Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Geofa

John and Martha just got handcuffed!

Recommended Posts

EPIC FAIL!One could at least hope that the Santa Barbara PD have learned a lesson from this rediculous comedy of errors...Did the fools from SBPD even offer the courtesy of an apology?

Share this post


Link to post

There was a TFR in effect around SBA and John and Martha violated it.They should have known Oprah was in town...

Share this post


Link to post
EPIC FAIL!One could at least hope that the Santa Barbara PD have learned a lesson from this rediculous comedy of errors...Did the fools from SBPD even offer the courtesy of an apology?
I personally find the term "Epic Fail" to be overused in recent times, however I agree with you, this falls under that category.

Share this post


Link to post
EPIC FAIL!One could at least hope that the Santa Barbara PD have learned a lesson from this rediculous comedy of errors...Did the fools from SBPD even offer the courtesy of an apology?
"Fools from SBPD"???In what way were they "fools"? Seems to me they acted appropriately given what they were asked to do by the El Paso Intelligence Center.Also seems to me the fault lies with (that Branch of) the FAA for issuing an N-Number that previously "belonged" to a stolen aircraft. That seems bone-headed to me.One could say even more blame could be assigned to "Cessna" and employee Jim Pitman for not ensuring this type of incident didn't occur again. King Incident The Second Case Of Mistaken Identity If you need someone to call names or vent on... seems this individual makes a good target.I can tell you as CFI & A&P w/ two Degrees in Aviation and having worked several years in Law Enforcement... never in a gazillion years would it have occurred to me to check the FAA N-Number Database... I had no idea the FAA "recycles" them. Even if it had occurred to me to check the Database... absolutely no freakin way would I countermand Dispatch and say... "oh um Control guess what?... I just checked the FAA N-Number Database and the N-Number is kosher. We can all go home now!" It doesn't specify anything about "N50545" ever having been stolen.Even if it had... and was listed that way in the Deregistered Section for that C150... an Officer is still going to want to see the Aircraft Registration and sort through that mess. Maybe they handle it a bit less aggressively... more like a traffic stop, but I doubt it. You see those 5 big numbers matching the reported stolen aircraft number... better to risk injury someone's feelings and go home that night to your family, than treat it like we're in Mayberry and end up dead on the tarmac. Going into a situation like that… You Don’t Know What Will Happen. "Complacency Kills".So... you get a request from the DEA / FAA to stop / detain a reported stolen vehicle: you do a "Felony Stop." Seems totally reasonable for the SBPD to do what they did given the circumstances reported in "the press". So why apologize? I mean... of course I would be sorry they had to endure such a stressful situation... I never got a warm fuzzy myself when executing a Felony Stop. It's not pleasant for either side. (except the gratification for pulling a Felon off the street :( ) But sorry for "doing my job"? I don't think so…

Share this post


Link to post

1 - I don't fly.2 - I don't have a plane.3 - I don't have a pilot's license.4 - I am not a CFI, CPA, CIA, FBI, etc.I do know that the FAA recycles aircraft registrations, have known for years. So, how is it I know something that apparently those in 'the industry' don't? How is this considered acceptable??As for 'why apologize?' Simply put: it's the right thing to do.Pointing a loaded weapon at someone is using deadly force. When the use of deadly force is unwarranted, an apology is the least that should be offered.

