader) knows this?
Why is this not mentioned in the report?
Mystified :confused: :confused: :confused:

[BEagle]

Absolutely not, Tudor old chum! You certainly don't fall into the category of person to whom I was referring - as I'm sure you well know!

No 'advent calendar' this year? :(

[Airbubba]

Another account of today's hearing from a local newspaper:

Virgin Atlantic Pilot Charged With Boarding Plane Under The Influence

Dan Telvock

Dec 22, 2003 -- A Virgin Atlantic pilot pleaded not guilty today in Loudoun County General District Court to a charge of attempting to operate a jet from Dulles Airport while under the influence of alcohol.

[redacted], 55, of England, was released on a $25,000 bond under the condition that he would not leave the country. He is accused of boarding a flight while under the influence of alcohol, said Metropolitian Washington Airport Authority spokesman Tom Sullivan.

Sullivan said that at about 6:45 p.m. on Friday, an employee for the Transportation Security Administration contacted the airport authority after the employee allegedly smelled alcohol coming from [redacted] as he went through the security gate.

“So our police responded to the gate, entered the aircraft and spoke with the pilot,” Sullivan said. No passengers had yet boarded the Dulles-to-London flight.

Some basic tests were given to [redacted] and Sullivan said his responses gave police enough cause to detain him. Later that evening, he was charged and the case was sent to Loudoun County, where [redacted] has been held since Friday.

Although he lives in England, Sullivan said [redacted] is a U.S. citizen. Sullivan said he has not heard of any pilot being charged with such a crime in the six years he has worked for the airport authority.

A Virgin Atlantic spokeswoman said [redacted] has flown for the company for 14 years with a strong employee record. The Federal Aviation Administration, which licenses pilots, plans to conduct an investigation along with Loudoun authorities.

http://www.leesburg2day.com/current.cfm?catid=6&newsid=8232

_________________________________________

This article mentions that the pilot entered a plea of not guilty, a minor detail somehow missed in the earlier report.

About a year ago a Delta pilot encountered a somewhat similar situation, also in Virginia:

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2002/2002-12-27-delta-pilot.htm

The police report of the incident is here:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/drunkpilot1.html

Apparently, the airport police failed to document a field sobriety test (touch your nose, walk a straight line etc.) so the pilot was acquitted of the state charges on technical grounds even though he blew a .07%:

http://www.news8.net/news/stories/0203/74030.html

Under federal law there are several technical errors that can render a breath test invalid:

(1) The 15 minute waiting period prior to a confirmation test is not observed.

(2) An air blank is not performed on the EBT before a confirmation test or the air blank doesn't result in a reading of 0.00

(3) The BAT does not sign the form as required by the regulations

(4) The BAT fails to note in the remarks section on the form that the employee failed the test or refused to sign.

(5) An EBT fails to print a confirmation test result

(6) The sequential test number or the alcohol concentration printed out is not the same as displayed on the EBT

(7) If an EBT fails an external calibration check, then every test result of 0.02 or above obtained on this particular device since the last valid external calibration check will be invalid.

(from: http://www.aviationmedicine.com/DOTetohtest.htm )

Of course, this doesn't mean you're off the hook, but the test cannot be used as evidence.

[paulo]

FL and any other experienced legal sorts - is it a tactic, for the prosecution, to delay their procedures when the case is high profile, controversial and they may not get their result? That would be the natural thing to do from a PR point of view.

The air rage case a year or so ago with some sports fans and a Gatwick based charter co. seemed to exhibit that kind of 'retreat' from the prosecutors - many harsh words said on both sides at the time, then a considerable cooling off period which let it subside from a press interest viewpoint.

[Flying Lawyer]

The long delay between today's hearing and the next appearance is very odd- especially as the judge saw fit to uphold the prosecutor's objection to the pilot being allowed to return to the UK in the meantime. It appears from reports that the prosecutor objected to bail at all, so no doubt the pilot is grateful for small mercies.
This appears to have been a lower court, equivalent to our magistrates courts. I'd be surprised if a more senior judge insists he stays in America pending trial. However, I don't know much about the American criminal system - I thought it was terrible he was in jail at all, but perhaps that's the norm in America?

The most extraordinary aspect of today's hearing (based on reports I've read) is that there was no mention of what the blood/alcohol level is alleged to be.
That wouldn't necessarily be mentioned at a first appearance here, but our procedure is different. The US prosecutor called the police officer who arrested the pilot to give evidence of the cirumstances of arrest - that woudln't normally happen here.

Further, there was no mention of the results of an Intoximeter procedure at the police station (or even that it was carried out).
It's possible that blood or urine samples were taken for analysis and time is needed to obtain the lab results - but there doesn't seem to have been any mention of that being the reason for the long delay before the next hearing.


=====================

Paulo

Anything's possible but I doubt it was a prosecution tactic to delay proecdures for the reasons you suggest.
There are delays here, but I've never heard of a case being delayed for the reasons you mention.

=====================

BEagle
I wasn't sent one this year so nothing to forward. :D

[Airbubba]

>>Can an American Pruner help?
In the UK, a 'roadside' breath-test simply shows positive or negative. If positive, a driver is arrested and taken to a police where he provides a specimen of breath to a machine which almost instantly gives the precise proportion of alcohol.

Does that system and procedure exist in America?
Or are all alcohol proportions measured by analysis of a blood or urine sample?<<

In the U.S. driver alcohol testing procedures vary from state to state. Here's a lawyer's site with advice on local procedures and how to beat the rap:

http://www.drunkdrivingdefense.com/general/breath-tests.htm

The federal procedure for testing pilots is described here:

http://www.aviationmedicine.com/DOTetohtest.htm

[Heliport]

Associated Press report
12/22/2003, 8:22 p.m. ET

LEESBURG, Va.[/b] — A Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot accused of showing up drunk to fly a plane from Washington to London was released from jail Monday after posting $25,000 bond and surrendering his passport.

(He) refused to talk to reporters while leaving the jail in Leesburg, about 40 miles west of Washington, D.C.

(Very wise of him.)

[Pollyana]

I don't often post on here, am more of a silent reader, but I have to say that with this guy's face and name on every news bulletin (and I'm watching in Australia) maybe some of us - especially at this time of year - should have a little compassion for his family. I'm sure that some of you out there know him, and I'd like to think that somewhere the caring face of aviation isn't dead. He is not even guilty yet, spare a thought for those left in the UK.

[GZip]

Absolutely, Polyanna. A BA Captain has recently resigned honourably, out of a sense of responsibility to his crew, despite his own negative blood test. The Virgin PR response to Capt [redacted] case has been a lot more impressive and initially supportive IMHO than that seen from BA - is this just being sharper or a symptom of closer, better-informed management. The fallout in media terms has been much greater because it's the third case in the UK media this year and it delayed 383 pax at a difficult time in the travel season. Meanwhile, we wish all the families concerned some respite from this media hell as Christmas approaches. The Press are only doing their job, so perhaps we need union/company emergency funds to fight the story in the public domain in future cases. The truth is irrelevant once the story is dead - only perceptions count. Get me Max Clifford!

[normal_nigel]

The fallout in media terms has been much greater because it's the third case in the UK media this year and it delayed 383 pax at a difficult time in the travel season

Also don't forget there was a piece of **** from Sky News due to travel on the flight as well. This is a Murdoch owned station remember. Can't think of a worse mob to get first hand details.

[Flying Bean]

We are still in fog/IMC here!!
Following my posts and that of Airbubba and Flying Lawyer can some of our USA friends clarify what happened at the airport?
The latest report posted here says
"some basic tests were given to..."
Was this a breathaliser? Walking the line? Finger Nose??
Surely the Prosecuter at the Prelim Hearing had to give the Judge some alcohol level information and this is a matter of public record?? Still:confused: :confused: :confused:

[arcniz]

After plodding through this long thread I am surprised that nobody seems to have remarked on the oddity of relatively untrained people - whether airline or TSA or XYZ - being able to start a situation like this because they "smell alcohol" or somesuch.

As one with more than a little experience smelling alcohol, I can tell you it isn't all that easy. I would bet that nine out of ten untrained people who think they're smelling alcohol are really triggering on some other familiar smell they associate with alcohol consumption... perhaps the unmistakable malty smell of beer, the fruity or vinegary smells of wine, or the volaitile hydrocarbon smells of just about any liquid that will burn with the touch of a match. Some of these latter ones can be produced by the body of relatively healthy persons who are in a strange place metabolically speaking - ketones and acetone being two very common substances, each smelling somewhat illicit on the breath, which the body manufactures on its own initiative. At least some breath analysis machines will surely be fooled by these as well. This is where a blood test - with multiple samples taken and tested at two or more different labs - can save the reputation of an individual unfairly accused.

My point is this: if people have not gone through a formal training course in discriminating alcohol smells from others, then they should not be allowed to put forward such accusations - and any person should expect to be held fully liable if they venture to do so without proper training.



Wino -- I believe the problem with Melatonin is not that it does not work.. but that it eventually decomposes into Seretonin, a feel-good hormone that might conceivably render the crew member insufficiently nervouus and wrought-up.

[BEagle]

arcniz - I totally agree. What right has some untrained person to say that he/she 'thought they smelled alcohol' on someone's breath? Do they know what they're actually looking for? Pungent deodorant/aftershave or last night's consumption? And what of those who don't even know what 'alcohol' or 'hangover breath' actually smell like because their religion does not allow it and they have no experience of it?

If the Virgin captain (who has pleaded Not Guilty) is acquitted, will the trouble-making sniffers be held to account?

I thought I smelled alcohol on the breath of a security checker the other week - should I have called Plod to investigate?

I'm amazed that anyone should ever want a career in commercial flying these days....

[paulo]

arcniz & Beagel - it's a fundamental right in most countries that if you think someone could be breaking the law, you have the right to report that belief.

Not to investigate, judge or sentence, but the right to report is anyone's and quite rightly so.

[SaturnV]

Excerpted from the December 23 Washington Post (as well as the December 21 Washington Post.

“Tom Sullivan, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, said an employee of the Transportation Security Administration smelled alcohol on [redacted] breath before he boarded. An Airports Authority police sergeant testified yesterday that there were no passengers aboard when police removed [redacted] from the cockpit about 7:25 p.m. Friday, just five minutes before the plane's scheduled departure.

