This is true. The standard in a criminal trial is "beyond a reasonable doubt". In a civil suit it is: "The preponderance of evidence." I'm sure there are entire classes taught in law schools on the nuance of the meaning of those words but you don't have to be a lawyer to see that the latter is a much lower standard.

Longtime reader of this board, first time poster. I was quite pleasantly surprised at the messages which acknowledged that sexual violence is a crime unlike any other. I was nonetheless dismayed, though not surprised at those which displayed the misogynist attitude I would expect from such an old boys club as commercial pilots. Heterosexual white men acting the victim is a sadly typical representation of the old guard. Your conflation of the law with justice smacks of the most vile excesses of societies that have mostly fallen by the wayside. I generally find this forum to be an intelligent discussion but every so often it reads very low.

This is the most surprising point which has barely been mentioned. Employee 1 reports Employee 2 to their employer for a serious criminal act and the employer doesn't contact the police? WTF?

True, this seems so improbable I'm not sure what to make of it.

Those working for an UK employer should be aware of this case.


https://www.thompsonstradeunion.law/...ty-or-off-duty

What’s your point? Do you want to remove “innocent until proven guilty” or create a separate class of victims who are excused from normal criminal law?


GF

.

Are you a UK council employee by any chance? Your nasty little rant so reminds me of an equal opportunities day I had to attend some years ago in my previous career in which I spent 7 hours being told that all the problems in the UK were caused by the males of the indigenous population.

Old boys club, perhaps 50 or sixty years ago.

That would seem to be his implication. Particularly the bit about This seems pretty clear to be a demand for "Justice" beyond the law. Yes the law is an imperfect form of justice. If I were an omnipotent creator, I would create a world where justice is administered by an omniscient, absolutely impartial being who knows all the facts (That last is for those who don't fully grasp the meaning of "omniscient") in a matter. the reality is, we don't live in that world. We live in a world where all the facts are not known nor capable of being known, in a world where there are evil people who rape other people, and there are also evil people who accuse other people of raping them, either to cause great harm to the accused or for personal gain, or both. So the systems of justice has to be constructed to balance the interests of all victims in both extremes, I am not for one moment trying to claim that the accuser in this case is one of the latter. Just making the point to those who seem to be advocating that all accusations of rape should be accepted as true, because it's hard to prove rape and it's a really ugly crime. Yes, it is an ugly, despicable crime. Yes it can be difficult to prove. That does not rationally lead to the conclusion that everyone who alleges rape is being truthful.

Rape accusations are rarely accepted as 'true'; until the recent past, the man's denial was usually accepted as true.

It would be interesting to estimate the ratio of 'malicious accusers' to 'evil rapists'. I suspect men see it as being 99/1, and women see it as 1/99. I suggest the stats support the female view. Personally, I think one wrongly accused man vs one million sexual assaults is an acceptable ratio. Presumably others don't.

PAXB Presumably as long as that one man was not you.

Neither historical injustices nor (questionable) statistics justify your position that rape accusations should be presumed to be true.

When have I taken the position that rape accusations should be presumed true? I don't think we should start from the position that rape accusations are wrong and malicious.

Why are my stats 'questionable'? Please tell where you think I'm wrong.

We had a flight attendant fearing the loss of her job after missing pickup make a accusation against a pilot for sexual assault as the reason she was unable to report. His entire career and personal life were facing disaster. He was saved only because the hotel had a sophisticated key logging system for entry and exit of every room that showed her story was completely false.

No, but the possibility shouldn't be dismissed, either. A justice system whcih does not consider that the accuser in *any* crime may lying would not be a justice system in any meaningful sense.

Thus, a trial by your peers to a proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

That is NOT going away, instant case notwithstanding.

What is happening, not for the good of the country, is kangaroo trial by the media.

