Honestly, at this point in the U.S. maybe we should all have a lawyer on retainer and their phone number memorized and take no such situations lightly.
Also, start actually punishing such mistakes. Detective(s), judge, police, and American Airlines (everyone involved) should be severely punished for once. And for God's sake, stop assuming someone that hasn't gone through a trial is guilty -- what is this...
And for God's sake -- I know some other sibling commenter posted it too, but honestly just in case anybody misses it: Don't talk to the police. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE -- his situation could have been worse unfortunately.
> Honestly, at this point in the U.S. maybe we should all have a lawyer on retainer and their phone number memorized and take no such situations lightly.
A retainer would be expensive and unnecessary unless you know that you're at particular risk of arrest and prosecution, but it's not unwise to at least know the number of a well-regarded criminal law firm. Put their number in your phone, and a physical copy in your wallet — along with other emergency contacts (spouse, family members, etc).
You won't have access to your phone and belongings. They are not trying to make it easy for you. How all these behaviours are sane and legal is of course beyond me. Public tolerates too much.
> And for God's sake, stop assuming someone that hasn't gone through a trial is guilty -- what is this...
Take notice: some of the people who (rightfully!) express outrage at this story will gleefully demand that all suspects of misdemeanors be imprisoned indefinitely without bail.
I was thinking the same thing. This is exactly what "tough on crime" looks like, and those who are complacent in their righteousness never think the coin has a reverse side.
While I agree that detectives and judges should absolutely face charges that could lead to imprisonment (not just fines and not just termination!) if their incompetence or malice results in someone being wrongfully jailed, I worry that it could have unintended consequences: with such a policy, judges would likely help other judges stay out of prison by lying or what have you, and this would make victims look more guilty.
Unfortunately it would also make it insanely expensive to hire judges and lawyers. How much would someone have to pay you to take a job where you could go to prison if you make a mistake?
I’m not saying it wasn’t straight up negligence in this case, but that’s definitely how prospective candidates will think about it (I know I would).
You don't need a dedicated attorney on retainer. You can buy legal insurance coverage. Many corporate jobs have this benefit already - ask your HR department.
Also, start actually punishing such mistakes. Detective(s), judge, police, and American Airlines (everyone involved) should be severely punished for once.
More specifically: required to bend over, expose their anuses, and cough. In addition to having a good chunk of their retirement portfolios confiscated, and being required to do at least double the jail time that this poor fellow did.
That varies greatly. Mine was $5k, but I don’t have to repay yearly. Basically I just get easy access to get on his calendar and the first 5k is covered.
Depends on the size of the firm, and how much you interact with them.
A local law office with 1-2 lawyers and a few assistants; likely $1000-1500 that’s held by them to put towards any future requirements.
Larger firms range from $5000-25000 for an individual, but again, usually this money is held in a trust on your behalf and you can use it to pay down any bills or let them keep it and pay the invoices as they come.
Wow this is insane. I hope this blows up in a big way and everyone is aware of what happened here, and I hope Mr Lowe gets a big payday.
>>>"After Lowe had been in jail for eight days, he was taken to a local judge. He still received no information about why he was there, he said. The judge told him his only options were to waive extradition — in which New Mexico would deliver him to Texas authorities — or wait for Texas authorities to pick him up. Lowe, unsure what the legal implications were of either option, waived extradition based on the court’s suggestion that he do so."
This is such a perfect application of the term "kafkaesque".
Also, is it weird that he was brought before a judge without having any sort of legal representation first, and that the judge was able to give Mr Lowe advice as to what to do? Imagining myself in his shoes, I wouldn't say a single word to the judge or anyone really before I had spoken with a lawyer, I don't care how long that takes. One wrong word and it's not hard to imagine his 17 day ordeal turning into something longer and more nightmarish.
These types of occurrences are my number one argument for eliminating qualified immunity. Police officers should face significant, personal liability for flagrant violations of individual rights like this.
It happens every day, and in almost every case, there's literally zero recourse no matter how much money you have to throw at the problem.
Eliminating qualified immunity won't help when judges are reluctant to award judgments against the whole department or the municipality that is responsible for them, which are not covered under qualified immunity. First you have to get the judges to stop protecting the executive side of the justice system, and then that may be enough already. (How long would a PD let these things go on if appropriate relief was awarded every time it happened?)
