Alaska Airlines FO Alleges Rape by Captain on MSP Layover
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: England
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don’t disagree.
But in law, if you can’t prove that there was rape. Then the defendant is not guilty of the allegation. They should be free to continue with their lives. It’s really very simple.
If you don’t even bother taking recourse in law, then frankly, any allegation is nothing more than an untested grievance. It would be perfectly reasonable to ask, why have you not taken this to the police?
As I have said. This isn’t rocket science!
Is there anyone that can disagree?
“Law and freedom must be indivisible partners. For without law, there can be no freedom, only chaos and disorder; and without freedom, law is but a cynical veneer for injustice and oppression.”
The law, is fundamental to society as we know it. To seek to subvert it, damages our freedom, and the quality of life itself.
#MeToo and #Time’sUp (etc) seem to wish to bypass the inconvenience of the law?
Do tell me how I’m wrong?
But in law, if you can’t prove that there was rape. Then the defendant is not guilty of the allegation. They should be free to continue with their lives. It’s really very simple.
If you don’t even bother taking recourse in law, then frankly, any allegation is nothing more than an untested grievance. It would be perfectly reasonable to ask, why have you not taken this to the police?
As I have said. This isn’t rocket science!
Is there anyone that can disagree?
“Law and freedom must be indivisible partners. For without law, there can be no freedom, only chaos and disorder; and without freedom, law is but a cynical veneer for injustice and oppression.”
The law, is fundamental to society as we know it. To seek to subvert it, damages our freedom, and the quality of life itself.
#MeToo and #Time’sUp (etc) seem to wish to bypass the inconvenience of the law?
Do tell me how I’m wrong?
Rape, however, is a unique crime. By its nature, rape is very hard to prove to the standards of other crimes. Even physical evidence such as semen, bruising and injuries are not conclusive proof, especially if both parties are known to each other. The specific nature of the crime - which is violent and ego-destructive - often leads to victims taking time to decide to contact the police, further weakening their case. (Date-rape drugs, by the way, don't always hang around in the system long enough to be detected. Some are gone in a few hours.) Rape is a uniquely traumatic crime, and expecting victims to respond as if they've come downstairs to discover a burglary is unreasonable.
One of the cunning things about rape / sexual assault is that victims remain in isolation, unaware of each other and unable to bolster each other's account. A rape trial isn't usually a class action. #MeToo was a platform that allowed many victims to speak up, so that the MO of individual men could be discerned. A lot of men had their careers trashed because their employers knew that if just one accuser went to court, the accused would lose...because for the first time there would be lots of corroborating witnesses. The employers chose to avoid crippling legal bills and bad publicity in pursuit of a guaranteed loss. Perhaps a few men went down unfairly on the basis of a single complaint. But ask yourself how many men avoided a criminal conviction by heading quickly for the door?
The male pilot in the Alaskan case is indeed currently free to live his life, and will remain free to live his life after the trial. The case is being brought against Alaskan Airways, not him. Whether he's employable depends on what emerges about him during the trial. If he's pure as the driven snow, his reputation will survive. Won't it?
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Earth
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These issues are always complex although if there was a rape, then justice must be meted out without villifying the victim for reporting it.
You know what, I just had a thought. This really is the argument you need to put a stop to women being pilots. Just look at the trouble they cause, all because they want to do a man's job.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I believe in letting "the facts talk". My response is to those who have declared HER "guilty" of attempting to ruin a male colleagues career and deciding he must be innocent because she didn't go to the police straight away.
These issues are always complex although if there was a rape, then justice must be meted out without villifying the victim for reporting it.
You know what, I just had a thought. This really is the argument you need to put a stop to women being pilots. Just look at the trouble they cause, all because they want to do a man's job.
These issues are always complex although if there was a rape, then justice must be meted out without villifying the victim for reporting it.
You know what, I just had a thought. This really is the argument you need to put a stop to women being pilots. Just look at the trouble they cause, all because they want to do a man's job.
I await that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Looks like the FO's tearful interview was the lead story on Friday's Good Morning America, video has been added to the link posted earlier:
Alaska Airlines pilot accuses co-pilot of rape in lawsuit, calls it a 'not-dealt-with issue in our industry' - ABC News
The actual lawsuit as filed is here:
https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-Airlines.html
The suit appears long on accusations and short on evidence to me.