This is unfortunate all the way around. Nobody walks away from this one without some injury, some stain upon their reputations. The following, while not entirely judicially prudent, nor perfect, is the most likely result, barring any new developments or evidence of substance:

With names and events out in the open now, the airline is forced to act responsibly. Most likely Pena will receive an out of court injury settlement, the captain will either be fired or forced to resign, possibly with his retirement intact, and the airline will be vilified for using poor judgment, having more apparent interest in their own image, than the protection of their employees.

In other words, the airline will be forced to pay both of them to go away...hmmm...I wonder if...nah, I'm not THAT much of a conspiracy theorist.

Statistics help us very little when it comes to sexual violence. These are what sociologists call "dark numbers." We will never know the true number of rapes and sexual assaults because we rely on victims to report them. Some will never do so; others do not even realise that what happened to them was a crime. Similarly, there is no way of determining the proportion of true and false allegations, the more so inasmuch as no consensus exists over what constitutes a "false" allegation (is it one, for example, where the complainant maliciously fabricates a story out of whole cloth, or one where the complainant genuinely but incorrectly believes a crime took place?). Given these limitations, we should treat any statistical data as indicative rather than determinative.

All that noted, there are things we can say about sexual violence with a high degree of confidence. The first is that a great deal of it occurs, against both sexes. The second is that women and girls are a majority of victims, and men and boys a majority of perpetrators, though strong minorities exist in both categories (in Britain around one in eight reported rapes occurs to adult men; in the U.S. around one in five). The third is that the majority of cases—how large a majority it's impossible to say—goes unreported. The fourth is that the attrition rate in cases brought to the attention of law enforcement is extremely high, so that only a trivial proportion of reported rapes results in custodial sentences. Lastly, rape is a crime suffered by the young, but often perpetrated by older people. For both sexes, the moment of highest risk occurs at the age of sixteen. One's chances of suffering sexual violence begins to fall sharply after one's twentieth, and precipitously after one's thirtieth, birthday, though it never diminishes to zero. All of what I've just said is true of every country in the world in which any kind of worthwhile data exist.

In this specific case, nothing about the complainant's story seems incredible to me. I have heard many similar ones, from people who are neither vindictive, ideologically driven nor angling for a payout. (Often they don't report what happened to them because they don't want the perpetrator to go to jail. They just want him or her to acknowledge the wrongdoing, and not to do it again.) It's often forgotten that successful rapists, by dint of practice, become frighteningly good at what they do. And many of them—Jimmy Savile, Kevin Spacey, Larry Nassar and others—can be almost unbelievably blatant in the commission of their acts. I personally know one woman, a senior professional, who was sexually assaulted at a formal dinner at which I, and a couple of hundred other people, were present. The perp relied on the victim's incredulity, and her reluctance to create a public scene, to get away with it. It later transpired that he had done this to many, many other people.

I'm not sure that I'm following the objections of some of the posters upthread to the action that FO Pina has taken. Nobody is suggesting that merely because she has levelled an accusation, what she says ought to be taken as unquestioned truth. She has asked the civil courts to render a verdict, and on her will rest the burden of convincing a jury of her, and the defendant's, peers that she is telling the truth. Previous experience shows that she faces an uphill job in doing so. But she is surely entitled at least to seek redress by these means.

Like Cows above, my belief is that in the world of commercial aviation, many more such cases exist than ever see the light of day. The chance to occupy the left-hand seat in the cockpit is keenly contested; deciding who fills it is almost entirely in the hands of men; and opportunities to shunt an aspirant off the path—or to ensure that her or his professional career will go thus far but no further—are not few. Boat-rocking of any kind is not encouraged in aviation circles. My guess is that any successful woman pilot will have had to grit her teeth quite a few times along the way, and that some of them will have had to put up with a great deal more than that.

I've sure guessed wrong these cases before.

In a 2002 lawsuit where a female SkyWest FO claimed that a male pilot exposed himself on, uh, short final I predicted:

https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...n-carrier.html

Turns out SkyWest took the case to court and won. Oddly enough, the claim of a male copilot waving at the female captain without using his hands seems to be urban legend in several variations at multiple carriers.