Giving him a "payday" alone isn't really justice. Whoever is responsible should spend 17 days in jail. Of course, that will never happen, but it's what should happen if the goal is to prevent "mistakes" like this happening again and again. Same goes for the victims who were "mistakenly" reported (and arrested) as car thieves by rental agencies not that long ago. Money isn't justice.
My limited experience (thank god not 17 days) being held for almost a day with border patrol is that complaining about being held just encourages them. Yes they live for that shit.
As someone with a 'flagged' US passport (despite no criminal record nor violating US border related law) who is repeatedly been detained and thrown in a cell without even being arrested or charged with a crime, I've become quite accustomed to how agents of the state treat those under their detainment. The best strategy is to pretend like you don't give a fuck and that you enjoy the experience; then the agents lose their amusement with you and eventually grow bored of fucking with you. If you act annoyed they latch on to you and toy with it the way a cat toys with prey.
Sadly this guy made the mistake of thinking jailers are not psychopaths. Never give psychopaths an opportunity to see your weaknesses.
Honestly, I'd be worried that they'd just say "cool, that's nice, good for you."
Probably better to be 100% explicit: "I am invoking my right to speak to an attorney" (as opposed to just saying you want to do something)
The whole ordeal would still be kafkaesque and cruel even if he had been guilty. I'd rather be a dog in a shelter than a prisoner awaiting trial in Texas.
I see that more of an indignation of a completely defunct judiciary of New Mexico. The airline maybe expected more due diligence too but it is still no excuse they identified him wrongly of course.
Your right to remain silent only applies to statements made to police and more specifically, those statements being used in court. You don't have a right to refuse to answer a judge, for example.
You also don't have a right to refuse to answer a police officer generally, such as when they're asking you questions as part of booking you (do you have health conditions they need to know about, for example), and furthermore, during (say, a threshold inquiry or administrative detention) police are legally allowed to treat you refusing to answer them as guilty behavior.
To be clear, in very simplified layman's terms: threshold inquiry = "Hi there, can I ask you a few questions?" and administrative detention = a traffic stop, or "Hi there, come over here, I have some questions to ask you." The primary difference between TI and AD is that in a TI the police ask, and in AD, they order. If you're being ordered to do something, yes, You Are Being Detained, and no, you are not Free To Go. IANAL, etc etc and this shit is annoyingly complex, so please do your own research, folks.
Kafkaesque....try this on for size: thanks to the Berghuis v Thompkins USSC ruling in 2010, it is no longer sufficient to remain silent. You now have to specifically state you wish to remain silent when you are Mirandized.
I wish I were making this up. The court flipped Miranda on its head almost completely. Prior to v Thompkins, the state had to prove, with high standard of evidence, that you had willingly waived your right to remain silent. Now remaining silent isn't enough...and aying anything is taken as an immediate implied waiver.
I am, in fact, a lawyer. Please consult a criminal attorney as you have no idea what you are talking about. HN is not a place for lawyer wannabes to make incorrect assertions about the law.
For those wondering why he's not suing the government:
Suing a government entity is a very long and costly affair, and is fraught with difficulties.
Suing a company is MUCH easier by comparison. Unlike governments, companies tend to be very sensitive to bad press, and thus much more likely to yield to legal pressure.
Therefore, your most promising tactic is to use the suit against the company to build a war chest and establish official records of fact that can then be drawn upon in the longer government campaign.
This is technically true, however, in many cases the government has already waived immunity through past legislation, or a court has already found that immunity doesn't apply to particular cases due to for example constitutional reasons. Crucially, it's not like everyone who sues the government has to beg a judge every time before filing the suit.
Aren't things like being offered an attorney and being informed of your charges legal requirements for detention in USA. What grounds would the state have to refuse a court case based on such things?
I'm hoping they'll get a massive payout and use some of it to launch a case against the authorities who allow such injustice to go unchecked.
Sovereign immunity only applies to the individuals that work for the state while executing their job. You can absolutely sue the state, federal agencies, or your town hall. They get sued all the time.
Derek Chauvin is getting the dogshit sued out of him now because he exceeded his duty and no longer qualified under sovereign immunity.
This is infuriating. How does it get to seventeen days in jail without talking to a lawyer? It was probably some COVID thing, but that's just not right.
AA needs to pay. First thought is some overly enthusiastic AA security person going way too far in doing the identification that they should be leaving to law enforcement.
I was detained by the LASD and asked to speak with a lawyer >20 times. They just kept coming back and trying different lines of questioning. They don't care about the law or your rights. It's all a big joke to them.
