Uh, you do realize don't you that this is not a criminal complaint? :confused:

a complaint is a complaint..its got nothing to do with evidence. confused indeed

I can see that. I rest my case. :D

A wide gap between civil and criminal law. A criminal complaint in the U.S. is filed by either the district attorney or a grand jury, and only after probable-cause evidence has been presented in support of the complaint.

No evidence is required for a civil lawsuit complaint.

Huge, huge, difference!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is no evidence, only 2 accounts of what happened that night, maybe his account is true, maybe hers is true, maybe both are invention, we will never know. Her lawyers have told her she has no chance of a winning a case against him and could be sued for defamination if she tries, so they have dreamt up some kind of unfair treatment case against the employer.
The employer is in a no win position, they have to respond to the case so it is going to cost a great deal in legal costs, they are likely to loose a court hearing with a jury because a jury always favors the poor defendant against the big bad company. So they will settle out of court with a NDA, that's the way it is, a big payday for her and the lawyers, nothing whatsoever to do with " me too ".

In UK a completely groundless complaint can be chucked out as vexatious, abuse of process etc with costs. If there's a no win/no fee agreement then lawyers will assess probable-cause evidence before proceeding.

I suspect it's same in most if not all states in US.

There's likely plenty of evidence although perhaps not of the absolute 'presence of body fluids' and 'clear physical signs of struggle.' But there will likely be witnesses to the events preceding, phone logs, perhaps security video, accounts of who told whom what in aftermath. If that evidence tends to buttress one version over the other and especially if there seems to have been sufficient prior incapacitation so as to render meaningful consent impossible, then the outcome of either the civil case in court or the decsion of one side to fold before going to trial will reflect that.

And a civil case against the employer often makes good legal sense (not just because of deep pockets) if the cause of action occurred while the employed individual was on company time and business and company policies governed behavior for safety or other reasons

That is what civil cases are for; damages.

Consider, a car driven by an employee of a common carrier leaves the road and smashes through your your fence. The evidence to meet the (quite properly) very high bar to obtain a criminal conviction for trespass is insufficient perhaps because you can't establish the identity of the driver of he claims persuasively he swerved to avoid a child.

Still you sue the company for damages to have your fence repaired and to recover the costs you incurred while the fence was damaged as a consequence of the trespass. Those losses could be significant depending on the circumstances and could include punitive and well as compensatory damages if gross negligence (such as the driver, irrespective of the circumstances, was in violation of employer's safety policies regarding route and driving time.)

Do you really believe that your decision to sue for damages should be pilloried because a criminal conviction was unobtainable for any reason, including (perhaps) your own failure to secure evidence or your confusion in the immediate aftermath?

I'm not drawing conclusions. I'm simply trying to point out that the absence of a criminal complaint or even a report to police does not rule out legitimate cause for civil action.

I fully admit this is an imperfect analogy and I'm not trying to be argumentative, simply that it is unfair to presume damages didn't result or an act didn't occur because an individual or the state chose not to seek a criminal charge.

Pretty much the same, except it is usually thrown out when it is a Frivolous Lawsuit, as opposed to vexatious, upon which the plaintiff must pay his and the defendant's legal fees.

Then, the defendant can sue the plaintiff for malicious prosecution.

Depending upon the facts presently known to Alaska Airlines, they might take the plaintiff to the mat, so to speak, rather than caving to a confidential settlement.

(Vexatious litigant in the U.S. is generally one who files repetitive frivolous lawsuits.)

Depending upon the facts presently known to Alaska Airlines, they might take the plaintiff to the mat.
Especially if they have seen the mysterious security video and it casts doubt on the FO's version. They would easily have seen it if the hotel (not in a great position so far) let them. Why not?

the issue was not about the difference between a civil and a criminal charge. It was only about the nature of a filing document, i.e. the Complaint.

and whether or not the observation that the "suit" appears "long on accusation and short on evidence" was helpful or not.

as My Cousin Vinny would say, "I'm not laying my cards on the table b4 the bid."

Your point is well taken that what has been filed to date is merely the complaint, and that evidence would be normally presented later, at trial. It's worth noting though, that the complaint only makes reference to what the plaintiff (Pina) was allegedly told, by a third party about what the hotel security video showed. If I were filing a complaint, and I had video whcih proved my claims, I'd phrase it as; "the video shows ... " not as; " I was told by X that the video shows ..." This seems to suggest that the plaintiff in not in possession of that video, and has not even seen it herself. Yes, it could be a case of keeping cards close to the chest until the right moment, but I'm not sure what advantage can be gained from that with the video. Supposedly, Alaska's attorney has seen the video, and it either shows what Pina claims it shows, or it doesn't. If it does, then there's no element of surprise to be gained because company representatives have already seen it, and Pina has already made statements about what she claims it shows. Also, given that Pina has embarked on a media campaign regarding her allegations with interviews and appearances, it seems if there was video which showed the Captain dragging her into his room while she tries to escape, and she was in possession of said video, she would providing it to the media outlets she is using for her campaign. Certainly seeing a video clip of that would turn me from a "wait and see" skeptic to someone who believes her account. I would imagine a lot of others would be the same. So in consideration of all that, I'm thinking that she doesn't have the video and/or it doesn't show what she claims, and it may not even exist any more.