Some versions have the plane diverting only to have the accused save himself at the upcoming hearing by wisely pulling the CVR circuit breaker to preserve evidence of his innocence.

I've even heard a version of this tale that supposedly takes place in the sim. And, I'm pretty sure I've heard versions of this narrative well before 2002.

I'm not sure the CVR recording can be used in a disciplinary hearing either way but I may be wrong, that's why we have lawyers.

This case has a similar possible motive of a missed report on probation with alcohol involved. That's the devil's advocate answer to the claim that she would have no reason to lie and risk her career.

Very touchy subject, and already it seems, emotions are running high.

I definitely sympathize with Victims and understand their reasons for not going straight to police, or the circumstances which might prevent them from doing so. Unfortunately the longer they wait, the more it becomes a case of He said/She said as most evidence is long gone. That's not "Victim blaming" it's the unfortunate reality of facts. The Drugs have long since left the victims system, DNA has washed away and witnesses memories fade.

If this case causes more women to come forward, then it's highly likely the Captain is guilty. While there's a first time for everything, I doubt he would have chosen a colleague on a layover as his first date rape victim. As such, he's probably done it before... or not at all. But that's just my opinion.

Unfortunately, I fear movements such as a #Metoo are actually doing more harm than good. While there's no doubt in my mind that Harvey Weinstein is a pig of a man who abused his position, I also have no doubts that some actresses were willing to do anything to advance their careers, enabling his behaviour. Remember folks, being a misogynistic arsehole isn't illegal. There's been a lot of allegations, but (to my knowledge) no charges have been laid.

Honestly, I don't have any answers with how we deal with Rape allegations any differently. Some men are Rapists and I have zero sympathy for their lives being destroyed, but some women are also liars, and their victims have their lives destroyed before it even goes to court. I suppose, both parties should have total name supression while the investigation and trial is completed.

Would it be possible for the Captain to sue the F.O. for libel, if he believes himself to be innocent? That might bring more evidence to light. Just a thought.

I'll dive-on in again. This particular event is very much 'water under the bridge' in that there will/will not be enough evidence to prove/disprove.

The more important thing society needs to resolve is the culture where some still think that using sexual assault, or indeed alleging sexual assault, is in any way acceptable.

#metoo is empowering people so that they no longer whisper in the corner how Captain F'Knuckle has always liked a quick fumble in the galley at FL390; they are being given the confidence to shout out immediately, not 10 years downstream. By doing so you start to change the culture, in a small way, such that F'Nuckle may just think twice before embarking on their sworded quest.

Mostly more evidence about the F/O's motivation to bring about her lawsuit.

Not for bringing the action itself, court process will be privileged though he can perhaps counterclaim. OTOH if she's appearing on TV etc he might have an opening but I think defamation is a much harder thing to prove in US than UK; constitution and all that.

Here's a recent case of a bogus rape claim leading to a successful jury verdict for defamation:

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/reti...d-her-1.482514

Blind Squirrel
Point of order, if I may?

Unless I have misread things. She is seeking no determination of whether or not she was raped? Certainly the alleged assailant is said, not to be named as a defendant.

I believe she is suing the company for their actions after her allegation was made?

Whilst simoultaneously, in the ensuing media circus, preventing her alleged assailant from receiving a fair trial. If she ever bothered to press charges.

She wants him fired, as she believes he “remains a threat to other employees”. Conveniently overlooking the fact that because she has not pressed charges, he will remain free, and might then be a threat to every woman on the planet!

Here is a direct quote from the lawsuit saying that she is suing for the actions of the captain and that the company is liable. She does say that the company's actions after the incident could be considered retaliatory.

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-Airlines.html

Yes, I’ve read that. It’s vicarious liability.

But why isn’t the alleged assailant a co-defendant? Is his guilt being tested in any meaningful way? Is he entitled to representation, if he is not named as a defendant?