[The Dec.. 21 Washington Post reported the sequence thusly:
“Law enforcement officials said the incident began when someone at the airport smelled alcohol on [redacted]l. It was unclear whether a screener noticed the smell or whether it was picked up when [redacted] was near the ticket counter area.

“The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police Department was contacted and notified Virgin Atlantic. Airline officials boarded the plane and spoke to [redacted] in the cockpit before summoning airport police, who escorted him off, said Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the authority. She said [redacted]l was cooperative when taken off the plane.”]

“Loudoun County District Court Judge James D. Forsyth said he would not risk allowing [redacted] to leave the country now, although he held out the possibility that [redacted]'s passport might be returned to him soon. "Once a defendant has crossed that border," Forsyth said, "it's very difficult to get him back."
“His attorney, Thomas C. Hill, had asked that he be allowed to return home, arguing that the airline would ensure that he appeared for court proceedings.

“A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Feb. 3.

“"Mr. [redacted] has a long and distinguished career and an exemplary record," Hill said. "He is the model of stability." In brief comments after the hearing, Hill said that [redacted] would "never do anything purposefully to jeopardize anyone's safety."

“Virgin Atlantic spokeswoman Libby Ciresi said that if [redacted]'s passport is returned to him, the airline likely will fly him to the United States for court dates. In the meantime, he is on administrative leave with pay, in accordance with British custom, she said.

"For 14 years, he's had a stellar reputation with us," Ciresi said. "He's never had a problem before, and it is the holiday season. It's a very difficult situation for him to be in."

“The flight was canceled after [redacted]'s arrest. The airline offered hotel rooms to the plane's 383 passengers, and they flew to London on Saturday. They were also given a voucher for a free ticket on Virgin.

[There were US media reports that Virgin ground staff told the passengers at the boarding gate the reason for the pilot’s removal and the flight cancellation. I believe the reported reaction was something like silent surprise, no uproar or anything like that. I think the story got much more play than otherwise because of the nearly 400 passengers who had to wait 24 hours before their flight began. If a substitute pilot had been available and the flight proceeded with little or no delay, there may have been little mention of it.]

“Representatives of the Air Line Pilots Association and the British Air Line Pilots Association were in the courtroom.

“The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident. If it finds that [redacted] violated U.S. regulations -- which prohibit consuming alcohol within eight hours of flying -- the United Kingdom's Civil Aviation Authority would be notified, an FAA spokesman said. The authority then could decide to revoke or suspend his license."

[Statorblade]

Can someone with a medical or other relevant background please give me a definitive answer regarding the effect of breath fresheners such as Tic Tacs, or mouth wash products such as Listerine, on orally administered blood alcohol checks.:confused:

[Bob Upndown]

Update from VS website:

Virgin Atlantic can confirm that <redacted> has been released on bail and will be back before the Loudoun County Court, Virginia for a preliminary hearing on 3 February 2004.
Everyone at Virgin Atlantic remains shocked and saddened by this incident and also that one of its most senior pilots, with an exemplary record, is now facing this charge.

<redacted> was stood down from duty on Saturday will face an internal inquiry. This inquiry will take into account the outcome of the legal proceedings.

Virgin Atlantic’s no alcohol policy is well established and well understood by all our staff and this is demonstrated by the fact that this is the first time anyone employed by Virgin Atlantic has been charged with this sort of offence. However, Virgin Atlantic has launched a comprehensive review of this incident to see what lessons can be learned.

As formal legal proceedings have now commenced Virgin Atlantic will not be able to make any further statement on this incident until after the outcome of the case.

Ends.

It beggars belief that the chap must stay in the US until the trial date. Given his previous exemplary history, and the fact that VS have offered to fly him as necessary back to the US, do the prosecutors REALLY believe he's going to skip bail???? Or is there an agenda I'm missing here?

[bjcc]

Mouth Washes don't effect the test. You get asked here if you have used one, and a Breath test will be delayed for 20 mins if you have used one. Mints have no effect whatseoever, afterall what right does a Policeman untrained in mint smells have to say its a mint?

I seem to recall some people with diabetes can, in theory produce a positive test, but never heard of it happening.
When we were trained to use the electronic breath test machine, we were given a mouth full of cheap scotch so we see what a positive test looked like, but had to blow into the machine straight away, as 5 minutes later we all produced a totaly negetive result.

Beagle, the security man had every right to do what he did. If he had been wrong then its not lightly that this chap would have been arrested. Thats not to say he is guilty thats for the court to decide. No Police officer is going to arrive and tell someone he's nicked 'cause that bloke over there says you smell of drink'. The must have been some other evidence, be that a machine or the walk the straight line type test.

Besides that most adults are perefectly well aware of what drink smells like, they have been to the school of alcohol smells, its called a pub!

[expat100]

I have been in the industry for 30 years, mainly at the pointed end and in a few different countries, and there is or was a problem with alcohol (and drug use if you include the cabin crew).

I fear that if random testing was introduced the figures would be appalling (especially if you included ground staff).

In our western society we tolerate alcohol (look at road accidents and days lost from work). People go on about the effects of smoking, but it is my belief that booze is just or more dangerous.

I for one do not understand the attitude of the unions or the authorities except that it is a problem best left undisturbed.

Maybe now is the time to be open and honest and try to resolve the problem.

[Paddy Don't Surf]

I must be missing a point here. Whilst I in no way condone flying under the influence of any kind of substance, since when was it an offence under civil law to turn up for work this way? AFAIAA, said pilot had not boarded the aircraft. Are law enforcers to charge car, lorry, bus and train drivers with the offence before they occupy their vehicle? "Excuse me sir, I believe you have been drinking and are likely to drive in the next hour or two, so I'm arresting you". What tripe!

He should have been prevented from boarding and the whole affair dealt with by the company, the end result would have been the same. It sounds like american law is as crap as British military law.

Rant over :rolleyes: :p

[openfly]

There .. but for the grace of God .. went us all!!!

Vehicle drivers in the UK know what the limits are. Until the CAA lays down DEFINITIVE guidelines as to blood/alcohol limits to operating flight and cabin crew, people will be sacked on other peoples whims. The 24/8 hours rules are too lax. Until we have defined limits, this must be used in defence in court. What is ''moderation''..what is ''excess''?
In my career I can honestly say that I have never drunk within 9 hours of flying....but I know I must have been over the limit a few times when I reported.
Surely, it is the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered that becomes the controlling legal authority. So, a UK pilot, flying a UK registered aircraft becomes subject to the laws of the UK, not the laws of the land of the country he is departing. If this is the case, then all companies must publish the exact laid-down laws of every country as to alcohol/blood limits.
A spoonful of Benelyn could be the end of a career..........

[Macaw_1884]

Throughout all the press coverage of this event, there has been no mention of the First Officer. If security staff were able to smell alcohol on the Captain, then I assume the First Officer would have been aware of the Captain's alleged state too.

I wonder if he/she face's discipline by the airline?!

[paulo]

If the airline chose to breathalyse crew before considering them on duty, it would probably work as you suggest. They didn't. So that's an operational issue rather than a legal one.

I suspect that alot of pilots would be very resistant to this idea, although personally I think it's got it's merits. A one off lapse of judgement and you might get to keep your job. Frequent abuse would probably meant the sack, but no prison, no fines.

With regards to the point at which the offence occurs, it would be impractical to say this would have to be after, say, push back.

After that, there's little anyone could do make the allegation to someone suitably authorised and equipped to get clear evidence of guilt/innocense, except if someone was so nailed that they were still over after getting to the stand at the other end.

[Airbubba]

>>I must be missing a point here. Whilst I in no way condone flying under the influence of any kind of substance, since when was it an offence under civil law to turn up for work this way? AFAIAA, said pilot had not boarded the aircraft. Are law enforcers to charge car, lorry, bus and train drivers with the offence before they occupy their vehicle?<<

From the Washington Post article quoted a couple of times earlier:

"...The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police Department was contacted and notified Virgin Atlantic. Airline officials boarded the plane and spoke to [redacted] in the cockpit before summoning airport police, who escorted him off, said Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the authority. She said [redacted] was cooperative when taken off the plane..."

In the U.S., pilots can be tested after they report for duty. They do not have to start the engines (a little late to get the tester onboard) or even enter the aircraft. Of course, defense attorneys will try every trick in the book to claim that the test was improper (not that there's anything wrong with that <g>). In one case it was claimed that there was no intent of flight since the trip was canceled due to lack of crew after the captain was arrested.

[phnuff]

Are law enforcers to charge car, lorry, bus and train drivers with the offence before they occupy their vehicle?

In the UK, anyone, and I mean anyone working in the rail industry , is subject to random breath test at any time they are on premises owned by the rail industry or are engaged in working for the rail industry on non railway premises. This is equally applied to drivers, computer staff etc.

[Digitalis]

The thing that worries me most about this case is that there has been no statement of what, if any, test of intoxication this Captain has failed. So far, it would seem that he has been arraigned simply on the subjective opinion and suspicion of one security official and one policeman. Surely that is wrong?

Does anyone have any information to suggest that this man has failed any objective test at all? If he hasn't, what the bloody hell is going on?!!

[Flying Lawyer]

Digitalis

I mentioned this point earier in the thread - it puzzles me too.

I've read every Press report of the court proceedings I can find on the net and can't find any mention of the prosecutor telling the court what test(s) were carried out, in what respect and/or to what extent the pilot is said to have failed such test(s) etc.

Given that the prosecutor called the arresting officer to give evidence of the circumstances of the arrest, and even added (for some reason) the wholly irrelevant fact that he had not encountered any similar case in all of his six (!) years working for the airport authority, it seems curious that he apparently made no mention of any intoxication tests. I say 'apparently'; if he had, I'm certain that aspect would have been reported.

Nor, apparently, was there any mention of waiting for the results of blood or urine samples being the reason for the long delay before the next hearing.

However, it also appears the defence attorney said nothing about these aspects.
In those circumstances, it may be there is more evidence upon which the prosecutor relies than the 'subjective opinion and suspicion of one security official and one policeman' even though it's challenged by the defence as being incorrect.
If there are flaws/weaknesses in the prosecution evidence, it is usually tactically better to keep powder dry for when the case is heard properly - yesterday was a formal hearing.

