Are the Pilots responsible for the contents of a passenger's suitcase ?

[cyrilroy21]

ANTO DOMINGO: A court in the Dominican Republic has ordered three French pilots detained in a cocaine smuggling case despite claims they knew nothing of the drugs in their plane.

Judge Edwin Rijo ruled there was enough evidence to hold them for at least a year while the case is investigated. They were ordered held yesterday along with nearly 30 Dominican law enforcement officials suspected of involvement.

A lawyer for two pilots said the men were only hired to fly the Paris-bound plane and didn't know about the 26 suitcases of cocaine found on board in a March 20 raid at the Punta Cana airport.

The pilots were identified as Pascal Jean Fauret, Bruno Armand Ados and Alain Castagny. Also ordered detained was the only passenger on board, French citizen Nicolas Pisapia.

Three French pilots held in Dominican drug case - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Three-French-pilots-held-in-Dominican-drug-case/articleshow/19392229.cms)

[captjns]

Corporate flight? PIC responsible.

Charter Flight? PIC responsible.

Scheduled or Non Scheduled Flight? Most Countries PIC not responsible as the air carrier and airport haves measures in place to prevent this activity. Suffice it to say that Airlines ala BA, AA, UAL, LH research those countries in question, and avoid them to minimize risk to crew and assets.

There are some banana republics out there that prey upon charter operators as a form of a so-callwd legalized hostage and ransom scheme. Mexico was notorious in the 70's for so-called aircraft confiscations, in the name of Federale Justice.

Insurance companies have countries to where operations are not covered risks unless prior approval is granted.

[DaveReidUK]

A bit more information on the provenance of the aircraft concerned (an FA50) and its crew here:

Punta Cana drug plane belongs to French businessman - DominicanToday.com (http://www.dominicantoday.com/dr/local/2013/3/27/47132/Punta-Cana-drug-plane-belongs-to-French-businessman)

[Dysonsphere]

There was a similar case out of Blackpool airport (UK) a few years ago small charter reccuring every month or similiar period. Turned out was drug smuggling and pilot was arrested along with passengers. He spent quite a few unpleasent months on bail before being aquitted after trial with actual smugglers Who were found very guilty) but it could have gone either way on the day.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

Sit a) I am captain on A380, fully loaded.
Do I search each pax bags, do I ask them at trhe top of the steps to sign a release document. Does the departure airport securiitry, if it exists have any responsability for prohibited items. Was I asked if I packed all passengers bags.

Sit b) I am captain on G650, with one pax.
Do I search hin, frisking, then open all his bags.???? my new job starts Monday flipping buggers in McZ.

Sit c) my co crew members have 10kgs of white powder in thier flight bag. I can only assume I am responsable for that too.

WTF, and where is the logic, law in this matter.

glf

ps just come back from South America with cans of company produce. (samples)..... Should I have opened each tin.

[Depone]

The Law is an Arse (ass). Normally. In this case, wouldn't you be suspicious? And if so, then you are complicit, surely?

[Hotel Tango]

Depending how one reads the link provided by DaveReidUK, it would suggest that the pilot was knowingly involved.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Corporate jet, one pax, 26 suitcases, routing Central America to Paris.

And the pilots thought they could get away with claiming they either had no reasonable suspicion about the extraordinary load or perhaps claimed they didn't even know it was there... get real! No law enforcement agency's going to swallow that one are they?

[darkroomsource]

enough evidence to hold them for at least a year
So at least the judge thinks there's more to it than the pilots claim.

Of course, 1 passenger and 26 suitcases just might have made a person think.

[deptrai]

There's plenty of good reasons why some people may travel with more luggage than others, and rationally - but maybe not de iure - I can't see how this is anyone else's business, except law enforcement officer's. I'm not Imelda Marcos, but first time I moved to Asia I was lucky enough that check-in staff accepted my 130kg of luggage (I had already filled a 50 ft container with household goods, and compared to that, I thought there was just a tiny little bit left, big mistake, I even needed to buy extra suitcases). At the destination airport, I got a couple of carts to shuttle my luggage to a minivan taxi, then...nothing happens. After a couple of minutes I asked the driver what he's waiting for. "The other passengers, sir". -"I'm alone, let's go :)".

No one asked me any questions though. Maybe they should have?