Share this post


Link to post
"Fools from SBPD"???In what way were they "fools"? Seems to me they acted appropriately given what they were asked to do by the El Paso Intelligence Center.Also seems to me the fault lies with (that Branch of) the FAA for issuing an N-Number that previously "belonged" to a stolen aircraft. That seems bone-headed to me.One could say even more blame could be assigned to "Cessna" and employee Jim Pitman for not ensuring this type of incident didn't occur again. King Incident The Second Case Of Mistaken Identity If you need someone to call names or vent on... seems this individual makes a good target.I can tell you as CFI & A&P w/ two Degrees in Aviation and having worked several years in Law Enforcement... never in a gazillion years would it have occurred to me to check the FAA N-Number Database... I had no idea the FAA "recycles" them. Even if it had occurred to me to check the Database... absolutely no freakin way would I countermand Dispatch and say... "oh um Control guess what?... I just checked the FAA N-Number Database and the N-Number is kosher. We can all go home now!" It doesn't specify anything about "N50545" ever having been stolen.Even if it had... and was listed that way in the Deregistered Section for that C150... an Officer is still going to want to see the Aircraft Registration and sort through that mess. Maybe they handle it a bit less aggressively... more like a traffic stop, but I doubt it. You see those 5 big numbers matching the reported stolen aircraft number... better to risk injury someone's feelings and go home that night to your family, than treat it like we're in Mayberry and end up dead on the tarmac. Going into a situation like that… You Don’t Know What Will Happen. "Complacency Kills".So... you get a request from the DEA / FAA to stop / detain a reported stolen vehicle: you do a "Felony Stop." Seems totally reasonable for the SBPD to do what they did given the circumstances reported in "the press". So why apologize? I mean... of course I would be sorry they had to endure such a stressful situation... I never got a warm fuzzy myself when executing a Felony Stop. It's not pleasant for either side. (except the gratification for pulling a Felon off the street :( ) But sorry for "doing my job"? I don't think so…
I have to agree, with the information the SBPD had, their actions were appropriate! This was a suspected felony. No different then when cops stop a suspected stolen car! The fault here lies with the FAA for recycling reg numbers for an aircraft that was stolen, and unaccounted for!

Share this post


Link to post
1 - I don't fly.2 - I don't have a plane.3 - I don't have a pilot's license.4 - I am not a CFI, CPA, CIA, FBI, etc.I do know that the FAA recycles aircraft registrations, have known for years.  So, how is it I know something that apparently those in 'the industry' don't?  How is this considered acceptable??As for 'why apologize?'  Simply put: it's the right thing to do.Pointing a loaded weapon at someone is using deadly force.  When the use of deadly force is unwarranted, an apology is the least that should be offered.
I agree. I learned that early on in my FS career due to me looking up N numbers while checking out planes via Airliners.net or seeing planes on the news. I would often look up aircraft and see that the numbers did not match the what the current registration said the plane was. If Ed or I can do this, why cannot LEO or agencies working for the Feds find this out? I know more often than not, POs have laptops in their cars, often with internet of some sort and anyone can view the FAA website. Command and dispatch should both be looking up said numbers to double check that said plane is actually stolen. They do this with cars, they can do it with aircraft.I feel sorry for the Kings as this should never have happened, especially with the same plane not once, but twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Pointing a loaded weapon at someone is using deadly force.
No it is not... not from a Law Enforcement point of view.That is why one practices over and over again... certainly on a yearly basis... "Shoot / No Shoot" scenarios. You do not go into a potentially high-risk situation like a Felony Stop (as the Kings were involved in and had to endure) w/o your firearm drawn. Period.
do know that the FAA recycles aircraft registrations, have known for years. So, how is it I know something that apparently those in 'the industry' don't?
Probably from osmosis if your "playland" is I69 - Clermont Co. (Hal Shevers / Sporty's Pilot Shop). :Just Kidding:Edit: btw I feel sorry for the Kings too... I know (in a general sense) it was a very traumatic incident... poor people. :(

Share this post


Link to post
No it is not... not from a Law Enforcement point of view.
Well, unfortunately I disagree with the 'point of view' and wouldn't take too kindly to having guns pointed at myself and/or my family. To be honest, I would not be nearly as gracious as the Kings are being at this time.
That is why one practices over and over again... certainly on a yearly basis... "Shoot / No Shoot" scenarios. You do not go into a potentially high-risk situation like a Felony Stop (as the Kings were involved in and had to endure) w/o your firearm drawn. Period.
While it was treated as a felony stop, in fact it was a completely blown process from the get-go. Not one person confirmed the information before acting on it. It's like executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong street address because you didn't take the time to confirm the house had the correct number on it.Wearing a badge doesn't relieve one of the obligation of being morally and ethically right... even if you're 'legally' right. A prime issue we currently have in this country, unfortunately, in many aspects of our 'legal' society.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest simmer9304

John still won't let me pass my lessons in FS9.