[bjcc]

I have tried, and failed to find the legislation this guy was charged under. If anyone knows that may well help the debate in that it way well show exactly what has to be proved.

For instance, does there have to be a blood/urine/breath test?

The words used by the press seem to be 'attempting to fly while under the infulence of alcohol'

I would guess there would have to be some form of evidence, other than the american walk in a straight line test, but then again maybe not.

If not it explains the lack of mention of a test.

[Flying Bean]

Digitalis & Flying Lawyer

Thanks for highlighting this aspect. It has been puzzeling me as well. I thought I might have missed something but the analysis by Flying Lawyer does offer a 'maybe'explaination.
Strainge tho, that with the interest in the case, something as fundamental as this is not avialable. If the information was presented at the Prelim Hearing it would seem to be impossible that a reporter would not have picked up on the figures, if they exist.

But perhaps one of our USA pilot collegues could clarify. If A pilot is questioned in the USA is a Breath Test the standard proceedure or does the questioning/test vary from State to State or even vary within the different Police Aurthority.

But another point to pick up on:-
It does seem to be agreed that "airline officials" presumably Virgin, did the first contact with the pilot and then passed him over to the police for questioning. So that would indicated they felt the need for further investigative action.

Edited: after Heliports point below.
Yes. Good point. I withdraw that inference. But I still wish we could get info about the testing???

[Heliport]

It does seem to be agreed that "airline officials" presumably Virgin, did the first contact with the pilot and then passed him over to the police for questioning. So that would indicated they felt the need for further investigative action.
If the police received an allegation that a pilot who'd passed through security to airside was under the influence of alcohol, they would investigate it with or without Virgin's say so. The call to Virgin was more likely to be a courtesy call. What was Virgin meant to do? Try to stop them interviewing the pilot?
The fact that Virgin accepted there had to be an investigation of the allegation doesn't mean the company thought there was any truth in it. On the contrary, all Virgin's statements have spoken in glowing terms of the Captain and said that any such conduct would be totally out of character.

[Airbubba]

>>But perhaps one of our USA pilot collegues could clarify. If A pilot is questioned in the USA is a Breath Test the standard proceedure or does the questioning/test vary from State to State or even vary within the different Police Aurthority.<<

It does vary considerably from state to state, I posted a couple of links about this earlier.

Here's an overview of the Virginia law:

http://vatrafficlaw.com/dwiprimer.html

I'm trying to find out if Virgina has a specific drunk flying law, some states have them. In other states, aircraft are covered as "motor vehicles" through definition or earlier rulings.

The federal rules for testing pilots are discussed here:

http://www.aviationmedicine.com/DOTetohtest.htm

As the news articles have mentioned, there are parallel cases at both the state and federal levels.

>>It beggars belief that the chap must stay in the US until the trial date. Given his previous exemplary history, and the fact that VS have offered to fly him as necessary back to the US, do the prosecutors REALLY believe he's going to skip bail???? <<

Well, I've sure known pilots and other crewmembers to skip out on legal proceedings in other countries. One of my coworkers is still wanted in Germany for a paternity judgement years ago. And a Canadian pilot acquaintance was surprised to be arrested transiting JFK as a passenger for unpaid child support payments to an American ex-wife. Hey, they even took Michael Jackson's passport away for a while (but let him have it back only to go to the UK).

The lawyer argued that the Virgin captain was in poor health and needed to see his doctor in London:

"The judge also ordered [redacted] to surrender his passport, as the defense argued the pilot suffers a heart condition and needs to get home to London to see his cardiologist. When asked how a pilot with a heart condition can fly, a Virgin Atlantic spokesman says [redacted] meets British standards."

(from: http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1575353 )

[Cosmo]

openfly,

Surely, it is the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered that becomes the controlling legal authority

A very good question.


I would contend that the law of the country of registration does not become the legal authority in all situations.

The Chicago Convention declares that all states are sovereign over their own territory. When an aircraft enters the air space of a particular state, it is bound by the laws of that state. This applies not only to the rules of the air (which might differ a little bit from state to state, that’s why countries publish AIPs so that differences to international standards can be easier ascertained by foreign operators, for example) but also to other laws. Only when an aircraft is in the air space of “no mans land” (above the Atlantic, for example) does the state where the aircraft is registered have full jurisdiction. But, since it is a legal question, the answer is not so clear as I purport it to be. Variations to the above exist (the Tokyo Convention springs to mind).

Cosmo

[bjcc]

I spent 13 years as a Policeman at heathrow, and up till about 1996 if we were called to a foriegn registered aircraft we couldn't do very much about anything that happened on board. If an offence continued when the parties got off we could possibly do something then, for instance could arrest a drunk when he crossed onto the airbridge, provided he was either disorderly or became incapable, possibly where the crew dropped him.

In around 1996, can't exactly remmeber the year but that would be close, the goverment passed the Civil Aviation(ammendment) Act.

This gave UK police juristiction in a forgein registered civil aircraft, provided there was an equivenlent offence in the coutry of registration (Which the accused had to show there wasn't) and The airport the aircraft landed at was the first point of landing since the offence took place.

I understand that this act was passed in responce to an international convention, so I belive that many other countries have a similar law.

Of course prior to this act we could do nothing and the aircraft crews seemed loath to take any action in thier own country. The only exception I recall was where the crew of an airline just to East of Iraq detained a passenger who said something about that country's political system as he got to the door on the way out. He wasn't alowed off and we were not allowed on.

[arcniz]

It may well be that the REAL circumstances underlying this are quite different from what the press has reported.

The ethos of the District of Columbia and environs at present seems a bit like something one might find in Golding's "Lord of the Flies."

Perhaps with great justification in certain cases and surely without reasonable justification in others, there appears to be a focus on "exigent means" in the use and abuse of law these days which seems greater than has been seen since WW2.

The process of law in the dear old USA is fairer and more accountable than in many parts of the world - largely thanks to the character and diligence of most persons who make public safety their line of work - but sometimes one wonders.....

[Airbubba]

>>Does anyone have any information to suggest that this man has failed any objective test at all? If he hasn't, what the bloody hell is going on?!!<<

Well, according to the article below, he blew a 0.11. Assuming this result was accurate, his best hope for getting off is a technical error (like a missing signature) somewhere in the paperwork. A Delta pilot in Norfolk, Virginia copped a walk on state drunk flying charges due to a procedural error earlier this year.

Looks like that much maligned "security employee" may have made a very good call from a safety point of view. Of course, as always, some will claim it was mouthwash, breath mints, or overripe fruit that may have caused the breath test reading. I wish I could believe them.

I would not be surprised to see him "voluntarily" enter rehab based on other cases I am familiar with. This gives you some protection under U.S. law, e.g. Rush Limbaugh and the MIA America West crew.

Some other press reports have claimed that Virgin is (are) paying his legal expenses. Is it really Balpa as mentioned in this article?
________________________________________


Virgin Atlantic Pilot Failed Breath Test

By Rosalind S. Helderman

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 24, 2003; Page A04


A breath test given to a Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot shortly before he was to fly a planeload of passengers to London last Friday showed a blood alcohol level of 0.11, according to court documents. That is more than twice the limit set by federal regulations and above the legal limit for driving a car in any state.

Capt. [redacted], who was removed from the cockpit of a Boeing 747 at Dulles International Airport, is charged under a state law with attempting to operate an aircraft under the influence of alcohol. Unlike Virginia's drunken-driving statute, which sets a blood-alcohol limit of 0.08, state law does not specify a legal limit for flying.

The Federal Aviation Administration, which also will investigate the incident, sets a limit of 0.04 and forbids flying a plane within eight hours of taking a drink. [redacted] holds a British pilot's license, and if the FAA finds that he violated its regulations, that information will be forwarded to Britain's Civilian Aviation Authority.

Former FAA chief counsel Kenneth Quinn said British regulations are similar to FAA regulations but not as specific.

Breath tests are considered preliminary, and Loudoun County Commonwealth's Attorney Robert D. Anderson said they generally are not admissible in court. Documents filed in the Loudoun County court case do not disclose the results of a test done on [redacted]'s blood.

Passengers had not boarded when [redacted], 55, was taken off the plane about five minutes before flight time. A security employee at the airport had reported smelling alcohol on his breath, according to a spokesman for the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority.

According to court documents, a sergeant with the authority police found [redacted] in his captain's chair, smelling strongly of alcohol, and then saw him stumble as he left the cockpit. The documents said that [redacted] was cooperative after his arrest and that when asked whether he had an alcohol or drug problem, he responded, "No, I do not."

[redacted], a 14-year employee of the airline, was released from the Loudoun County jail on Monday after posting $25,000 bond -- provided by his union, the British Air Line Pilots Association -- and surrendering his passport. [redacted], a U.S. citizen who lives with his wife and two children in London, was placed on administrative leave with pay and ordered to stay in the United States.

His attorneys argued in court Monday that he should be released on his own recognizance and allowed to go home. In documents supporting their arguments, they said he has taken heart medication since having triple-bypass surgery. They also said [redacted] worked for Trans World Airline for 15 years before being hired by Virgin Atlantic.

Thomas C. Hill,one of [redacted]'s attorneys, said yesterday that the captain has "an exemplary record with no incidents of any kind. . . . When all the facts and circumstances are known, it will be shown that Captain [redacted] never intended to violate any laws."

More than 380 passengers and 17 crew members were scheduled to make the flight, which was canceled after [redacted]'s arrest. The airline offered passengers hotel accommodations for the night before flying them to London on Saturday. They also were given vouchers for a free flight anywhere the airline flies.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Feb. 3.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26306-2003Dec23.html

[BEagle]

"Breath tests are considered preliminary, and Loudoun County Commonwealth's Attorney Robert D. Anderson said they generally are not admissible in court. Documents filed in the Loudoun County court case do not disclose the results of a test done on (****)'s blood. "

Why do they not disclose this?

I hope that the defence is keeping its powder dry and will be able to rip the prosecution apart in February. But why does it take so long in the US?

[Captain Numpty]

Just one small point.............

It's amazing just how many folk are saying that they could smell "Alcohol"........I wonder how? Afterall, alcohol in it's natural form is odourless!

May be they should be smelling "Intoxicating Liquor"??

Just making a point!

C.N.

