On 4/12/2017 2:45 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 4/12/2017 4:10 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 4/12/2017 3:15 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 4/12/2017 1:01 PM, Kurt V. Ullman wrote:
On 4/12/17 12:10 PM, Meanie wrote:

Though I will agree that fighting/resisting police will never win.
Fortunately, it's already been stated the authority did the wrong thing
and heads will roll in that department. They had no right to drag
him as
he didn't break any laws.

He refused a lawful order of the flight crew. That is a violation of a
couple federal laws.

Cite.

Seems vague at best. Newton's Law always applies.

The pilot is in command of the airplance and its safe operation

Beyond that, not much from what I found
http://www.kreindler.com/Publication...e-06162011.pdf
Airline crewmembers are responsible for safety and order in the
passenger cabin and necessarily undertake law enforcement
responsibilities when planes are in flight. Yet no federal statute
clearly defines the police authority of airlines over their passengers.
A 1963
treaty, the Tokyo Convention,
1
does establish rules applicable to international flights. It took
nearly 50 years, but the first U.S. case
interpreting the treaty, Eid v. Alaska Airlines Inc.,
2
was decided last year in a 2-1 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit.
The Supreme Court recently denied certiorari in Eid, despite amicus
briefs filed by the United States and various carrier and pilot
organizations urging the Court to overturn the decision. Eid ruled that
under the treaty, airlines are held to a standard of reasonableness
rather than a more deferential and higher benchmark that would establish
liability only where the airline's conduct was "arbitrary and
capricious."


Thank you


Typical.