Show no mercy for this scumbag....http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Girl-13-Reportedly-Groped-on-American-Airlines-Flight-383610901.html
Young girl groped on AA flt.
- Thread starter LD3
- Start date
Don't worry. Once he's in jail he too will get groped plenty of times. Inmates have a way of paying back molesters, rapist, women beaters and of course snitches. GP will handle him just the way he needs to be welcomed.LD3 said:
swamt said:
All that and....
At 26 years of age, to be branded a "sex offender" for the rest of his life is certainly going to ruin him. Since the flight attendant witnessed his criminal behavior, he has very effectively flushed his life down the crapper.
$10 million lawsuit filed against American Airlines, man accused of groping 13-year-old on Portland flight.
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/07/10_million_lawsuit_filed_again.html?_ga=1.90783258.1013238580.1466041608
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/07/10_million_lawsuit_filed_again.html?_ga=1.90783258.1013238580.1466041608
DallasConehead said:
I agree. But AA won't miss the money, and the lawyers will get 80% plus fees and expenses.
No, of course not. But in this case, the flight attendant noticed this child molester sitting in the middle seat next to the victim (in window seat) during boarding even though plane was about half full. She was in a window seat, he took the middle, and the aisle seat was empty. That sets off alarm bells for any normal adult.jcw said:
His choice of seat most certainly set off the FA's alarm bells, but the creep refused the suggestion and did not move.
The FA's instinct was dead-on, but the FA failed the 13-year old victim when the FA did not do what was logical - and that would have been to demand that the child molester move to an unoccupied row.
Her parents paid the $150 unaccompanied minor fee, and while that fee doesn't guarantee 100% safety, this victim's potential predicament was noticed before it happened, and then the FA ignored him for a half hour, while he molested the girl.
THAT's why AA is liable to the victim (IMO), although $10 million may be a bit much.
The lawyer will likely take 33% to 50% (not 80%) depending on how far the litigation proceeds.
Again - this child molester outed himself during boarding, as no normal 26 year old man would willingly sit next to a 13 year old girl when the plane is half-empty unless he had sinister intentions. The FA suspected that during boarding, but did nothing until after he groped her for half an hour. "Here primarily for your safety" will be repeated over and over at the trial by the girl's lawyer (if it goes to trial).
What, exactly, did she or her parents get for that $150? Not even basic human decency, and that's why AA will likely pay a lot. The airline has the ability to move passengers (no seat assignment is guaranteed) and FAs have the absolute authority to re-seat passengers. This one failed when they had that chance.
jcw said:
One would have to see the text of the company policy describing the job responsibilities of the flight attendants. If immediate action in an incident like this is part of the job description, then it would be a job failure and might merit discipline. If the flight attendant were to be sued individually by the plaintiff, I am fairly certain that the flight attendant contract would hold the company liable to defend the flight attendant in the lawsuit.
But I doubt it is that black & white. I don't think the flight attendants are required to police criminal laws that have nothing to do with airline safety, nor are they trained to do so.
I am not an attorney, but it seems this will all come down to contract law. What exactly has the passenger and her parents contracted with the airline? Has the airline failed in that contract, or not. When a passenger purchases an airline ticket, there is a contract in place. When the parents purchase the unaccompanied minor contract, there are specific things the airline is required to do. Personally, I doubt the lawsuit would be successful if litigated, but the bad publicity for the airline has its own costs. My guess is the airline will settle for much less just to make it all go away, at least for the airline.
The 26-year-old creep is the criminal here, not the airline. Could the flight attendant have handled it better? Maybe. Was better handling required legally? That remains to be decided by the courts, if it actually gets that far. Was better handling required morally? Probably, but I won't second guess the flight attendant nor place the blame on her because I wasn't there to see the incident. The girl could have screamed, yelled for help, climbed out of her seat or caused some commotion to make the creep stop. Parents have great responsibility to train their children to act in their own defense, especially around strangers. If the child is not emotionally able to understand or accept his/her obligation to object strongly and loudly, then that child should NEVER be permitted to fly unaccompanied. That is a parental failure, not the flight attendant's, nor the airline's.
nycbusdriver said:
I whole heatedly disagree.
To say its the kids fault is like saying its a woman's fault when she gets raped.
It is not the girls fault, she's a kid. What level of self defense should parents teach their kids? It is not the parents fault. The parents can teach stranger danger all day long, then the kid gets a stranger seated next to her, and what threats were given by the monster? The fault lies primarily with the molester and then with the airline whose job it is to protect the minor while she is in their custody.
The FA's (there was more then one on board) failed in their responsibility to protect and care for the child. Most are professionals but, this doesn't surprise me, I have witnessed some horrible ones in my time.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,188
- 5,343
The FA couldn't force the man to move from the middle seat without it appearing at first that she was accusing him of something beforehand. Was that the seat on his ticket? Maybe the thought would have been that he just wanted to be able to look out the window even if sitting right next to the child is odd.
Unaccompanied minors should be required to be placed in an aisle seat so the attendant can keep a better eye on them anyway.
Unaccompanied minors should be required to be placed in an aisle seat so the attendant can keep a better eye on them anyway.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,188
- 5,343
You're not really blaming a scared CHILD here are you? The mother paid an extra $150.00 to have a set of eyes monitor her child. Just the fact that the airline charges a fee says that they have to be responsible for the service they're charging for. Clearly the ball was dropped here.nycbusdriver said:
Similar threads