[billovitch]

In the company dispatch offices in Japan, there is a breathaliser. If anyone supects a crew member of being unfit through alcohol, this device is produced and the crew member tested. If positive he doesn't operate.

Very discrete - no sackings - no newspapers and no recriminations. Safe though......

[bjcc]

FL

Are you not judging US law on ours?

I agree it seems the bail conditions are exessive and to object to bail for this matter is down right stupid, but again that may be because i am used to our system.

I seem to recall photos of Maxine Carr from when she was charged being relaesed, and no one complained obout that, or Huntley being named when they were charged. At that stage they should have been considered just as innocent.

I am NOT, before anyone starts to complain, comparing the those 2 with this pilot. Just wwondering why one rule for one etc......

[Capt.KAOS]

In documents supporting their arguments, they said he has taken heart medication since having triple-bypass surgery. "The judge also ordered [redacted] to surrender his passport, as the defense argued the pilot suffers a heart condition and needs to get home to London to see his cardiologist. Still wondering why this captain with such an obvious serious heart condition is allowed to fly a long haul 747.

[Flying Lawyer]

"medication since having triple-bypass surgery"

What a good thing you deleted the unkind and sarcastic comment you made about his heart problems in an earlier post then, Airbubba?

----------

BEagle
Possibly because the results of the analysis hadn't been received from the lab when the documents were filed.

----------


I have no idea whether the man is guilty or innocent - but what extraordinary notions of justice they have in Virginia!

First they give the Press a photograph of the pilot taken in custody.
Now, the Press are told the contents of documents filed with the court, some of which "generally are not admissible" as evidence.
So let's tell the Press instead?
Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Airport Authority is making statements to the Press about a case which has yet to be tried in court?

I was in Virginia a couple of months ago. Beautiful state - but I'm very relieved I didn't do anything which might have led to my being prosecuted there. :rolleyes:


[Edit]

bjcc
Sorry, I inadvertently deleted my post when editing so your response and my post are now out of sync.

No, I'm judging what's happening in Virginia against what I consider to be justice and fairness to people charged with offences.
I agree there's an increasing tendency for our police to say/give far too much to the Press and, IMHO, it's very troubling. No question of double standards - I think it was disgraceful that photographs of a defendant taken in police custody, copies of exhibits and even videos of police interviews were leaked to the Press in the case you mention.

[Airbubba]

>>What a good thing you deleted the unkind and sarcastic comment you made about his heart problems in an earlier post then, Airbubba?<<

Please refresh my memory.

The defense lawyer was trying to emphasize what poor heath the prisoner was in order to obtain bail. I do find it a little ironic to claim that the man is too sick to be in jail but well enough to command a 747 across the Atlantic. I think some others here (mere pilots, not lawyers) find that ironic as well. But hey, it worked, I suppose.

Since you seem to be unfamiliar with mug shots, take a look here for some classics:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/index.html

Most documents concerning court proceedings and arrests are publicly available in the U.S. unless sealed by a judge.

Surely you must realize that the legal system in different in each country?

The accused pilot is an American facing trial in an American court. Are you already implying that he is being treated unfairly?

[Wino]

FL,

In this media age where everyone gets to tell their story to the press (WHILE NOT UNDER OATH I MIGHT ADD) the perp walk (pictures of the alledged criminal being brought in in handcuffs) have become something of a tradition that the prosecution uses to counter the inevitable press release of the perp being more holy than mother terresa. Do I like it? Nope...

There is a fair amount of spin that goes on before a trial in high profile cases. I don't know how much it actually effects the outcome, but you should read a very good book by Thomas Wolf called "Bonfire of the Vanities" It was made into an okay moving strarring Tom Hanks and Melanie griffiths that was outright suppressed by the liberal media because it painted Al Sharpton for the lieing thug that he is... Its fiction, but consider it historical fiction and will give you a good idea of what drives some prosecutions.

Also, while I am not comfortable with the steep bail here, the charges apparently are quite severe in this state. However, often they get overturned later because when a state makes an anti aviation law they are often over stepping their authority and taking actions that are reserved for the federal government. The problem is you first have to convict someone of this before you can declare it unconstitutional (usually).

Oh and one other thing that we do differently. A cornerstone of American justice and the chief protection from the government is PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE COURTS. That's why David Dinkin's plan to move the courts out to Rikers Island (a prison Island in NY harbor where most NY criminals are held) in order to save the 100s of millions of dollars they spend a year transporting criminals from Rikers to Manhattan criminal courts was such a dangerous plan. There would have been no public access, then you are like a banana republic, Strait from your show trial to your punishment without ever seeing the light of day...

But that public access to the courts may make things seam a little more open than they do in the crown courts... So more makes it into the news.

Cheers
Wino

[FlapsOne]

With rgds to any existing heart condition, whatever it is, the guy has a Class 1 medical so it has been assessed as OK for him to command 747. Numerous days in prison, with all the protracted stress that might bring is, I would suggest, a different matter.

Not really for this forum to speculate nor much room for further debate on that issue is there?

Heart bypass ops are almost routine these days and there are plenty of very healthy people out there who have had it done.

A relative of mine, who had one several years ago, says he wishes he had it much earlier as he has never felt fitter.

[Airbubba]

Here is the section of Virginia law covering drunk flying. As Wino points out, sometimes these state laws get thrown out due to conflicts in jurisdiction with federal laws regulating air commerce.

Drunk flying is considered a felony charge in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

_______________________________________________

§ 5.1-13. Operation of aircraft while under influence of intoxicating liquors or drugs; reckless operation.

Any person who shall operate any aircraft within the airspace over, above or upon the lands or waters of this Commonwealth, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of any narcotic or any habit-forming drugs shall be guilty of a felony and shall be confined in a state correctional facility not less than one nor more than five years, or, in the discretion of the court or jury trying the case, be confined in jail not exceeding twelve months and fined not exceeding $500, or both such fine and imprisonment.

Any person who shall operate any aircraft within the airspace over, above or upon the lands or waters of this Commonwealth carelessly or heedlessly in willful or wanton disregard of the rights or safety of others, or without due caution and circumspection and in a manner so as to endanger any person or property, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(Code 1950, § 5-10.1; 1964, c. 416; 1966, c. 576.)

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/lst/LH805571.HTM

[Flying Lawyer]

Airbubba

"I think some others here (mere pilots, not lawyers) find that ironic as well."
No doubt they do, (Capt.KAOS for one) but they may be a little more understanding that the Captain and his lawyer used every possible argument in support of the application for bail, even if some were better than others. They may even be pleased he wasn't kept locked up in prison while he awaits his trial. He may be guilty and, if so, sympathy for him will inevitably and understandably disappear but, at the moment, he hasn't been convicted.
"But hey, it worked, I suppose."
I doubt it. It's more likely the court thought the prosecutor's arguments for keeping a respectable and unconvicted man in prison were even weaker than the defence 'health' argument for releasing him.
"Surely you must realize that the legal system in different in each country?"
Of course. Does that mean I shouldn't criticise aspects of another country's system which I think are unjust. I criticise aspects of our system with which I disagree.
"Are you already implying that he is being treated unfairly?"
I haven't implied anything. I've said so in unequivocal terms. I have no reason to suppose his trial won't be fair. My criticism has been of those in authority feeding the media circus, with complete disregard for him and his family, while he awaits that trial.

BTW, I don't think your snide "mere pilots, not lawyers" remark will cut much ice on this forum. My respect for professional pilots is well-known to regulars on Pprune.


Wino

I'm not cricising Press pictures of an accused being brought to court, only the authorities (whether police or prison) giving the Press copies of pictures taken in custody - in this case, an official photograph of the pilot, an unconvicted man, in prison garb. I can't see how the public interest or the interests of justice, can be served by giving such pictures to the Press.

From what you say, it appears practices in America are very different from ours. Here, prosecution lawyers would not respond to defence press releases, do not engage in a newspaper/media spin battle and would certainly not discuss the evidence with journos. Some police officers improperly give information to journos 'off the record' pre-trial, but prosecution lawyers don't. Indeed, the Press has to be very careful what it publishes pre-trial or risk being in contempt of court. eg If journos are present at preliminary hearings here, they are free to record what's said including any discussions about the evidence, but they aren't permitted to publish until after the trial.
Giving the Press information for publicaton before the trial which will not be admissible in evidence before the jury which tries him is, IMHO, very dangerous. Such information is only published here after trial, if at all.

In case there's any misunderstanding, all our criminal courts are open to the public unless, truly exceptionally, national security is at risk. eg Espionage prosecutions. I wonder where the idea of that 'cornerstone of American justice' came from? ;)

T. O.
(Good to meet you last weekend. Sorry it was so brief.)

[Wino]

I don't think that the prosecuters can say anything that is patently false. But they sure can engage in a little spin now and then, to make sure someone doesn't arrive in court as a saint...

There have been a couple of very high profile cases that were probably spun by the defense to allow them to go free. (OJ, and few others come to mind)

But the real problem in a high profile case is that often they are overcharged because someone is making a political statement.
The other problem is the tendancy to overcharge a case to get a perp to plead guilty to what they really were guilty of. (Louise Woodward comes to mind in that). Its actually gotten so bad that I am starting to think that maybe plea bargains aren't such a good idea... I am aware of the backlog of cases so I don't have an easy solution however...

Cheers
Wino

PS. It was a bleedin shame we didn't have a few hours over a few pints. Maybe next time... You could come to the coming NY bash in April...

[Airbubba]

>>BTW, I don't think your snide "mere pilots, not lawyers" remark will cut much ice on this forum. My respect for, and assistance to, pilots is well-known to regulars on Pprune.<<

And likewise, I assure you I won't let your pedantic observations on my posts affect my opinion of lawyers one bit <g>.

Did you see the links and cites I posted in response to your queries about how things work in America?

[Flying Lawyer]

Wino
I don't know anything about pre-trial defence spin in the OJ case, but the defence tactics during the trial were breath-taking to someone used to our system. Not the American system's finest hour, perhaps.
Your assessment of the Woodward case is more generous than mine. I felt more sympathy for the way the poor parents were pilloried.

I'm off-line now for Christmas. Have a good one! :D



Airbubba
Yes, I did. Thank you.