I've been told in other cases that the civil suit is sometimes filed to get things like internal HR documents, emails and investigation results into the court system and potentially into the public domain.
Since this discovery phase can be costly and possibly promote negative media coverage for the defendant, particularly in the #MeToo era, there is pressure to reach a settlement before the case goes to trial.
According to the court document linked above, the captain said 'We're f****d, we're f****d.' Obviously the FO was thinking 'What do you mean we, Kemosabe?'
I'm guessing that the airline will settle for several million dollars rather than risk a media circus trial in a progressive Seattle courtroom.
A couple of details in the lawsuit that catch my eye. It is acknowledged that the captain denied any sexual contact. Also, the suit mentions that the FO took her birth control pill the next morning. Are these details mentioned to correlate with previous testimony in the company's investigation which will be uncovered by a discovery subpoena?
Alaska Airlines pilot accuses co-pilot of rape in lawsuit, calls it a 'not-dealt-with issue in our industry' - ABC News
The actual lawsuit as filed is here:
https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-Airlines.html
The suit appears long on accusations and short on evidence to me.
I've been told in other cases that the civil suit is sometimes filed to get things like internal HR documents, emails and investigation results into the court system and potentially into the public domain.
Since this discovery phase can be costly and possibly promote negative media coverage for the defendant, particularly in the #MeToo era, there is pressure to reach a settlement before the case goes to trial.
According to the court document linked above, the captain said 'We're f****d, we're f****d.' Obviously the FO was thinking 'What do you mean we, Kemosabe?'
I'm guessing that the airline will settle for several million dollars rather than risk a media circus trial in a progressive Seattle courtroom.
A couple of details in the lawsuit that catch my eye. It is acknowledged that the captain denied any sexual contact. Also, the suit mentions that the FO took her birth control pill the next morning. Are these details mentioned to correlate with previous testimony in the company's investigation which will be uncovered by a discovery subpoena?
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here we see the beginning of the end of a career based solely on unsubstantiated accusations...
World wide there appears a whole lot of accusations are leveled in the media, certainly not through the legal process that result in untold damage to the accused without even a modicum of process involved.
What is scary is that the damage is done BEFORE a complaint is filed, evidence and defence heard and a decision made.
The rule of law is based on the presumption of innocence. Slowly but surely this is being eroded, the presumption of innocence and due process thrown out and replaced with a modern version of lynch mobs and witch drownings on social media.
These issues are always complex although if there was a rape, then justice must be meted out without villifying the victim for reporting it.
I find the absence of a complaint in a timely manner to be a worrisome trend.
World wide there appears a whole lot of accusations are leveled in the media, certainly not through the legal process that result in untold damage to the accused without even a modicum of process involved
Redditch forklift truck driver took own life after fake rape claim | Daily Mail Online
.. And I have absolutely no idea what the solution is.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the court document linked above, the captain said 'We're f****d, we're f****d.'
Meanwhile, others here suggest rape is too ‘tricky’. Too unique to obey the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Too difficult to satisfy the standard of proof required. So the highly inconvenient rule of law should be sidestepped, to drag the names of alleged assailants through the mud. It doesn’t matter if a ‘few’ innocent men’s lives are ruined. Only those who can somehow ‘prove’ they are pure as the driven snow, should be excused the opprobrium of being born male!
Talk about shifting the burden of proof!
What a f@cked up world!
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Europe
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find this case a bit strange.
First of all why didn't the company advise her to contact the police once she reported the alleged rape to them. Even if after the company finishes their investigation and determines that the guy did in fact rape her, what's the most they can do, fire him? Is that enough punishment for a rapist? I think not! If someone ever comes to me with such reports my fist instinct would be to get the police involved. What else can I do?
Second of all why is she suing the company and not the alleged rapist? Are companies responsible for the behaviour of their employees outside duty hours? Or is it because the company has deeper pockets than the alleged rapist?
First of all why didn't the company advise her to contact the police once she reported the alleged rape to them. Even if after the company finishes their investigation and determines that the guy did in fact rape her, what's the most they can do, fire him? Is that enough punishment for a rapist? I think not! If someone ever comes to me with such reports my fist instinct would be to get the police involved. What else can I do?