This is a classic service provider issue. Can you hold a phone company responsible if terrorists used their phone network to plan a criminal act? Shouldn't they have listened in on the conversation and warned everyone? Can you hold the company which built a particular road responsible when thieves use it to rob a bank? What about the company that manufactured the escape car? Shouldn't they have a duty to know their customers? :oh:

[Gulfstreamaviator]

So i should have asked them to empty the carry ons, just to be sure...

Dream on.

Should I have alerted incoming customs in UK, YES and I did on two trips...... did they find anything intersting... NO comment.



glf

[lomapaseo]

"detained" ... for questioning or arrested and charged :confused:

I would expect the police to question all witnesses, especially the passengers in charge of the suitcases. If no passengers than the pilots need grilling. Charges are a matter left to the law of the land, just or unjust in one's mind.

[con-pilot]

Very wealthy people carrying a lot of baggage is not unusual nor very rare. I knew of one couple that had a second aircraft, just to carry the luggage and the maid of the owner's wife, on about every trip.

They used a Sabre 65 to carry themselves and their four dogs, with a Sabre 40 that left first* going to their destination and they followed in the 65. The home bound flight was just the opposite. They would leave first in the 65, followed later by the 40, full of the luggage, the maid, plus anything they might have bought.

They did this for years.

So a lot luggage with just one passenger on a business jet, not unusual.



* She wanted her clothes unpacked and sorted before she arrived.

[Depone]

Very wealthy people carrying a lot of baggage is not unusual nor very rare

True but, repeated from above, from South America to Europe? 26 suitcases; 1 pax?

[bubbers44]

I almost had a Lear Jet charter to Rio but my roomate took it because I had other commitments. One of his passengers back in the 70's left a satchel on the plane going through customs as they were passing through RIO and customs asked why wasn't this brought in. My roomate said I don't know. They fround cocaine in it and my roomate was in prison at Aguasanti for a month before my buddy with one of their lawyers got him out. We worked with the DEA a few times so they knew we were clean but it took a lot of lawyering to get my roomate out. I decided not to help the DEA out any more after that. They get paid for it, we don't.

[RFGN]

French pilots and passengers have been sentenced to 20 years jail.

[jack11111]

Gee, there are 27 suitcases on my aircraft and one passenger. What, me worry?
.

[Hotel Tango]

Whatever scenario you choose it will always be difficult to judge immediately if the pilot(s) are in on the act or not. I imagine the authorities would need time to investigate more thoroughly into their life style, activities and actions prior to the day they were detained.

[ATC Watcher]

From what has been written since 2 years on the French media the case is a bit more complicated , it was the 3rd similar run with same aircraft , same crew , same pax and same "fixer", who dressed as a pilot (with 3 stripes) to appear to be s crew member.
The whole judicial question turned around if it was a commercial flight ( operator responsibility) or a private flight( PIC responsibility.) Apparently the judge ruled it was a private one .

[OldLurker]

commercial flight ( operator responsibility) or a private flight( PIC responsibility.)Which regs or laws govern this? In the UK the Air Navigation Order (http://www.caa.co.uk/CAP393) says the commander of an aircraft must be "satisfied that flight can be safely completed" (87). Therefore, as captain you must be satisfied that (for example) the baggage contains no dangerous material – so the captain of PA103, if it had been a UK-registered aircraft and he'd survived, would presumably have been technically culpable, just as the captain of a ship is culpable (in the navy, will be court-martialled) if his ship runs on a rock, even if he was asleep or on the can at the time and his first officer was on watch. But I don't see anything in the ANO that says you're responsible for illegal items – or illegal passengers, for that matter – so long as they're safe. Your country's mileage may vary.

[RatherBeFlying]

PIC following air regs to the letter can still get nailed according to criminal law of whatever country he's in.

Slightly off topic, but a Canadian teacher was just acquitted on appeal from a conviction for sexual assault of a minor in Indonesia by a judge who declared that the defendants used "magic stones" to have their way with the alleged victims.

[peekay4]

"Magic stone" in that case was brought up not by the judge, but by one of the alleged victims who was 6-years old at the time. The police presumed the "magic stone" was some sort of a sleeping pill or drug given to the child in order to make him compliant during the alleged assault. Kudos to the appeals court for throwing out the conviction.

A better example for foreign pilots might be the Gol 1907 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Transportes_Aéreos_Flight_1907) mid-air collision with an Embraer Legacy in Brazil. The Legacy pilots (both American citizens) were arrested, charged and convicted for their role in the collision, even though they operated the plane exactly per Brazilian ATC instructions.