[surely not]

Well we can all rest easy................Todays Daily Express (a tabloid rag in the UK) has a picture of the aircraft the pilot was about to fly and it was not a 747 at all!!!!!!

It was a 737 of Virgin Blue!!!!!

Don't you just love the way the press get their story so factually correct in every detail! I hope Virgin Blue sue them to hell and back for defamation of the company name.

I cannot add anything else to this thread as it seems to be repeating the same suppositions time and time again.

Do Judges have to be lay off the booze beore trying people?

[Rowardennan]

Do Judges have to be lay off the booze beore trying people?


Of course they do!

Haven't you ever heard the expression 'Sober as a Judge' ;)

[newarksmells]

Having read 12 pages of support, denials, excuses etc...all I have to say is this.

IF the pilot did what he is accused of doing, he has lost his career and livelyhood which is a far greater punishment than any court could ever hand down.

IF he didn't do anything to merit this arrest, I hope he will be found innocent and sue the a*s off the US Government. You just can't pick somebody's life up and throw it in the toilet which is what the TSA are doing IF he is innocent.

Newarksmells

[bjcc]

Newarksmells,

I thought this side of it had finished now...go on then explain why it is that the Security man has done something wrong...???

Perhaps, while you are there, you can provide justification for sueing anyone who tells the Police anything, like 'I saw Fred Smith rob that person', 'John Brown is selling drugs', or 'I saw ********* hide a knife in his sock before he went off to catch a flight'. Because like it or not, it is exactly the same thing!

Interesting idea if you take your point isn't it. Don't tell the Police if you think someone is committing an offence. Remember one day you may be the victim of crime, how would you feel if someone may have information about who was guilty and said nothing, in case they got sued.

The evidence against this pilot is being provided by himself. In the shape of a blood or urine test. No one else. On the result of that evidence or some fault in proccedure the court will decide.

On the other hand you could try and be sensible the guard, whatever you think of him or who he works for has EVERY right to call in the Police.

[arcniz]

The Ratchet

One problem inherent in cases of this sort is the potential for somewhat mindless escalation of the seriousness of a situation by individuals who are ill-qualified, ill-informed, tired, angry, confused or frightened by the circumstances of the moment.

In the aviation version of this, the outcome that people read about is an airplane on a mountainside or wedged in a marsh.

The law-enforcement version is quite similar, but it appears as a case which begins with very odd and sketchy initial circumstances. Each escalation of authority in the decision proocess ratchets the concept from complaint to suspicion to matter to charge to proceeding. The ranks of officialdom close up behind the process makers and no hint of any error is likely to emerge - except on the bloody end of discovery and maybe in the appeals process.

The first escalation in the instant case now seems complete and the official players are evidently solidified into very hard positions. Whether a mindless escalation has occurred here - or not - remains to be determined by the rough grinding of the legal machinery. All too often, in the U.S. at least, the hamburger that comes out of legal process no longer resembles in any way the "facts" that went in. This is amplified by a pronounced tendency to overcharge individuals in every manner possible so as to bludgeon them into early confession... ahead of fact-finding. Any resemblance of U.S. style "plea-bargaining" to the Spanish Inquisition is purely chimerical, of course. Leakage to the press of incriminating allegations and details that undermine the defendant's ability to defend himselt is icing on the case.... er.. cake.

It all starts with an unexpected situation arriving in the lap of someone who is marginally prepared to handle it. A necessary second ingredient is some inexorable outside pressure that demands quick action, rather than more deliberate or thoughtful study and problem-solving.

In an aircraft, there are ample time pressures, even when something important is not broken or failing. In police work, the pace can sometimes be more leisurely, except in the presence of reporters, crowds of bystanders, schedules that are about to change the circumstances, strange accents, bad vibes, etc.

With a marginally competent (at the moment) decisionmaker and a swift need to do SOMETHING, the conservative and (one might say) reasonable choice is to follow procedures with the utmost care and diligence. In an airplane this usually means "read the book" or "gawk the efis" to determine the data and SOPs that might apply. In law enforcement it tends to mean: "assume the charges and use that justification to call in a superior (who will then inherit responsibility for the actual decision)."

After a few iterations of either approach, all the opportunity for a graceful, fact-oriented, and de-escalated resolution of the problem is gone in the wind.

The consequenses then ensue.

It's called "decision by default".

[virgin]

bjcc
I don't understand what you can possibly think is wrong with with what Newark said.
All he said is if the Captain's guilty he'll pay a very high price. He didn't say the price was too high and he didn't say he shouldn't have to pay it if he did what they allege.
Then he said that if the Captain's innocent and has been put through all this for nothing then he should get some compensation for what he's been put through.

How can you disagree with any of that? :confused:
And how do you get from what Newark said to "I thought this side of it had finished now...go on then explain why it is that the Security man has done something wrong...???
I don't understand how you make the jump. :confused:

Newark probably knows as much about how you go about getting compensation for this sort of thing as I do which is not a lot. I'd call in Flying Lawyer if it happened to me. But if the Captain's innocent I'd be very surprised if many people except you and the likes of Airbubba would think he shouldn't get some compensation for the humiliation, stress, distress, being locked up in prison, having his photo splashed all over the papers and some asshole of a prosecutor making it worse by talking to the papers. Wino explained that's how they do things in the States. The prosecutor tries to sway public opinion against the person accused ahead of the trial. That's dirty tricks in my book.


"whatever you think of him or who he works for the security guard has got EVERY right to call in the Police."
Sure. Has anyone said he hasn't? But what people think of him doing it is another thing and people have got different opinions. Some people have condemned the secutity man. Do you genuinely find that as hard to understand as you make out? Are you pretending you don't know most people don't like sneaks? Even if what the sneak says is true? Maybe it isn't logical, but God gave us hearts as well as heads and most people don't like seeing one man getting another man in the sh1t EVEN IF he's done something wrong. Andplease spare me all the media hype about '383 people narrowly escaping death over the Atlantic.' What a load of bollox.

Once a copper always a copper, eh bjcc? ;)
This is mainly a pilots forum so we're bound to feel compassion for a fellow pilot in trouble even if he's brought the sh1t on himself. That's not the same as saying he doesn't deserve to pay a high price if he's done wrong and been caught.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have drink laws and I'm not saying people shouldn't done if they break them but I don't like the press whipping it up out of all proportion.

Forgot to say Happy Christmas. You people lucky enough to be at home today are probably about to start tucking in to your turkeys about now. :D

HAPPY CHRISTMAS to you all, especially to fellow pilots logging in from hotel rooms.

[bjcc]

Virgin

Yes once a copper always a copper.

Your points all seem to be based round the premise that if this guy is aquitted, then everyone else must be a fault. Thats not the case. The arrest is a result of information received, but that information was not the sole reason for the guy getting arrested. An allagations been made, Police attend and investigate that allagation, if there is then suffiecent evidence and or reason to exercise a power of arrest then thats the Police Officers decision. In this particular case the reason for arrest is to secure evidence, that evidence being a breath/blood/urine (whichever applies) test. The result of those tests seem to have provided sufficent evidence to charge him. So how is the US Goverment at fault? How is the TSA at fault?


You may well not like snitches, grasses or any other similar expression, but then again you probably wouldn't want to live in a society where Police didn't get information from the public either.


I have no objection to supporting the guy, especialy when he's being treated in a way which seems harsh to you and me. But thats the US Judicial system and I doubt you raised an eyebrow when Micheal Jackson's photo was shown or when he was given strict bail conditions. But that support should not extend to the slating of others who can't or haven't defended themselves.

All comes down to treating people fairly, so yes I will repeat it, once a copper always.....

[Airbubba]

The reality in the U.S. is that security screeners will report a smell of alcoholic beverages on your breath. I'll leave it to the other geniuses here to discuss whether it is legal, appropriate or ethical. Coming back to work after a pint or two may be still be acceptable or even traditional in the UK in some jobs but for pilots reporting for duty in the U.S. it is definitely bad news.

Sometimes the screener's suspicion is proved correct, sometimes not but, like random alcohol testing, it does make you think twice about drinking in the hours before a duty period. Remember, we've had breath alcohol testing for pilots in the U.S. for about a decade now.

Here are a few recent examples of U.S. security screeners reporting the smell of alcohol on pilots' breath:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58299

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104007

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79661

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=76410

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66110

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63157

[prayboy]

I find it somewhat staggering that so much publicity is being given to this event, when (allmost five years ago to the day) a senior pilot at ROYAL BRUNEI was arrested at LHR in full veiw of hundreds of xmas travellers for possession of illicit drugs. Amazingly, apart from PPRUNE , there was zero publicity of ANY kind on the planet. How did they manage it? more to the point, what did the SULTAN ask tony blair to do to cover it up? was this done as a result of this pilots subsequent report to the then DFO implicating up to SEVEN fellow captains for similar irresponsible behavior? I would love to know the answer but guess its not going to happen.

[Nigel Molesworth]

:confused:
Two things:-

I thought we were all to believe that there is a "Special Relationship" between the US & the UK; Tony told us so. So why can't a senior member of an International Airline leave the US - even when his employer has publicly agreed to facilitate his return. Is this person such a hardened criminal or so untrustworthy? Couldn't a "special arrangement" have been made in this case?

Secondly: Reporting transgressers of the law. Yes, of course we should report people who break the law. Presumably now that includes people who use mobile phones while driving in the UK. Do you feel as strongly about that as reporting "breath" on a pilot? Let's hear it .....

[ZQA297/30]

One cannot help but conclude that at the moment in the USA you are guilty until proven innocent, but you are still guilty anyway.

I know Rawle Joseph, and he is a genuine "church man" who never curses or raises his voice. He goes about his job quietly and unobtrusively. It would be hard to imagine a more un-terrorist person, yet he is being put through the grinder.
It therefore does not surprise me that the poor Virgin skipper is under heavy manners, whether innocent or guilty matters not.



From Trinidad and Tobago Newsday


FBI tells stunned BWIA pilot
‘We’ve got you!’
By HORACE MONSEGUE in NEW YORK


BWIA pilot Rawle Joseph was surrounded by five armed FBI agents at JFK International Airport, New York, last week, one of whom shouted, “We’ve got you!”