Share this post


Link to post
Well, unfortunately I disagree with the 'point of view' and wouldn't take too kindly to having guns pointed at myself and/or my family.  To be honest, I would not be nearly as gracious as the Kings are being at this time.While it was treated as a felony stop, in fact it was a completely blown process from the get-go.  Not one person confirmed the information before acting on it.  It's like executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong street address because you didn't take the time to confirm the house had the correct number on it.Wearing a badge doesn't relieve one of the obligation of being morally and ethically right... even if you're 'legally' right.  A prime issue we currently have in this country, unfortunately, in many aspects of our 'legal' society.
The city of Atlanta recently settled for $4.9 million due to a botched no-knock drug raid where the police killed an innocent elderly woman due to not verifying the address on the warrant. There were also other circumstances involved, but this is a glaring example of exactly what you  are saying. I expect PDs to dot their i's and cross their t's and the King incident just shows that no one involved did it. It is one thing to do a felony stop on a car that was reported stolen the day before, but on an 8 year old complaint, double and triple checking should have taken place, before weapons had to be drawn. If checked, there would have been no felony stop with weapons pointed at unarmed aviators.

Share this post


Link to post
John still won't let me pass my lessons in FS9.
I think that is Rod-not John...

Share this post


Link to post
I think that is Rod-not John...
It's not even Rod, It's some lady that Rod hands you off to for your checkride.Maybe it was Martha?

Share this post


Link to post
Well, unfortunately I disagree with the 'point of view' and wouldn't take too kindly to having guns pointed at myself and/or my family. To be honest, I would not be nearly as gracious as the Kings are being at this time.
That is completely understandable... exactly why Officers get the question, "Why are you treating me like a criminal!?". The response is, "I am not treating you like a criminal, I am treating you in such a way to minimize the opportunity of injury to either one of us (especially me!). John & Martha must divorce the incident | from who they know themselves to be, because how SBPD treated them has absolutely nothing to do with who they "are".Btw, I never knew another Officer who said (or had the attitude)... "I hope I get shot tonight"... "I hope I do something that gets me involved in a lawsuit tonight"... "I hope I get my picture in the paper/tv showing how stupid a thing I did tonight".
While it was treated as a felony stop, in fact it was a completely blown process from the get-go. Not one person confirmed the information before acting on it. It's like executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong street address because you didn't take the time to confirm the house had the correct number on it.
That is what I find interesting about the story... How exactly was N50545 flagged in the FAA system as stolen?Is there an automated process when N-numbers are entered into "the system" (for clearances)... are they then automatically (cross)checked with The NCIC Database, then are "flagged" if a "hit" comes back as stolen? I don't understand the, "Not one person confirmed the information before acting on it." You get a NCIC hit on a vehicle registry as "stolen" what more do you want checked? So it says Cessna 150... "what the heck is a Cessna 150?" And even me knowing aircraft... "was the C150 information incorrectly entered?" An officer is going to want to speak with the occupants and check the aircraft registration. Again, the Officer has no idea who he will be confronting... they have a report of it being stolen and have to act accordingly.
Wearing a badge doesn't relieve one of the obligation of being morally and ethically right... even if you're 'legally' right. A prime issue we currently have in this country, unfortunately, in many aspects of our 'legal' society.
Of course not. Many officers want to "stand before God" or "before the mirror" with a clear conscience. They realize how serious it is to intervene in another person's life... that the quick judgments they make can have lasting consequences. One prays not to be involved in a law suit. Or in a situation where a mistake causes "everything to go south" and someone is needlessly hurt or killed. Obviously we know not all officers are like this... but most that I knew were good and decent and tried to do "the right thing".And I think it is wrong / morally unacceptable to call those SBPD Officers "fools" when it appears they were acting in good faith for the incident tasked to them.

Share this post


Link to post
I personally find the term "Epic Fail" to be overused in recent times, however I agree with you, this falls under that category.
Peter, in this context it is very a'propos, given that the erroneous information was provided to the SDPD by:El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC)......which is of course a quite deliberate double-entendre! LOL.gif