Second of all why is she suing the company and not the alleged rapist? Are companies responsible for the behaviour of their employees outside duty hours? Or is it because the company has deeper pockets than the alleged rapist?
Why did they stand her down?
And do nothing?
Did they?
And do nothing?
Did they?
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: England
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a very strange way to drug rape a co-worker???? Knowing that, however the alleged victim reacts, there will have to be an investigation, and serious consequences.
Meanwhile, others here suggest rape is too ‘tricky’. Too unique to obey the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Too difficult to satisfy the standard of proof required. So the highly inconvenient rule of law should be sidestepped, to drag the names of alleged assailants through the mud. It doesn’t matter if a ‘few’ innocent men’s lives are ruined. Only those who can somehow ‘prove’ they are pure as the driven snow, should be excused the opprobrium of being born male!
Talk about shifting the burden of proof!
What a f@cked up world!
Meanwhile, others here suggest rape is too ‘tricky’. Too unique to obey the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Too difficult to satisfy the standard of proof required. So the highly inconvenient rule of law should be sidestepped, to drag the names of alleged assailants through the mud. It doesn’t matter if a ‘few’ innocent men’s lives are ruined. Only those who can somehow ‘prove’ they are pure as the driven snow, should be excused the opprobrium of being born male!
Talk about shifting the burden of proof!
What a f@cked up world!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, now I see your point.
You are suggesting that what went on in the past was deeply wrong. In any event, the law now prevents alleged victims, (who uniquely have the right to retain their anonymity) from having to discuss anything at all not directly related to the alleged offence? Even if it may assist the defence.
But such obnoxious bias should now be considered as perfectly acceptable, as long as it’s now only men having to prove their innocence? So it’s not actually the principle per se? It just depends how it suits your agenda?? (Or more accurately, how it suits your gender!)
That’s a fair summation, isn’t it?
Of course, this is why so many rape trials have recently collapsed in the UK, and many more are under review as potentially being unsafe. This is because relevant information was not disclosed to the defence by the prosecution/police. It was just inconvenient, as we want to lock up as many of these b@st@rd men as possible. We don’t need to bother ourselves with the inconvenience of due process. No woman would lie, eh!
However this non disclosure has revealed that some women do indeed lie (with impunity!) about rape. In much the same way that some men are rapists.
Personally. I want to see as many rapists as possible taken off the streets. Yet I don’t wish to see a single innocent person, suffering life changing consequences for a crime they did not commit. Much less for a supposed ‘crime’ for which they were never ever charged!
But as long as the lady involved here can enjoy a life changing bung, without the need to bother the courts. As long as that ‘b@st@rd’ man gets his commuppance’. (Because he must be guilty! Right?)
Then all is well in the world? Eh?
What a screwed up world!
You are suggesting that what went on in the past was deeply wrong. In any event, the law now prevents alleged victims, (who uniquely have the right to retain their anonymity) from having to discuss anything at all not directly related to the alleged offence? Even if it may assist the defence.
But such obnoxious bias should now be considered as perfectly acceptable, as long as it’s now only men having to prove their innocence? So it’s not actually the principle per se? It just depends how it suits your agenda?? (Or more accurately, how it suits your gender!)
That’s a fair summation, isn’t it?
Of course, this is why so many rape trials have recently collapsed in the UK, and many more are under review as potentially being unsafe. This is because relevant information was not disclosed to the defence by the prosecution/police. It was just inconvenient, as we want to lock up as many of these b@st@rd men as possible. We don’t need to bother ourselves with the inconvenience of due process. No woman would lie, eh!
However this non disclosure has revealed that some women do indeed lie (with impunity!) about rape. In much the same way that some men are rapists.
Personally. I want to see as many rapists as possible taken off the streets. Yet I don’t wish to see a single innocent person, suffering life changing consequences for a crime they did not commit. Much less for a supposed ‘crime’ for which they were never ever charged!
But as long as the lady involved here can enjoy a life changing bung, without the need to bother the courts. As long as that ‘b@st@rd’ man gets his commuppance’. (Because he must be guilty! Right?)
Then all is well in the world? Eh?
What a screwed up world!
Last edited by 4468; 18th Mar 2018 at 12:39.