Joseph, 50, a father of three, of Pinto Road, Arima, a national scholarship winner, who joined BWIA in June 1980, was stunned when the agents pulled him aside and began two and a half hours of questioning, claiming that he was a terrorist, whose name and age, matched someone on a ‘no-fly list’ issued by the Transport Security Agency. Joseph denied being a terrorist and showed the agents that he always carried a bible in his flight bag. The agents then proceeded to go through the bible — page by page.

Joseph who was detained at JFK, was last night at the Holiday Inn, Manhattan, where he has been ordered to stay “and not leave the US.” He told colleagues that his situation has him frustrated because he does not know how long he will have to stay in the United States while FBI agents continue their investigations. BWIA, Sunday Newsday understands, is also conducting its own investigation. Joseph along with fellow Trinidadian pilot Captain Anthony Wight, who was detained in Miami the same week, was yesterday still in the dark about their future, although they had been receiving calls from family, friends, and Trinidad government officials. Minister of National Security Martin Joseph has already briefed Prime Minister Patrick Manning on the episode and Trinidad embassy officials have been in touch with Joseph. The USA is on heightened alert risk status, following re-newed terrorist threats. Joseph and Wight feel they have been caught in a sinister web spun by persons who stole their identity. Talking to colleagues yesterday, Joseph, who is First Officer on the BWIA plane to New York said that what has happened to him has left him distressed and when he is allowed to leave he will not be at the controls of the BWIA aircraft. “I want to be a passenger like everyone else,” he told colleagues.

Joseph’s nightmare began on Tuesday night last when he and other crew members were about to disembark the aircraft. On reaching a departure gate, they were accosted by the FBI who demanded their passports, but singled out Joseph. They put his passport in an orange bag and then searched his flight bag thoroughly, including his other travel bag. One of the agents then shouted “We’ve got him!” “They then went through my bible page by page,” Joseph told colleagues. Joseph told crew members, “One fellow said they were looking for a wanted terrorist, but they didn’t really think it was me.” He was grilled for two and a half hours, before he was allowed to leave.

On Christmas Day when Joseph was about to board the 7 am flight back to Trinidad, he was again confronted by FBI agents and told that he would not be given clearance to leave the US. Joseph was again interrogated, and the mild-mannered pilot, according to sources kept his cool, even though he was being repeatedly asked the same questions, like how he spelt his name, if he ever changed his name, etc. “I am a virtual prisoner at the hotel,” said Joseph, who was yesterday short on money. His colleagues have rallied around him, telephoned him, and invited him out for meals. Still, Joseph’s situation is far from comfortable. He believes that every step he makes, he is being monitored. He feels that his room at the Holiday Inn is bugged, and the FBI is not telling him anything about how long he will have to stay in the US. The FBI agents have given Joseph back his passport, but he dares not leave the “Big Apple.”

[Iron City]

Thanks to AIRBUBBA for posting the section of the Virginia code that it appears CAPT redacted was arrested on. What , typical of Virginia, poorly drafted cr*& of a statute. His counsel should be able to drive trucks through it and then you get to the federal preemption because aviation is regulated by federal law and drunken flying (if one is convicted) is regulated by federal authority. If I recall properly none of the state statutes have been successfully used to prosecute anyone for drunken flying...the place where they did get them was operating the aircraft on the ground (a motor vehicle). And if this is considered a motor vehicle in Virgina there is a doctrine of implied consent for search and sobriety testing by just getting into the vehicle.

The court in question is a general district court of a Virginia county, Loudoun. I believe the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority (a creature chartered by the federal government and run by a board representing Virginia, Maryland, District of Columbia, and the legislative and executive branches of the federal government) has their police, the Dept of Homeland Security has their security. The WMAA police have powers on the airports and the access road to IAD but have to operate under Virginia laws (both DCA and IAD are in Virginia).

A general district court is the court where everything criminal and civil for adults ( except family and domestic relations issues) are handled. The time from hearing to trial is different in different courts from the so called "rocket docket" in Fairfax County where you can be arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced in a week to some far less speedy proceedings. A February trial date for a criminal matter in Loudoun does not seem unusual. The avenues for appeal would be to the state supreme court (and good luck to you) or to the federal court on the federal preemption ( guess it would be Eastern district of Virgina where all the alleged terrorists get tried because it has a reputation for quick convictions and harsh sentences) or a U.S. court of appeals.

Court proceedings in adult cases in Virginia are generally open and if one wants one can spend the day seeing this form of "theatre".

That's it for the local color.

[newarksmells]

As you posted, once a cop always a cop...and then you posted:

"I thought this side of it had finished now...go on then explain why it is that the Security man has done something wrong...???"

I never said any such words.

But then again, the first sentance says it all. Namely, if in doubt, force words down the supspect's throat and make them confess.

You wonder why people have so little trust in authority after seeing you spout your flase accusations and venom??

Newark

[HercBird]

Let me start off by saying that I am not a pilot. Unfortunately, some of you might stop reading at this point, and that is a shame, cause it is exactly those people that this is aimed for.

Anyways, eventhough I am not a pilot I have the utmost respect for this profession. Yes, aviation is just a hobby to me, or rather a sickness, an addiction, but I try to keep informed, have gone fully through FAR/AIMs alone a few times, even got myself registered and have posted 1 (2?) posts in here. Now it is several threads in the past month that make me post this reply.

What troubles me in this conversation is the fact that some of the pilots posting seem to be taking the pilot's side even if he is guilty.

OK, STOP, rewind. I am NOT saying he is guilty. The fact that he needs to be proven guilty first in a court of law is given. Yes, the fact that this individual is being treated as guilty already, and that everything seems to have leaked to the press is regretable, however, it is not different than any other high-profile news-story.

However, it does appear that some of you think that even if he is guilty and he gets away on a technicality, then it is ok. Good for him, good for all of us. Now I know all about supporting your fellow brothers in arms, but as I see it, that should go only if they are right.

I fail to see that from some of you. I might be referred to as Self-Loading-Freight :hmm: by some of you, however even I know that flying any type of aircraft (even a user friendly Airbus :) ) requires immense skill and concetration, something that does not mix well with alcohol. Anything less, and not only that aircraft and its passengers are in jeopardy, but the whole environment around them.

Yes, he might be a senior captain with no errors so far in his career. Yes, if this is proven to be a mistake he should be restored to flight-status immediately, and even be paid for lost wages. However if it turns out that he was under the influence, he has commited a crime and he was caught, whether he has been perfect so far or not. By even trying to operate an aircraft while intoxicated he was putting hundreds of lives in jeopardy.

Some of you might say "what about the Christmas he has lost with his family and the trouble he has gone through ?". Well I must say that I do not expect the process to have reached this point without any special circumstances within this case. It would not make sense, no matter what. There must be other factors that we are either not aware off, or are to be proven. Only if there is no hint of improperness should the state be asked to pay for any sort of further "psychological" damages.

Yes, it does suck that this profession requires a higher degree of discipline concerning such matters, but that is the job. You knew that when you started. I could even understand it, if it turns out he had been drinking, if he would have decided to call in sick. There are times when all of us have needed a drink, maybe it would have been one of those times for him. However, if he had been drinking and tried to have a go at it, then he did the crime and he should do the time, no matter what his past record.

Now regarding the support-him-no-matter-what people: :rolleyes:

I do understand that this profession, and the decisions that need to be taken from a commander in general require a strong personality, a certain arrogance (for the lack of a better word) of sorts. However it appears that a lot of pilots have taken the mentality of "we are perfect, so it must be them" and that it is "us against them" :confused:.

I have 3-4 friends that are commercial airline pilots. All of them have my respect for what they do, as I do have an appreciation of part of what it takes, however the ones that have earned it even more are the ones that know that they still have things to learn, that they are not the "ultimate beings" :}.

When you do not question the ways of other aviators ever, it is even more likely that you will not question your own ways. I find this very dangerous, especially when lives are at stake, and maybe a moment of thought on it is in order.

The mentality of "5-dollar-an-hour rent-a-cops should not be allowed to question pilots or their sobriety" is beyond me. When you are going to be in-charge of the safety of 300 or so passengers and crew for the next 10 hours, at 35000 feet, anyone should have the right to question you.

Should you be chastised before you are found guilty ??? No. However precaution does validate that you do take some sort of test. If you are in the right, there should be no fear. You will be proven innocent (Yes, I have more faith in courts acquiting the guilty than wrongfully convicting the innocent).

Most of you will run to the recent case of the crew in Norway and say "they weren't drunk and look where that ended up". Well, the fact that they were chastised before proven guilty was the problem, not the fact that their sobriety was questioned. Again, regretable but not uncommon, as a society we seem to think the worst of people even before they are proven guilty, and yes, pilots are guilty of this too (or have you not ever thought of a politician being corrupt for example as soon as any sort of improperness is alleged???).

So to summarize:

1) He should be restored to flight status and lost wages should be awarded (nothing more, nothing less) if he is found innocent (and I do not mean on a technicality).

2) He should be punished if he is found guilty. There is no excuse for flying while intoxicated.

3) Anyone should have the right to question the sobriety of anyone in charge of the safety of 300 people.

4) There should be a better process in place where the pilot is protected until the allegation is examined thoroughly with evidence.

5) Until this (4) happens, there will be pressure on all pilots accused. This is something that happens everyday, with dozens of other high-profile professions (doctors, lawyers, politicians for example) and whether it should happen or not, pilots cannot expect special treatment in regards to it.

My more than 2 cents.....

P.S: Actually, I think that if it was me running the show, I would probably make breathaliser tests a pre-requisite before someone is allowed to enter an aircraft as a crewmember. Rather have a few positives which are later proved to be false rather than having someone intoxicated commanding 200 tons of metal, with 100 tons of fuel and 350 people on board.

[GlueBall]

HercBird: Not familiar with U.K. rules, but in the USA air carrier pilots already are subject to random drug & alcohol tests under CFR Title 14 Part 121.

Any media coverage of this subject is magnified, as if it were a major industry wide problem. Actually less than .5% of the 50,000+ major air carrier flight deck crewmembers have been found to have an alcohol problem since the testing started many years ago. :ooh:

[bjcc]

Newark

As you said....

"IF he didn't do anything to merit this arrest, I hope he will be found innocent and sue the a*s off the US Government. You just can't pick somebody's life up and throw it in the toilet which is what the TSA are doing IF he is innocent"

the relevent bit being...'what the TSA are doing'.