Share this post


Link to post
That is what I find interesting about the story... How exactly was N50545 flagged in the FAA system as stolen?
It wasn't flagged in the FAA system as stolen. In fact, after the first incident, the FAA took steps to have the information removed from the NCIC Database!
http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2010/100831kings.html?WT.mc_id=ebrief+An FAA spokeswoman said the number was removed from the list of stolen aircraft, preventing it from being reported again as a stolen plane to the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC). That list is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database maintained by the FBI. Data contained by the NCIC is provided by the FBI, federal, state, local, and foreign criminal justice agencies, and authorized courts. It is not open to the public.
And I think it is wrong / morally unacceptable to call those SBPD Officers "fools" when it appears they were acting in good faith for the incident tasked to them.
They were "fools" only in the sense that they were (re)acting well out of their area of competence.Demonstrating once more the depth of class the King's possess, they've offered to help develop a training program for all LEO's faced with such a scenario on the future:
http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2010/100831kings.html?WT.mc_id=ebrief+In other developments, Santa Barbara Police Chief Camerino Sanchez has called John and Martha King and apologized "clearly and profusely" for his department detaining the couple at gunpoint Saturday, Aug. 28, Martha King said Aug. 31. "He said that the police don’t have any training for aircraft stops, and used the only procedure they knew--a “hot stop” on a stolen vehicle," King said. Her husband John, co-owner of King Schools, suggested police departments should have national training and a standard operating procedure so they can do aircraft intercepts properly. He will provide the chief ideas on the kind of training police should receive.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest simmer9304

All these years I thought it was John and Martha. I feel like some stranger is living in my computer now.

Share this post


Link to post
It wasn't flagged in the FAA system as stolen. In fact, after the first incident, the FAA took steps to have the information removed from the NCIC Database!
Yes I see now... EPIC "sees" an aircraft airborne that is apparently stolen and notifies the originating office: McKinney PD. McKinney PD asks Santa Barbara PD to make the stop. Does EPIC stop there??? No...."McKinney police received a second call from the intelligence center, saying they had spoken to Cessna Aircraft Co. officials who said that the N number had been reissued. McKinney police suggested that the intelligence center call directly to Santa Barbara police who were then on the scene. The El Paso Intelligence Center official did that, but the Kings had already been detained." [Emphasis Added]So great... the FAA gets the info scrubbed from NCIC. Obvious by this (and previous incidents) it isn't the wisest move to re-issue an N-number that has been previously linked to a stolen aircraft.
They were "fools" only in the sense that they were (re)acting well out of their area of competence.
:( And where is the least bit of evidence to indicate that???
Demonstrating once more the depth of class the King's possess, they've offered to help develop a training program for all LEO's faced with such a scenario on the future:
More power to them. I hope it becomes more than a cathartic exercise for them. They are going to face an uphill battle in trying to convince any LEO there is "kinder and gentler" way to make such a felony stop. Officer Safety is paramount... not the feelings of someone being stopped.You don't think non-uniformed officers have ever been stopped? But they don't whine or complain about it (or they better not) as they know the stopping Officer has to (reasonably) establish his safety first.If you were in Law Enforcement, or understood the job they did, you would not make comments like, "they were (re)acting well out of their area of competence".

Share this post


Link to post
And where is the least bit of evidence to indicate that???
The SBPD chief admitting his officers were not trained to handle a stolen aircraft.
More power to them. I hope it becomes more than a cathartic exercise for them. They are going to face an uphill battle in trying to convince any LEO there is "kinder and gentler" way to make such a felony stop. Officer Safety is paramount... not the feelings of someone being stopped.You don't think non-uniformed officers have ever been stopped? But they don't whine or complain about it (or they better not) as they know the stopping Officer has to (reasonably) establish his safety first.If you were in Law Enforcement, or understood the job they did, you would not make comments like, "they were (re)acting well out of their area of competence".
No one who is a LEO is conscripted or forced to become one. They step into the position knowing beforehand exactly how dangerous it is. It's not like a 'police recruiter' lied and promised a free RV and a condo ('Stripes' reference). While I respect those who choose to be a LEO for all the right reasons... I don't feel they deserve more protection than the average law abiding citizen. The law abiding citizen isn't wearing any body armor (most police are), the law abiding citizen can't call for backup (police can), the law abiding citizen is rarely armed (the police are), the law abiding citizen can be killed and only a small team of LEOs will deal with it (one LEO gets attacked at any level and you can find an entire force chasing the individual very quickly). I could go on and on... but the entire concept of police safety above citizen safety is so wrongfully upside down it's insulting to those who pay their salary. Like I said... I respect those who choose to serve, but don't tell me they deserve to put citizens at risk for their own protection. That's just so not the purpose of having law enforcement to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
The SBPD chief admitting his officers were not trained to handle a stolen aircraft.
:( just :( :( B)
but the entire concept of police safety above citizen safety is so wrongfully upside down it's insulting to those who pay their salary.
How did anything I say or what SBPD do morph into that perversion?
but don't tell me they deserve to put citizens at risk for their own protection
I didn't Ed. You want to twist my words to go off on some rant to justify why you believe SBPD are fools, when they acted in a professional manner... well... whatever.No one was hurt... no property damaged... the issue was sorted at a relatively isolated area of the airport grounds... I'd imagine it was sorted very quickly... EVERYONE went home that night to their family... and that's the bottom line.So you tell me Ed... how should SBPD have acted?