But why isn’t the alleged assailant a co-defendant?

Pina has hired well known lawyers (search "Lincoln Beauregard") who presumably advised that was not the best route to success.

This lady is looking for a big settlement out of court from the airline no doubt about that, encouraged of course by lawyers that are going to get a big slice of that. With men and women in the same workplace these allegations are going to happen and the only answer is a no fraternization rule, if you are caught you both get suspended. There will of course be couples who consent and some companies have rules, men are not allowed in women's bedrooms, women entering men's rooms are responsible for what happens and no complaint will be accepted, other than an immediate criminal investigation.
This woman has many years experience working alongside men in the military, she knows how to handle them, let's have none of the poor emotional woman, there has to be evidence to back up what is alleged, if there is none forget it.
One aspect is puzzling, why, when they had an early flight next day did they both go out drinking, as neither was breathalysed I guess there are ways of talking your way out of that.

She knows how to handle men, perhaps. But it’s a dead certainty she doesn’t know how to handle a roofie.

GF

Here's an interesting tale. I may be the only person here who has (perhaps) been the victim of a date-rape drug.

Scenario. Heterosexual male. An unscheduled night-stop, after a long day, and checked into a hotel used by many of the crews. I went to the bar and had two pints of beer over the space of maybe two hours. One of the other pilots was well known for batting for the other side, quite aggressively. I was invited several times to go to his room, and he would wash my shirt for me (not needed, I always carried a small night-stop kit). I awoke next morning with the worst splitting headache I have ever had. Alone in my room, I hasten to add. I put it down to a long day, too much coffee and too many hours in the foul air of a crewroom. One of the other pilots at breakfast saw the state I was in, and must have called ops, because I was taken off the flight I should have been operating. Perhaps he thought I was badly hungover. I thought nothing of it until several weeks later, when the other pilot's name came up in conversation. I don't know to this day (and I'm sure I made it back to my own room OK), but I do know that two pints of beer wouldn't have had that effect. Scary stuff.

I think that in expecting him to suddenly become coherent, you are being unrealistically optimistic. Have you visited his website?

Any drug is just an allegation, it could have been food poisoning or a whole host of other things that caused illness.
Clearly none of us know what really happened but an airline captain that drugs his copilot a few hours before they are due to fly does not sound likely to me, add to that the fact that any complaint was not made for some time makes me very sceptical.
Police are over sympathetic to any complaint involving women even to the extent of failing to reveal evidence to the defense, there are a string of cases being investigated in the UK at present, so men cannot even rely on the police to investigate impartially.
Of course the guilty ones should be jailed, do it on the evidence or where repeated allegations are proved, not on the story of a woman who wants a big payday.

I didn’t mention any drug use as fact, just stated it’s unlikely that she, or anyone, could somehow “handle” being drugged.

Here’s the Seattle Times article.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...uring-layover/

GF

I've led a sheltered life. Can someone explain why it's called a "roofie"?

It's a corruption of Rohypnol, which is one of the trade names the drug is marketed under.

Rohypnol is a tranquilliser, colloquially known as ‘roofie’. (There are other similar alternatives!)

It is said to be 10x more powerful than Valium. Anyone who has had any contact with Valium for legitimate medical reasons, will know you appear conscious, and care/pain free. But are utterly compliant!

You can both walk and talk. Though I’m told you appear rather ‘out of it’.

There are big blanks in your memory, and significant subsequent confusion: “How could I have been so stupid as to get so drunk.” Etc. The moment of realisation also usually exceeds the period of detection! Pina’s testimony is totally authentic. Make of that what you will! I still say, these things should be tested in court.

Rohypnol etc, renders any potential victim, completely and utterly defenceless!

Assault, and rape, has occurred in every generation. Bad things happened. That it didn’t happen at the parties you were at doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

As I said, these parties were 4 or 5 F/As and 3 pilots. Not one-on-one at the start.

Yes, I've read about rape going back to Rome and before.