It's worth reiterating that we only have one account; Hers. Neither the captain in question nor Alaska have publicly made any statements about the incident. (other than Alaska's non-statement that they are investigating and take this seriously) All information (true or false) that we have before us has been supplied by Pina.

I was rather assuming that the captain has been interviewed by the airline about the background to this complaint and of course will put an innocent gloss on his account, because something happened. The fact that both were unable to fly next day will have been noted on his record, anything further will damage his career and maybe personal life.

Her case that she was treated wrongly by the company has some merit, according to earlier posts she took 6 months leave (voluntary?) whereas he continued flying, did she receive the " correct" handling by the company. Together with the media appearances it is publicity the company needs to get rid of quickly, does anyone want to bet against her getting a payoff.

I worked under an ALPA contract, as does the subject captain. Any derogatory written comments or discipline by the company would be removed from the pilot's personnel file after 3 years and upon the pilot's request. The exception was comments or discipline directly pertaining to aircraft operation.

Her case that she was treated wrongly by the company after the event has some merit.

Maybe, but that is not the main complaint in the lawsuit. It is that Workplace Rape took place and she wants damages for that.

Interesting to see so many of those who tell non-pilots to lay off the keyboard now pretending to be lawyers. Stick to your day jobs boys - it’s quite clear you have little to no idea of what you type.

To help the thread along, please give us your clarity.

Betty has gone quiet ...

Suit filed and publicity round done. Presumably next step is for Alaska Airlines to file a defence followed by judges directions, disclosure etc abd a hearing in 2019 though I'd expect it to be settled before the court doors open.

Here in UK we've recently had a deal of publicity about a multiple offender named John Warboys whose MO was to drug and rape/sexually assault youn women in back of his London taxi. Like complainant in this case they report odd tasting drink, walls closing in and eventually waking up grossly confused and with amnesia. Recollection of what might have happened to them comes more slowly than time for next shower etc. Forensics long gone.

All of which is corroborative as to why Ms Pinar might not have reported rape promptly. By time two and two were put together any criminal trial will be he said/she said where he presumably avers consent. Such cases, with a criminal standard of proof, are a lottery as to outcome and the sort of nightmare procedurally and evidentialy that lawyers will want to avoid. In UK CPS would drop it like a hot potato -would it be same with a DA in US?

OTOH whatever happened occurred on duty. The standard of proof is civil - balance of probability. Good legal advice for her would be that it's better to deal with it as an Employment issue. She goes down that line but Employer's inquiry seems to be going nowhere and he's getting the clean end of the stick while she feels she's getting the shi**y end.

Reasonable at that point to up the ante. That's how Employemnt cases go.

The complaint should be publicly available. It takes an attorney to find it, though.

As cited twice previously on this thread, the 'Complaint for Damages: Workplace Rape' is posted here by Seattle Times reporter Louis Kamb:

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

Many, if not most, U.S. court records are supposed to be available to the public under sunshine laws enacted decades ago. However in the digital age the docs are served on sites like www.pacer.gov that have registration requirements and user fees that tend to discourage perusal by other than legal professionals.

Pina v. Alaska Airlines is filed in King County Superior Court and the documents may be accessed electronically by jumping through the hoops and paying the fees listed on this web page:

https://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/cl...CR-online.aspx

Thanks Airbubba. Informative! And, I missed the previous two messages with the link to the newspaper. The PDF is now downloaded. This is where the media does a real service to the public.

Thanks again.

Alaska Airlines CEO Brad Tilden has recently posted this update on his blog, possibly in response to claims that Alaska Airlines did not properly address Ms. Pina's initial allegations of sexual assault.

https://blog.alaskaair.com/alaska-ai...eople/respect/

The egregious feature of the cases that collapsed in the UK was the willingness of the police and prosecution to go forward with a criminal case in the light of ample direct evidence of consent - and their willingness to subsequently extend their deliberate disregard of reality by refusing to hand over said evidence to the defense. One can understand that some people feel the pendulum may have swung too far when disculpatory evidence is deliberately not handed over to the accused's lawyers. The Rolling Stone case in the US has many of the same features although here it is building the facts to fit the case in investigative reporting rather than prosecution that is at fault. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/b...tone-frat.html

Edmund

A Conversation I'd rather not have overheared
 

Gents my age seem invisible to young ladies - or assumed hard of hearing.

