Indicted -- Guilty

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by AndreaAbbott, Apr 3, 2012.

  1. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

  2. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    I wrote the mayor as well as the DA and reminded them that they rely heavily on tourism. I mentioned that I am on site selection committees for several professional organizations and will block any motion to host a major conference in Nashville. His contact is

    Mayor Karl Dean
    100 Metro Courthouse
    Nashville, TN 37201
    Phone (615) 862-6000
    FAX (615) 862-6040
    Emailmayor@nashville.gov
     
    FriendlySkies and KrazyKat like this.
  3. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    Agreed. If he wanted to send that kind of message, it would have been "time served" or he would have overruled the jury and declared her not guilty.

    She now has an arrest and misdemeanor conviction that she will have to admit to on job applications and security screenings, and in this job market your skill set doesn't matter if you have a criminal record. In New York, the law says that only a felony conviction is a bar to being certified as an EMT or Paramedic. In practice, the Bureau of EMS will deny any application where an applicant has admitted to ANY conviction, and will revoke certification if they find out you have a conviction and didn't admit to it. At which point you have to hire a lawyer if you want to be certified.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  4. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    This happens?

    Please tell me it doesn't work the other way around.
     
  5. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    It does. Rarely, but it does. More often the judge directs a verdict of not guilty, and no, it doesn't work the other way. No one can override a jury finding of not guilty.
     
  6. FliesWay2Much

    FliesWay2Much Original Member

    My reading of open source stuff makes me think that the prosecution succeeded by narrowly focusing the trial on the disorderly conduct taken out of context. Putting on my Monday Morning QB helmet, perhaps the defense should have tried to put the TSA on trial, or, at least, the judgment of the clerk who testified that Andrea disrupted the checkpoint and caused the TSA to close it down. Andrea, being a rational individual, could not have gone into protetive mode without some provocation. Context should have been essential.

    I for sure would have called the clerk's judgment into question: "You're telling me that one mother visibly concerned about her daughter being groped inappropriately is enough to disrupt airport security at a major airport? Do you have the authority to close down a checkpoint? What are the criteria for shutting down a checkpoint and who has the authority to do so?"

    Perhaps the defense tried this line of quesitoning? Regardless, I would have painted the clerk as a person who was all over the map with judgment and decisions and incapable of deciding what to have for breakfast.

    I think the narrow scope also helped rule out jury nullification.

    Perhaps an appeal is in order if funds are available and if a good lawyer can make the case that contextual facts were erroneously excluded?
     
  7. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    It's a disaster. Seriously, it's very hard to get employment with any kind of conviction. The kind of legal abuse Ms. Abbott has been subjected to is a tool to marginalize anyone and everyone who resists the growing totalitarian police state.

    If you aren't scared, you should be.
     
    KrazyKat likes this.

Share This Page