I can't believe that it is not company policy to relay any accusation of serious sexual assault to the police asap. No matter how much time has elapsed since the incident there is always an opportunity to gather evidence whether that is forensic samples or interviewing witnesses. Allegations of rape are very difficult to investigate and even more difficult to prove. It is a job for investigative professionals ie cops NOT hr professionals. The max sentence for a conviction like that is life in prison.
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: England
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@4468 I'm sorry this has made you so agitated. I'm merely listing facts.
If we get down to numbers:
Roughly 2% of rape accusations in the UK are 'false'. Of those, less than half make it to be formal accusations, and 1% result in convictions which are later overturned. That's 1% of 2%, ie 1 person per 10,000 accusations.
It's estimated half a million adults are sexually assaulted every year in the UK (99K are full rapes). Only 15% are reported to the police, ie 75,000. Of those, less than 6% result in convictions, ie 4,500 convictions per 500,000 actual assaults. The stats in the previous paragraph suggest roughly half a person per year may be wrongly convicted - one man every two years.
To sum up - each year:
425,000 assaults take place but are not reported.
420,500 perps go unpunished.
0.5 people are convicted unjustly.
Do you really feel the system is biased against the 0.5?
The stats can be argued against - some wrongful convictions may never be discovered, so the 0.5 is presumably lower than the actual number of falsely imprisoned men. How many of the 4,500 do you think are victims of lies? How high a false-accusation rate is acceptable to you? Is any false-accusation rate acceptable to you?
Note: the vast majority of men who sexually assault other humans have a 90% chance of getting away with it, even in a country like the UK.
I think there is a wave of male panic that the notion of 'consent' is being brought into sharp focus, and that older men in particular will have to learn new behaviours. All change is painful.
If we get down to numbers:
Roughly 2% of rape accusations in the UK are 'false'. Of those, less than half make it to be formal accusations, and 1% result in convictions which are later overturned. That's 1% of 2%, ie 1 person per 10,000 accusations.
It's estimated half a million adults are sexually assaulted every year in the UK (99K are full rapes). Only 15% are reported to the police, ie 75,000. Of those, less than 6% result in convictions, ie 4,500 convictions per 500,000 actual assaults. The stats in the previous paragraph suggest roughly half a person per year may be wrongly convicted - one man every two years.
To sum up - each year:
425,000 assaults take place but are not reported.
420,500 perps go unpunished.
0.5 people are convicted unjustly.
Do you really feel the system is biased against the 0.5?
The stats can be argued against - some wrongful convictions may never be discovered, so the 0.5 is presumably lower than the actual number of falsely imprisoned men. How many of the 4,500 do you think are victims of lies? How high a false-accusation rate is acceptable to you? Is any false-accusation rate acceptable to you?
Note: the vast majority of men who sexually assault other humans have a 90% chance of getting away with it, even in a country like the UK.
I think there is a wave of male panic that the notion of 'consent' is being brought into sharp focus, and that older men in particular will have to learn new behaviours. All change is painful.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Qwerty
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conviction rates for rape are far lower than other crimes, with only 5.7% of reported rape cases ending in a conviction for the perpetrator.
Using this % above you could say that 94.3% of rape allegations were false yet the figures come from rape crisis UK who were trying to use the number to emphasise that in their opinion to many rapists were getting off scot free.
I suspect in this case only one person knows what really happened, two at the most.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PaxBritannica
Ha ha!
Not agitated at all. Too busy sunbathing!
Truth is, you have no interest whatsoever in ‘facts’! Even your list of made up statistics is as heavily based in agenda as ‘fact’, and doesn’t even acknowledge recent trial collapses! Every single ‘not guilty’ verdict you mention, is a case in which the evidence has failed to satisfy the standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) that a jury of every day men AND women are required to satisfy, before finding guilt. Those found not guilty, are precisely that. NOT GUILTY. They are not simply rapists who dodged their guilt. Though I accept some may be!!
So because you find you don’t much like the fundamentals of the law, and the changes that have been introduced STILL can’t persuade a jury of every day men AND women to convict. Cases such as the one under consideration become the default MO!