> First thought is some overly enthusiastic AA security person going way too far
Anecdotal evidence hints that that may be part of their training. I was held in line for check-in for checking in in LAS for about 1h, prevented from speaking with somebody at the actual check-in counter, all because I couldn't provide proof on my phone that I had uploaded COVID documents to the VeriFly app (which wouldn't allow me to upload said document because the first leg of the trip back to Europe was through UK which lifted all restrictions). The AA staff person threatened to call security if I tried to move ahead and speak with the check-in counter staff and instead told me to wait until he sorted out things.
After a few exchanges like that where I was in retrospect way too polite and complying, he smiled and told me that I'm stuck there and there is no way I'm going to fly home.
At the end of his shift, the next person was super polite and wanted to help me, but it was too late since the check-in window was closed.
I can only describe this behaviour as sadistic. It seems to me that this person had been told that his job was to make sure order was upheld and he used that as an excuse to exercise power over other people.
I'm sorry to complained this happened to you. Definitely file a complaint with the DOT. Depending how much you want to push things, this could qualify as involuntary denied boarding (IBD). I would definitely pursue this.
You might also consider disputing the charge on your credit card. In the end, you presented yourself for check-in and were unjustifiably barred from the flight through no fault of your own.
Police are not interested in justice or ensuring everyone is treated well and given a chance to articulate their situation.
They are interested in what makes their lives easier, which is to pack people into cells and wait for the notoriously slow justice system to sort things out. There's no consequences for mistakes, so there's no incentive to improve.
It should be shocking to the core that anyone, innocent or guilty, would be subject to these conditions. But police just aren't interested in improving them.
I don't deploy it lightly, but the reason I've come around to ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards) has nothing to do with the personalities of individual officers (many of whom are quite nice people). Instead, it's an acknowledgement that every officer subjects people to this sort of treatment as a matter of course. They cannot avoid treating people inhumanely with the current incentives.
Unrelated rant: Someone please explain to me how does COVID precisely delay things? It has become blanket excuse for anything and everything. I'd like step-by-step, minute-by-minute timeline on how exactly the risk of COVID delays things by days. I used to give this thing some leeway and benefit of doubt, but my default stance these days is that it is bullshit. Restroom closed? Because COVID. Fan not working in the office? COVID. Hiking trail fenced off? COVID. I can understand if someone is sick because of literally any disease or illness, we'd just make that an exception, not the norm.
It's really fucked up that so much discussion revolves around the more peripheral issues (the evidence from American Airlines, getting access to a lawyer, why bail wasn't set, whether or not it's appropriate for a judge to give legal advice to an accused person, etc) and not around the central issue. It's like everyone just accepts it's OK that being held in jail for a relatively short amount of time is a traumatizing experience.
People held in jail are wards of the state. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail have to fear for their physical safety. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail have to fear sexual assault. It is utterly unacceptable that jails do not take appropriate precautions around communicable diseases. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail are treated disrespectfully by jail staff.
People being held in jail pending a hearing have been convicted of no crime. Jails should be safe and comfortable. Jail staff should be held to the highest standard.
"It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail have to fear sexual assault."
It looks like society disagrees, I'm astonished how nearly every "hero" in every TV show hints at "sexual assault" when someone goes to jail, does not want to talk etc. as something the person deserves.
Indeed. The brutal treatment of ""criminals"", up to and including summary execution in the street, is something that has very wide support. We went through all this with BLM and "defund the police", and people were very clear that this kind of treatment was what they definitely did want funded.
People are very afraid of crime and will support anything happening to other people if they think it might reduce that.
This story is bizarre and a complete nightmare, but there are just too many unexplained elements of the story for me to pass judgment yet:
1. The word "bail" doesn't occur in the story anywhere. Even if he were to be extradited, he would have to be offered bail, especially after he waived extradition. Why was no bail offered?
2. Being informed of charges against you is one of our most basic constitutional rights. Why didn't this happen?
2. Now, I'm not saying that some horrible local bureaucracy couldn't have put this man through this, but if that's the case, why is his lawyer only suing AA? There are like a million civil rights violations in this story as it is told - it's difficult for me to understand why a lawyer wouldn't go after those responsible for those violations.
Again, I'm in no way saying I don't believe what happened to this man, but I would like to understand more of the missing details in this story.