That conviction was unfortunately upheld on appeal, although the pilots were allowed to return to the US.

[Exnomad]

Af fairly regular SLF, we are asked "has anyone had acess to your suit cases, and did you pack them yourself.
What is the point of this, If my case was packed by someone else, who may or not be a drug smuggler, I am certainly not going to say that at that point.

[PURPLE PITOT]

The point is that you then have no defence if they do find something in your bag:ugh:

[roulishollandais]

The airline is responsible, and the Captain represents the airline.

[cwatters]

Plans to appeal..

france 24 - Dominican Republic jails four Frenchmen in ?Air Cocaine? affair - France 24 (http://www.france24.com/en/20150815-dominican-republic-jails-four-frenchmen-air-cocaine-affair)

[andrasz]

The airline is responsible, and the Captain represents the airlineTo clear this up a bit:

The PIC is responsible for "the safe conduct of the flight", including all its phases. The airline is responsible towards all authorities for adherence to applicable rules and legislation, and needs to demonstrate that there are adequate processes in place to ensure full compliance. For procedures (or lack thereof) that reach beyond the scope of a single flight, it is the postholders of an airline (CEO, head of Flight Ops, Maintenance, etc.) who are criminally responsible.

In a commercial operation security screening (and passenger declaration) is in place to ensure there are no items posing a threat to flight safety in checked baggage. Unless actually aware of a breach, the PIC may reasonably assume that the procedures are working - just like you may reasonably assume a load-sheet or wx report is accurate if supplied by flight ops. You will only be accountable if you knowingly operate a flight with an unsafe condition (which obviously was not the case with Pan Am). The case against the Embraer pilots in Brazil hinged on them switching off TCAS, thus KNOWINGLY creating an unsafe condition which directly contributed to the accident. Of course whether intentionally or not may be argued, but the fact remains they did.

With private operations the PIC is directly responsible for everything. Again, in a criminal case any act must be either willful and knowing to be prosecutable, or be a direct result of gross negligence (i.e. lack of customary and expectable attention and oversight). I would say if crossing the Atlantic 3x with 20+ suitcases and one only passenger, with Dominica as the departure point, it is a rather weak defence that they had no clue...

[hamster3null]

Generally speaking, in most systems, pilot is responsible if he acts with "mens rea" - "guilty mind". That is, basically, if he is aware that he's doing something wrong, or he exercises "willful blindness" by intentionally putting himself in a position where he would be unaware of anything illegal being on board the plane.

Specific bounds of "willful blindness" are somewhat imprecise but it's usually enough to exercise normal standard of care. E.g. a pilot on a scheduled flight is off the hook if he is aware of standard protocols (all passengers and luggage being screened by customs officials before they get on the plane) and nothing hinky is happening. On the other hand, if you're flying a small plane and you have no reason to think that your passengers' bags were properly screened, you have to check for yourself or you may be held culpable.

In some criminal law systems there is a category of crimes that don't require mens rea, that's called "strict liability". This is a much lower bar. For example, you can be found guilty of speeding even if you had no intention to speed and you did not know that you were speeding. All that matters is the fact that you were. However, strict liability is rarely (if ever) used for drug crimes.

[ATC Watcher]

In a television interview the arrested broker (fixer) admitted he suspected that the "pax" was smuggling , but he was told the pax was a gold merchant ,transporting "pieces of gold ",the fact that he dressed up as a pilot to appear a member of the crew did not help the 2 real pilots . The Doninican prosecutor,also interviewed said that they normally do not hold pilots of commercial planes in similar cases , but this was not a normal commercial flight and all 4 arrested knew what they were doing .
So this was the base of his prosecution.
It would seem from a French custom official also interviewed I this program that everyone knew about the nature this flight and their arrest was planned, if not in PUJ at their arrival in France .

[SeenItAll]

Not that it really matters, but what was the flight plan? I would imagine that a Falcon 50 doesn't have quite the legs to make it to France nonstop (even though the cargo may have well allowed the pilots to go the distance without relief :=).

[hamster3null]

One online source reports that they were bound for Azores.

[cwatters]

There are some interesting reports online attributed to the Prosecutor. Makes you wish there was a video or CCTV of the plane being loaded.