A young lady at an adjacent table in a coffee shop was discussing her involuntary sexual encounter at a party with another young lady sat on the bench next to me. Not having been invited to the conversation, I decided remaining apparently oblivious with my nose in the paper would occasion the least distress at a difficult time.

She showered for two hours after.
Then a friend advised her to go to Emerg.
She didn't know what she wanted to happen and still doesn't.
She cried for two weeks.
Her family doctor when apprised of the incident stated that the lesson was to leave a party immediately the first bottle of beer was opened.
Now she is concerned that if she does not take it to the police, nothing will stop the perp from victimising somebody else.

It makes me wonder if a civil suit might be a better way to get even than a criminal proceeding where the matter is taken completely out of the victim's hands.

I miss Joe Friday and his famous line "just the facts mam". This thread has become a very emotional and political charged rant for many.

All that I can add it that during my years working with the airlines I was harassed many times by women. They really didn't accept a no for an answer, when we were overnighting ,and they had a bit to drink. They behaved no better then men but I just took it in stride.

Downroute anything that can happen will happen. In my experience, on overnights, once they hit the bar (i.e. always) UK crews were nothing but trouble, up-front were generally much better behaved. I found US crews though to be impeccable... never once saw any problems with them.

We had a male flight attendant accused of sexual harassment (of another male) in a Georgian bar (the country Georgia... macho to the core). How we got him out of that bar alive still shakes me to this day.

Fairy Tale
 

[I]All that I can add it that during my years working with the airlines I was harassed many times by women. They really didn't accept a no for an answer, when we were overnighting ,and they had a bit to drink. They behaved no better then men but I just took it in stride.[I]

As to the above, "What is the difference between a fairy tale and a flying story?

They both begin with " Once upon a time...."

Not a Fairy tale
 

I've worked with predominantly women for many years and I can assure you they are capable of anything you can imagine and a lot more besides. Hand on heart I have only transgressed once, a group of 3 in their late 20s decided that the first one to lay me would win a bet, that was enjoyable for a few weeks and ended amicably but then the other 2 said " me too". The amount of trouble they caused when I said no was considerable ( hell hath no fury and all that) so forgive me for being sceptical about claims of rape a month or ten yrs after the event.

warbirdfinder remember that fools that don't learn from the past are stupid enough to repeat them all over again.

In aviation we have a saying " learn from the mistakes of others , you won't live long enough to make them all yourself".

Opened again when there is actual news.

Rob

Alaska Airlines FO Alleges Rape by Captain on MSP Layover, the rest of the story
 

Since the original thread has been locked.

Here's the latest news on that.


A former senior Alaska Airlines pilot who was fired earlier this year after a female co-pilot sued the airline, alleging that the captain drugged and raped her during a June 2017 work trip, has filed a lawsuit of his own against his accuser and the carrier. The aviator, who flew for Alaska for 22 years, claims he was wrongly terminated amid “false #MeToo claims” in a “negligent, flawed investigation.”Paul Engelien filed the lawsuit against former First Officer Betty Pina after the 40-year-old woman claimed the captain, 51, drugged and raped her during a layover on a work trip to Minnesota in June 2017, the Seattle Times reported on Nov. 2.According to Engelien’s litigation, Pina falsely invented the claims of sexual assault in order to avoid “workplace discipline” given her status as a probationary employee. The former military pilots were subjected to a “routine, internal” alcohol-consumption violation investigation by Alaska regarding their actions on the trip.Officials at Alaska believed that the pair may have violated the airline’s ten-hour alcohol rule during layover, which prohibits pilots from consuming alcohol within ten hours of duty.“Pina’s false claims defamed Engelien, invaded his privacy, decimated his life and career, and caused him severe distress,” Engelien's lawsuit states, arguing that Alaska’s human resources advisor lead a “negligent, flawed and pretextual [internal] investigation” regarding the claims.The lawsuit also states that Pina was previously involved in a similar incident during her time working for Alaska in May 2017, during which she reportedly “drank too much, blacked out, then later blamed others,” the Times reports.According to Pina’s LinkedIn profile, she now flies for a Hawaii-based carrier.Engelien was grounded by Alaska almost immediately after news of Pina’s lawsuit broke in March 2018, before his employment with the airline was eventually terminated.Though Pina’s lawsuit against Alaska was settled out of court in September of this year, Engelien claims that he has suffered “devastating economic, emotional and reputations injuries and damages” as caused by accuser’s “false #MeToo” claims" in the lawsuit.Representatives for Alaska Airlines did not immediately return Fox News’ request for comment on the story.

I doubt if the truth will ever be known, but the lawyers will make a lot of dosh that's for sure!