Share this post


Link to post
:( just :( :( B)
Ok, that's a rude response. LOL You asked, I pointed it out. No need to be rude.
How did anything I say or what SBPD do morph into that perversion?
A drawn and loaded gun pointed at an innocent person is an extreme risk to that person. Do they deserve to undergo such risk?
I didn't Ed. You want to twist my words to go off on some rant to justify why you believe SBPD are fools, when they acted in a professional manner... well... whatever.
Please re-read the thread. I don't believe I called them fools.
No one was hurt... no property damaged... the issue was sorted at a relatively isolated area of the airport grounds... I'd imagine it was sorted very quickly... EVERYONE went home that night to their family... and that's the bottom line.So you tell me Ed... how should SBPD have acted?
No one was hurt. Had they pulled no guns, the same outcome with a lower risk for the innocent individuals. I find it disturbing that you think pointing a loaded gun at someone doesn't put them at risk. I find it even more disturbing that you think it's perfectly acceptable to place a citizen at greater risk for one's own personal safety when only the LEO is the one who agreed and chose to be at greater risk. Not the citizen.I believe there's a case in Detroit right now where a young child was shot dead, during a no-knock warrant. The suspect wasn't even in the residence where the child was killed. The suspect was apprehended... but I doubt that makes the child's parents feel any better. Especially since they weren't actually involved other than living in a home that was a mulit-unit dwelling and knowing the suspect. They were innocent people, put in harms way and one of them died because of the process and the belief that the life of a LEO is of greater value and thus guns and agressive military tactics are endorsed. Innocent people die from this. It has happened in the past, it will continue to happen. I am saddened that this is apparently considered an acceptable risk.

Share this post


Link to post

I 100% agree with Ed. Well said in all of your posts sir!Here is what I see wrong with the whole situation and would like to ask a question.Why did the SBPD have to approach this situation with guns drawn? They received a called that a plane had been stolen. Did they also receive info that the occupants were armed and dangerous? I think not. I guess it is out of the question to approach the plane and simply ask the occupants some questions and respond appropriately from there. Yea that's out of the question because as our ex-LEO states multiple times, officer safety comes first! I will make multiple quotes to prove my point and show where the problem lies.

better to risk injury someone's feelings and go home that night to your family, than treat it like we're in Mayberry and end up dead on the tarmac. Going into a situation like that… You Don’t Know What Will Happen. "Complacency Kills".
Pointing a loaded weapon at someone is using deadly force.No it is not... not from a Law Enforcement point of view.
You do not go into a potentially high-risk situation like a Felony Stop (as the Kings were involved in and had to endure) w/o your firearm drawn. Period.
That is completely understandable... exactly why Officers get the question, "Why are you treating me like a criminal!?". The response is, "I am not treating you like a criminal, I am treating you in such a way to minimize the opportunity of injury to either one of us (especially me!).
Officer Safety is paramount... not the feelings of someone being stopped.
but don't tell me they deserve to put citizens at risk for their own protectionI didn't Ed. You want to twist my words to go off on some rant to justify why you believe SBPD are fools, when they acted in a professional manner... well... whatever.No one was hurt... no property damaged... the issue was sorted at a relatively isolated area of the airport grounds... I'd imagine it was sorted very quickly... EVERYONE went home that night to their family... and that's the bottom line.So you tell me Ed... how should SBPD have acted?
I'm afraid sir you did indeed state that "officer safety is paramount". This is the real failure of police departments today and the justice system in general, treat everyone as criminals and assume they are guilty until proven innocent! All for the safety of the officer! The SBPD should have acted in a manner to protect the citizen and the officer. No longer does the saying "to protect and to serve" (the general public) applies. It is simply about protecting the officer.A different way of thinking is needed by LEO's as too many innocent citizens have been killed in the name of officer safety.LEO's have my respect for what they have to put up with but they don't have it for how they go about it.OK that's my 2 penny rant!Todd

Share this post


Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...