Where the inconvenience of establishing the facts is sidestepped. In it’s stead, a scurrilous means of besmirching alleged assailants is undertaken. No proof required, or desired! Go #MeToo/#Time’sUp! Launch the media campaign! Name and shame!
So here we are very likely to see a multi million dollar bung to the complainant. She will forever carry the association with her unproven allegation. But hey perhaps immediate retirement to the Caribbean (or elsewhere) might ease her trauma?
But what of the gentleman involved. Who I imagine is likely never to be charged. Never given the opportunity of clearing his name? Two outcomes are possible. Either an innocent man will have his life ruined by a false (or mistaken?) allegation. Or a rapist with a tendency to drug women will continue to walk the streets. I would suggest both of those outcomes are undesirable. But it’s precisely the world your argument, and that of Hollywood activists are taking us.
So please don’t pretend you have any interest whatsoever in facts. (Or even in protecting women!) You and others like you, do not. Admit you find ‘facts’ can be inconvenient. Which is why you and others are delighted to sidestep the examination of factual evidence lest the ‘facts’ fail to deliver the ‘right’ result!
As a gentleman, I shall of course allow you the final word. It’s been such a shame to interrupt your grandstanding.
4468 I'm sorry this has made you so agitated. I'm merely listing facts.
Not agitated at all. Too busy sunbathing!
Truth is, you have no interest whatsoever in ‘facts’! Even your list of made up statistics is as heavily based in agenda as ‘fact’, and doesn’t even acknowledge recent trial collapses! Every single ‘not guilty’ verdict you mention, is a case in which the evidence has failed to satisfy the standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) that a jury of every day men AND women are required to satisfy, before finding guilt. Those found not guilty, are precisely that. NOT GUILTY. They are not simply rapists who dodged their guilt. Though I accept some may be!!
So because you find you don’t much like the fundamentals of the law, and the changes that have been introduced STILL can’t persuade a jury of every day men AND women to convict. Cases such as the one under consideration become the default MO!
Where the inconvenience of establishing the facts is sidestepped. In it’s stead, a scurrilous means of besmirching alleged assailants is undertaken. No proof required, or desired! Go #MeToo/#Time’sUp! Launch the media campaign! Name and shame!
So here we are very likely to see a multi million dollar bung to the complainant. She will forever carry the association with her unproven allegation. But hey perhaps immediate retirement to the Caribbean (or elsewhere) might ease her trauma?
But what of the gentleman involved. Who I imagine is likely never to be charged. Never given the opportunity of clearing his name? Two outcomes are possible. Either an innocent man will have his life ruined by a false (or mistaken?) allegation. Or a rapist with a tendency to drug women will continue to walk the streets. I would suggest both of those outcomes are undesirable. But it’s precisely the world your argument, and that of Hollywood activists are taking us.
So please don’t pretend you have any interest whatsoever in facts. (Or even in protecting women!) You and others like you, do not. Admit you find ‘facts’ can be inconvenient. Which is why you and others are delighted to sidestep the examination of factual evidence lest the ‘facts’ fail to deliver the ‘right’ result!
As a gentleman, I shall of course allow you the final word. It’s been such a shame to interrupt your grandstanding.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This isn't just about rape (which is a sickening crime), it's more to do with the ongoing inequality in our profession. I fly with a girl who previously got a job with an AOC set-up through personal recommendation from a company pilot. Subsequently there was a 'price' which she refused to pay, leading to some rather despicable behaviour from people within the company. She then spent some time extricating herself from the organisation who were insistent on a more standard 'arrangement' of £##K for her TR training. With a bit of BALPA assistance, the fee was dropped and they let her go, chivalrously. 
My point? We can shove our heads in the sand, convincing ourselves that we have an absolutely level playing field and that all pilot's have the highest integrity. The truth is something significantly different. For sure, people of both genders (or should I now say 'all sexualities'?) can and do cause mischief but, in my mere 30 years of aviating experience, I fancy that the girls tend to be wronged far more often than the boys.
My point? We can shove our heads in the sand, convincing ourselves that we have an absolutely level playing field and that all pilot's have the highest integrity. The truth is something significantly different. For sure, people of both genders (or should I now say 'all sexualities'?) can and do cause mischief but, in my mere 30 years of aviating experience, I fancy that the girls tend to be wronged far more often than the boys.