> Mr. Lowe was provided no clarification regarding his arrest, other than being shown a copy of his Tarrant County warrants. Informed that bail would not be set for him because he was a fugitive from justice, Mr. Lowe was told his only options were to waive extradition so that Texas could come pick him up or hope that the Governor of New Mexico would block the extradition.
Thanks, that's helpful. And I am definitely not a lawyer, but I thought to be considered a "fugitive" in that context that you have to have been previously served.
I'm not doubting that this actually happened, but again, why isn't the lawyer suing the NM jurisdiction, too?
I think you might have a bit too much faith in the criminal Justice system, no single person I know working in it respects it and considers its rules a burden to their job.
Always remember that they are a country with slavery enshrined in their constitution. That is they fully support it in certain cases. Should tell everything about their justice system.
Seems like an error, considering the complaint doesn't state that AA reported the burglary. They were served a search warrant for records of everyone on the flight, and only produced this person's info.
Readit News
Also, start actually punishing such mistakes. Detective(s), judge, police, and American Airlines (everyone involved) should be severely punished for once. And for God's sake, stop assuming someone that hasn't gone through a trial is guilty -- what is this...
And for God's sake -- I know some other sibling commenter posted it too, but honestly just in case anybody misses it: Don't talk to the police. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE -- his situation could have been worse unfortunately.
A retainer would be expensive and unnecessary unless you know that you're at particular risk of arrest and prosecution, but it's not unwise to at least know the number of a well-regarded criminal law firm. Put their number in your phone, and a physical copy in your wallet — along with other emergency contacts (spouse, family members, etc).
Take notice: some of the people who (rightfully!) express outrage at this story will gleefully demand that all suspects of misdemeanors be imprisoned indefinitely without bail.
I don't know what to do about it, though.
More specifically: required to bend over, expose their anuses, and cough. In addition to having a good chunk of their retirement portfolios confiscated, and being required to do at least double the jail time that this poor fellow did.
Because this is America, after all.
A local law office with 1-2 lawyers and a few assistants; likely $1000-1500 that’s held by them to put towards any future requirements.
Larger firms range from $5000-25000 for an individual, but again, usually this money is held in a trust on your behalf and you can use it to pay down any bills or let them keep it and pay the invoices as they come.
>>>"After Lowe had been in jail for eight days, he was taken to a local judge. He still received no information about why he was there, he said. The judge told him his only options were to waive extradition — in which New Mexico would deliver him to Texas authorities — or wait for Texas authorities to pick him up. Lowe, unsure what the legal implications were of either option, waived extradition based on the court’s suggestion that he do so."
This is such a perfect application of the term "kafkaesque".
Also, is it weird that he was brought before a judge without having any sort of legal representation first, and that the judge was able to give Mr Lowe advice as to what to do? Imagining myself in his shoes, I wouldn't say a single word to the judge or anyone really before I had spoken with a lawyer, I don't care how long that takes. One wrong word and it's not hard to imagine his 17 day ordeal turning into something longer and more nightmarish.
It happens every day, and in almost every case, there's literally zero recourse no matter how much money you have to throw at the problem.
1. make a policeman's professional licensing body and require all police to join it. (Take the police unions and turn them into that.)
2. Have the licensing body introduce the concept of professional malfeasance.
3. Make a simple regulatory statute where professional malfeasance as decided by that licensing body, creates civil/criminal liability.
Y'know — just like engineers!
It still would not be the same. They would have to be pulled out of their lifes randomly without knowing why and how long it will take.
Maybe a factor could be applied to account for that uncertainty. n * 17 days in jail, where n will only be announced after the fact.
https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1534192090111889410
Basically, that we should be just as shocked and appalled when it happens to guilty people as well!
I’d be saying things like “I don’t know why I am here”, “I’ve been in jail for 17 days with no explanation”, I want to talk to a lawyer… and so on.
As someone with a 'flagged' US passport (despite no criminal record nor violating US border related law) who is repeatedly been detained and thrown in a cell without even being arrested or charged with a crime, I've become quite accustomed to how agents of the state treat those under their detainment. The best strategy is to pretend like you don't give a fuck and that you enjoy the experience; then the agents lose their amusement with you and eventually grow bored of fucking with you. If you act annoyed they latch on to you and toy with it the way a cat toys with prey.
Sadly this guy made the mistake of thinking jailers are not psychopaths. Never give psychopaths an opportunity to see your weaknesses.