The presumption being that the TSA in the shape of this Security Guard went to the Police...if thats what you mean fine, all I want is for you to provide an alternative answer what do you suggest he did? If thats not what you mean, whats the TSA got to do with it?

Thanks for your comments on my past profession, which I note with amusment.

[scroggs]

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with any aviation or airport personnel reporting genuinely held suspicions regarding any other aviation or airport personnel, and if those suspicions are determined to be reasonably justified by those appointed to make that judgement, then the individuals concerned should face the investigation and further legal action that the law allows. That, of course, includes all the defences that the accused individual may bring to bear.

HercBird, that said, this is a pilot's board and it's hardly surprising that there is both suspicion of the motives of the accuser (the TSA has been seen to be overly keen to 'trap' pilots in the past), and some encouragement for the accused to use the technical legal arguments that may be available to him. They are a legitimate and, while not necessarily to your taste, a perfectly reasonable way of conducting a defence. Whatever the result is, I don't doubt for a minute that the legal process will be fairly conducted under Virginia and Federal law.

There is, however, a greater issue of trust here, and I don't believe that the way it is going will reflect well on either the flying profession or those who feel that it's their mission to undermine it at any and every opportunity.

Rather like the medical profession, pilots rely on the trust of those placed in their care. If that trust is shaken, then the foundations of the entire industry are under threat. There will always be a few pilots (as there are doctors) who are themselves untrustworthy, and each of those does immeasurable harm to the industry - but a reasonable observer will understand that human nature does not make possible a perfect workforce in any field. Take the Christian clergy as perhaps a good example of a body that can't possibly live up to the standards expected of it at all times. Should aviation be expected to be less vulnerable to human nature than the Church? I think that would be unreasonable - and I'm quite sure that the general public would agree. Therefore, it must be expected that occasionally an individual will fall short of the standards expected of the industry as a whole. We should accept that, do our best to plug whatever loopholes are revealed by each case, and move on. There is no need for sensationalism - for or against those involved.

This case will be revealed in its entirety in court. The Judge will have, by then, all the available information in front of him. If there is reasonable doubt of guilt (or if the technical procedures have not been carried out correctly), this pilot will walk free as an innocent man, there having been no case proven against him. If the evidence convinces the Judge that this pilot is guilty, then such sanctions as the State of Virginia allows will be available to be used against this man. Until then - when all the evidence has been presented - we should all refrain from prejudging the case.

Meanwhile, whatever the eventual findings of the court, the plight of this man is worthy of the empathy of those fellow professionals who can understand the pressures that he is undergoing now, and who can find it in themselves to give him support should it be found that he has transgressed. If he has, he will deserve punishment. Condemnation, however, requires a deeper understanding of the facts of his case - and I doubt that anyone here commenting has that knowledge.

Please, let's wait and hear what the court has to say.

[HercBird]

I did not mean to imply that the Aviator workforce should be perfect. There is going to be "bad apples" everywhere, and by this I do not mean that this is one here.

Quite to the contrary, what I did mean is that I see some hesitation to admit there are loopholes (as scroggs said) and "bad apples".

Now, having said that, if we do allow people to get away with technicalities, even among ourselves, we encourage the behavior. Technicalities might get someone acquited in court, but it should not allow them to get away with breaking our (and by our, I mean the community's in general) trust in them.

"Bad apples" should be identified and isolated from within. It makes everything safer for both us passengers, but even more so for you aviators, who afterall spend much more time out there and are more likely to find yourselves in a situation with them.

Yes, noone is perfect and even the holiest of saints will make a mistake one day. What I am trying to say is that if you do see that a coworker is making one, or even suspect it, don't ignore it. Make them realize that it is a mistake and that they should avoid a bigger one by continuing.

A pilot walking out/calling in sick when incapable of fully operating an aircraft will cause less harm to themselves than them being caught violating the law, and will be no risk of turning every person's day around them into a very dangerous one.

By encouraging self-review of the ranks, you will not have to worry about the TSA trying to discredit any profession. They will never have a chance to find something substancial to use.

Closing the ranks and just defending everyone, no matter what, just because they are "another one of US" will only help in the aggrevation of the "us against them" and the lack of trust from all.

As for the specific case, I agree, let's see what we have yet to see...

Blue Skies....

P.S: Yes, I know this is a pilot's forum, and I am a guest here. Whether it is apparent or not at this time, I am trying to protect the true nature of this noble profession, just because of the respect I have for it.... ;)

[Jet II]

GlueBall

Actually less than .5% of the 50,000+ major air carrier flight deck crewmembers have been found to have an alcohol problem since the testing started many years ago.

Surely that is an argument in favour of random testing - In the UK all we get at the moment is regular expose` on TV showing flightcrew drinking before flying and hysterical headlines in the press. BALPA then trot out a spokesman saying 'there is no problem, trust us' - which of course nobody does and the whole argument continues.

If random testing were introduced, as it has been on the railways (don't get many stories about drunken train drivers?) then there would be definitive statistics to show whether there were a problem or not.

The days of any profession 'policing' itself are coming to an end - whether they be Doctors, Lawyers or Pilots.

[arcniz]

[Post deleted]


This isn't Jetblast.
Please do your best to make intelligent contributions.

[BlackSword]

(I posted similar in another thread):
It will be very interesting to see what effects the new UK legislation will have.

The legislation makes it an absolute offence to have drugs or alcohol in your body and sets specific limits for alcohol.
If you are tested positive, then you are guilty of a criminal offence and there is no defence (which is why a zero-tolerance level of 0.2% has been set). It seems unlikely that anyone found guilty would be returned to work......... and any airline that did not report "unfit" flight crew could be considered guilty of conspiracy - which reduces the scope for in-house rehabilitation.

What I find interesting in this thread (and others) is the lack of mention of "drugs". These are not effectively defined in the legislation and no "cutoff" levels are set. The term embraces a wide variety of illicit drugs as well as legally obtainable drugs that may impair your "function" - for example, anti-depressants, beta-blockers, heart drugs etc. Drugs are in widespread use (overtaking alcohol in traffic offences) and it seems niaive to ignore their use.

The body metabolises alcohol quickly (and even manufactures it, which is why the .02% cutoff level is set). However, the body metabolises other drugs much less efficiently and if "zero tolerance" levels are set (as with alcohol) as seems likely, this could mean that an individual may test positive several days after imbibing.

The police will test if they are reliably informed (by workmates etc) that an offence may have been committed.

The industry really does need to take this issue seriously and not pretend that cabin and flightdeck staff don't take "drugs". Pro-active random testing seems unavoidable.

[Airbubba]

TSA Chief At Dulles Is Charged With DWI
Agency Says Official Had Code Orange Duty

By Steven Ginsberg

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 2, 2004; Page B01

The chief of the Transportation Security Administration at Dulles International Airport was placed on administrative leave yesterday after being charged with drunk driving while he was on duty for a New Year's Eve Code Orange alert, officials said.

Acting federal security director Charles Brady was pulled over about 1 a.m. by a Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police officer who saw him driving erratically on Route 28 near Dulles, airport spokeswoman Tara Hamilton said.

Brady, 49, was taken to the Fairfax County jail, where was booked at 3 a.m. He was released at 1 p.m. yesterday after being charged with driving while intoxicated, said spokesman Lt. Tyler Corey, who described Brady as "extremely cooperative" during his stay.

On a night considered at particular risk of terrorism, with extraordinary security actions in place across the country, Brady was supposed to be at his airport post until 2 a.m. TSA spokeswoman Jennifer Marty said that Brady should have been participating in a security exercise to ensure the safety of air travelers at that hour.

"Obviously it was New Year's, and obviously it was not only a chance to practice but to be on site during the holiday to make sure everything goes smoothly," Marty said. Asked who at the airport had indeed made sure everything went smoothly at that hour, Marty replied, "I couldn't tell you."

Reached at his home in Oak Hill last night, Brady maintained that he was stopped at 2:30 a.m., a half-hour after his shift had ended. He said he had spent his final work hours monitoring flights and declined to discuss his whereabouts after that.

"I'm just waiting for the results of [the TSA] investigation," he said.

Brady was arrested not long after the final passengers from a British Airways plane detained for hours because of security concerns were released from interviews at Dulles by TSA officials and FBI agents.

Flight 223, en route from London Heathrow Airport with 247 passengers, had been escorted to Dulles by U.S. fighter jets. It landed just after 7 p.m. Wednesday and was directed to a remote area, several hundred feet from a terminal gate, where baggage was searched and the plane inspected.

The nation was put under a Code Orange alert -- the second-highest level -- on Dec. 21 because of heightened fears of terrorism over the holiday season. That immediately triggered stepped-up security procedures across the country to protect government buildings, critical infrastructure such as nuclear plants and railroads, harbors, shopping malls and other locations where people congregate.

Security officials cited a particular risk from terrorists commandeering a plane heading to the United States from a foreign country and using it as a weapon as they did in Washington and New York City in 2001. Six Air France flights heading to Los Angeles were canceled before Christmas, and two London-to-Dulles flights were canceled yesterday because of security concerns.

U.S. officials said yesterday that an Aeromexico flight from Mexico City to Los Angeles also was canceled Wednesday evening for the same reasons.

Marty said the agency had named Adm. James Shear as acting federal security director at Dulles pending its internal investigation into Brady's arrest.

Brady said he came to Dulles in April 2002 as deputy federal security director. He became acting director in July when Scott McHugh resigned shortly after raising concerns internally about being shorthanded and unable to screen all luggage for explosives.

[boofta]

Many security staff I have encountered around the world take great delight in giving pilots an extra strong screening compared to passengers.
The stupidity of their actions is lost on them.
A pilot can kill all on board with the flick of a button or the smallest shove on the controls... why is it necessary to remove our shoes, belts, pens, glasses etc. to comply with idiotic rules that apply to passengers.
Pilots should have access to weapons on the flight deck to protect the aircraft from the type of morons that occupy security jobs, not the other way around.
While I'm at it.
Why in heavens name do we allow duty free bottles on board, they could contain liquid explosive and be use as weapons if smashed off against our heads.
I know what will fix it all, you security MORONS, lets have the crew tell the passengers not to congregate around the aircraft.
There is only one way to achieve security, give control back to
the controllers of the aircraft you FOOLS.

[HotDog]

What is the latest news regarding the Virgin captain? Is he still under detention, has his case been heard yet?

[fireflybob]

boofta, I think you are so right.

It is up to the INTERNATIONAL body of pilots to take action to stop these inane and puerile activities that you have enumerated.

It is time to put the authority and responsibility for flight safety back with the aircraft commander where it rightly belongs.

I am all for sensible measures but we know find that vast empires are being built on the back of the excuse of "security".

As a body pilots must take concerted action to halt this ridiculous trend, ideally via IFALPA. How about world wide action such as everyone wearing an arm band/vest which some suitable inscription or even taken some other action which says that we will not put up with this dilution of our authority,

[B767300ER]

What ticks me off is that no TSA BAG-SCREENER should have the power to determine if a pilot is 'fit-to-fly'. That is NOT their job, and never will be. They should stick to screening bags and wanding people with their shoes off.

The first TSA screener that accuses me of drinking better have a good attorney.

[Jet II]

B767300ER


no TSA BAG-SCREENER should have the power to determine if a pilot is 'fit-to-fly'

I doubt if anyone would disagree with you - however the bag-creener didn't determine the alledged state of the guy, the cops did - which is exactly what we pay them for.

[Carpe]

If they could sniff out bullets as well as they can alcohol the skies would be a lot safer

[Yorky Towers]

Any news on the latest developments with the Captains destiny ??

(sorry to be the fourth person to ask, vdoes anyone know ???)
Regards

Yorky

[Flying Lawyer]

As far as I know, nothing's happened since the first court appearance just before Christmas, apart from the prosecutor and airport officials briefing the press.
I assume he's still in America - it was a condition of his bail bond that he didn't leave the country.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Tuesday 3 February.

[Airbubba]

Alleged Drunken Pilot Case Heading To Grand Jury

Pilot Waives Right To Preliminary Hearing

POSTED: 11:17 AM EST February 3, 2004
UPDATED: 11:53 AM EST February 3, 2004

LEESBURG, Va. --

A Loudoun County grand jury will decide whether Virgin Atlantic pilot [redacted] should face a criminal trial for allegedly attempting to fly an airplane while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

[redacted] appeared before a judge in Leesburg, Va., Monday to waive his right to a preliminary hearing in connection with the December incident at Dulles International Airport.

Security screeners reportedly smelled alcohol on [redacted]'s breath as he prepared to fly a Virgin Atlantic flight bound for London with 400 passengers aboard.

If convicted, [redacted] faces state charges that carry penalties of up to five years in prison and $2,500 in fines.

The Loudoun County grand jury meets on March 8. The prosecutor in the case said the panel will decide whether there is substantial cause to proceed with trial.

Virgin Atlantic suspended [redacted] from flight operations and they have declined to comment on the case.

http://www.nbc4.com/news/2814169/detail.html

[Iron City]

I'm not a lawyer but this going to a grand jury for an indictment seems a little more court work than I had expected. Maybe it is just proforma, but if the state's case passes a snif test by the grand jury I would guessit would go to trial. If the grand jury does not think the state has a case then ther ewill be no indictment and no case , charges dropped.

Previously on this thread the text of the statute Captain XXXXXXXX is charged under was printed and , personal opinion, it is a really poorly written law.

Hope he gets a fair shake and if not really guilty of anything sent on his way.

[Airbubba]

Pilot accused of being drunk won't get passport back

By DERRILL HOLLY
Associated Press Writer

Published March 12, 2004

LEESBURG, Va. -- A Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot accused of showing up for work intoxicated lost a bid Friday to get his passport returned.

[redacted] was arrested Dec. 19 at Washington Dulles International Airport, after authorities said security screeners smelled liquor on his breath and called police. At the time of his arrest he was preparing to fly a Boeing 747 with 383 passengers and 17 crewmembers to London's Heathrow Airport.

[redacted], 55, was indicted this week on a charge of attempting to operate an aircraft while under the influence of an intoxicating drug or alcohol. He pleaded innocent.

The 14-year Virgin Atlantic veteran has been free on $25,000 bond since Dec. 22, at which time he surrendered his passport. But that has kept [redacted], a U.S. citizen, from returning home to Britain, where he has lived for several years with his wife and two children.

"It's rare that we have an individual under indictment and facing trial that seeks to leave the country," said Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Stephen Sincavage, arguing against the return of [redacted]'s passport. Loudoun County Circuit Court Judge James H. Chamblin agreed.

"This is not a minor offense," said Chamblin, noting that 400 people could have been killed as a result of [redacted]'s actions.

"I just don't feel that this court should substitute $25,000 for his guarantee to appear," Chamblin said. The judge also questioned whether extradition laws in the United Kingdom would compel [redacted] to return to faces the state charge.

Trial has been set for Aug. 2. If convicted, [redacted] faces up to five years in prison and a $2,500 fine.

"We're obviously disappointed by the judge's ruling," defense attorney Thomas Hill told reporters after the hearing. Hill promised to mount a defense featuring "substantial factual and legal challenges."

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-va--pilotdetained0312mar12,0,479699.story?coll=dp-headlines-virginia

[visibility3miles]

Pilot Can't Go Home Pending Trial

By Rosalind S. Helderman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 13, 2004; Page A04

A former Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot charged with operating an aircraft under the influence of alcohol will remain in the United States while he awaits trial, a Loudoun County judge ruled yesterday.

[...] will not be permitted to rejoin his [family] in [the UK] until his trial in August on the felony charge, Loudoun Circuit Court Judge James H. Chamblin said in refusing to return [...]'s passport.

"This is not a minor offense," Chamblin said. "The allegation is that he was going to operate a 747 loaded with hundreds and hundreds of people and fly across the ocean while under the influence."

[...], who worked for the airline for 14 years as a captain, was arrested in December shortly before he was scheduled to fly a Boeing 747 with 400 passengers and crew members to London's Heathrow Airport.

A police sergeant for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority testified in December that [...] was escorted from the cockpit five minutes before the plane's scheduled evening departure, though no passengers had yet boarded.

According to court documents, a breath test given to [...] showed a blood alcohol level of 0.11, more than twice the limit set by federal regulations and well above the limit to drive a car in most states.

[Note, in the United States the limit for driving is 0.08 in most states, and 0.10 in the rest.]

Breath tests are considered preliminary and are not generally admissible in court. Virginia law does not specify a legal limit for flying, but the Federal Aviation Administration sets a limit of 0.04 and prohibits flying within eight hours of taking a drink. Results of tests on [...] blood could not be learned yesterday.

The airline offered passengers booked on the flight hotel accommodations for the night before flying them to London the next day. They also were given vouchers for a free flight anywhere the airline flies.

[...], a U.S. citizen, has been living in a motel since surrendering his passport and being released on $25,000 bond in December, said his attorney, [...].

[...] has lived in the same [British location] house for 25 years and does not pose a flight risk, [his attorney] said.

"He is an extraordinarily responsible client," [his attorney] told the judge. "He really represents no risk of flight whatsoever."

But Chamblin rejected that argument, saying that if [...] did choose to run, extradition proceedings to bring him back to the United States could be difficult.

After the hearing, [his attorney] said there are "very substantial legal and factual defenses to the case." He said that [...], who declined to comment, expects to be exonerated.

The airline placed [...] on administrative leave without pay in December, but a company spokeswoman said he officially resigned from the company yesterday. [...]'s trial was set for Aug. 2.

[maxy101]

I am amazed that the extradition treaty between the USA and the UK would appear to be so weak? Or could it be the easy thing to do is deny bail? Where would this Captain go? As I understand he is an American citizen living in the UK for years!

[Arkroyal]

Surprised they haven't stuck the poor s0d in camp delta

[Airbubba]

Yep, in Europe he could just pay 1500 euros and be on his way home:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122246

[Coconuts]

I would just like to say even though I let rip at the beginning of this thread I do feel sympathy for the man & have from the moment he was paraded humiliatingly infront of the public like a common criminal, the spectacle completely deflated me. The man has a family, feelings, a career now in tatters because of one silly mistake & a soon to be had pension now up in smoke. I think we should all bear that in mind. No-one likes to see a spectacle like that whatever their attitude is to flying intoxicated.

I'm sure what he is being charged with goes on alot more than anyone cares to admit if the truth be known, just a suspicion. He was the unlucky one that got caught, the one being made an example of IMHO.

I as much as he wishes the clock could be turned back. :(

Coco

[scroggs]

He has not been denied bail; he has been denied to right to return to UK because of the perceived (if tiny) risks of absconding, and the weakness of the extradition treaties' application to this offence.

He also should not (as I read it) lose his pension, which is a private pension through a third-party company - like all of us at Virgin. Unlike a company-funded final-salary scheme, it's his money and can't be witheld from him.

[Oilhead]

This is turning into one of the most inhuman cases involving aircrew I can remember. I think this guy has been tried already - by the UK tabloids if I recall - they sentenced him to a life of abject misery - denied access to his family, humiliated with that disgusting mug shot that the BBC is still gleefully showing on thier web site. And now we read he has resigned.

The fact that he is still jammed up in the USA is beyond belief. Did he stick a knife in someone outside a bar? Did he rob someone at gunpoint? No, he allegedly used some questionable judgement in fitness for duty, and is now paying a fearful price, even before he gets his day in court.

I am curious as to why his fellow crewmembers in the van let him get to the airport, let alone the airplane. I am making the assumption (I know, I know!) that he travelled from a hotel to the airport like all crewmembers - in a van. If so, why no noise from them? Did they smell anything on his breath? Presumably in the confines of a closed van, they would have smelt something questionable coming from him, certainly so if some TSA thug could so in such an open area as a security check point. Stale alcohol is one of the eaisest smells to detect. If anyone in that crew had the slightest suspicion of alcohol on this guy's breath prior to leaving the hotel or arriving at the airport, they bear a huge responsibility here as well, if they did not confront him with their suspicions. I hope if this goes to court (did I read August??!!) that this will get explained; could be very embarrassing for Virgin. I will bet there are some crewmembers sweating bullets that they don't get called as witnesses.

I hope this guy is getting taken care of, stuck as he is away from his homeland and family. He does not deserve this seemingly never-ending nightmare, whatever the circumstances of that night.

With liberty and justice for all.....