Honestly, I'd be worried that they'd just say "cool, that's nice, good for you." Probably better to be 100% explicit: "I am invoking my right to speak to an attorney" (as opposed to just saying you want to do something)
Deleted Comment
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkPR4Rcf4ww
Deleted Comment
You also don't have a right to refuse to answer a police officer generally, such as when they're asking you questions as part of booking you (do you have health conditions they need to know about, for example), and furthermore, during (say, a threshold inquiry or administrative detention) police are legally allowed to treat you refusing to answer them as guilty behavior.
To be clear, in very simplified layman's terms: threshold inquiry = "Hi there, can I ask you a few questions?" and administrative detention = a traffic stop, or "Hi there, come over here, I have some questions to ask you." The primary difference between TI and AD is that in a TI the police ask, and in AD, they order. If you're being ordered to do something, yes, You Are Being Detained, and no, you are not Free To Go. IANAL, etc etc and this shit is annoyingly complex, so please do your own research, folks.
Kafkaesque....try this on for size: thanks to the Berghuis v Thompkins USSC ruling in 2010, it is no longer sufficient to remain silent. You now have to specifically state you wish to remain silent when you are Mirandized.
I wish I were making this up. The court flipped Miranda on its head almost completely. Prior to v Thompkins, the state had to prove, with high standard of evidence, that you had willingly waived your right to remain silent. Now remaining silent isn't enough...and aying anything is taken as an immediate implied waiver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berghuis_v._Thompkins
At the very least, please refer to this helpful reference from the ACLU, who are also staffed with actual lawyers who know what they’re talking about: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/stopped-by-police
Suing a government entity is a very long and costly affair, and is fraught with difficulties.
Suing a company is MUCH easier by comparison. Unlike governments, companies tend to be very sensitive to bad press, and thus much more likely to yield to legal pressure.
Therefore, your most promising tactic is to use the suit against the company to build a war chest and establish official records of fact that can then be drawn upon in the longer government campaign.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unit....
I'm hoping they'll get a massive payout and use some of it to launch a case against the authorities who allow such injustice to go unchecked.
Derek Chauvin is getting the dogshit sued out of him now because he exceeded his duty and no longer qualified under sovereign immunity.
AA needs to pay. First thought is some overly enthusiastic AA security person going way too far in doing the identification that they should be leaving to law enforcement.
Anecdotal evidence hints that that may be part of their training. I was held in line for check-in for checking in in LAS for about 1h, prevented from speaking with somebody at the actual check-in counter, all because I couldn't provide proof on my phone that I had uploaded COVID documents to the VeriFly app (which wouldn't allow me to upload said document because the first leg of the trip back to Europe was through UK which lifted all restrictions). The AA staff person threatened to call security if I tried to move ahead and speak with the check-in counter staff and instead told me to wait until he sorted out things.
After a few exchanges like that where I was in retrospect way too polite and complying, he smiled and told me that I'm stuck there and there is no way I'm going to fly home.
At the end of his shift, the next person was super polite and wanted to help me, but it was too late since the check-in window was closed.
I can only describe this behaviour as sadistic. It seems to me that this person had been told that his job was to make sure order was upheld and he used that as an excuse to exercise power over other people.
You might also consider disputing the charge on your credit card. In the end, you presented yourself for check-in and were unjustifiably barred from the flight through no fault of your own.
They are interested in what makes their lives easier, which is to pack people into cells and wait for the notoriously slow justice system to sort things out. There's no consequences for mistakes, so there's no incentive to improve.
It should be shocking to the core that anyone, innocent or guilty, would be subject to these conditions. But police just aren't interested in improving them.
I don't deploy it lightly, but the reason I've come around to ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards) has nothing to do with the personalities of individual officers (many of whom are quite nice people). Instead, it's an acknowledgement that every officer subjects people to this sort of treatment as a matter of course. They cannot avoid treating people inhumanely with the current incentives.
Availability of judges and the staff to move people and so on?
The police willfully caused it to continue.
People held in jail are wards of the state. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail have to fear for their physical safety. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail have to fear sexual assault. It is utterly unacceptable that jails do not take appropriate precautions around communicable diseases. It is utterly unacceptable that people being held in jail are treated disrespectfully by jail staff.
People being held in jail pending a hearing have been convicted of no crime. Jails should be safe and comfortable. Jail staff should be held to the highest standard.
It looks like society disagrees, I'm astonished how nearly every "hero" in every TV show hints at "sexual assault" when someone goes to jail, does not want to talk etc. as something the person deserves.
People are very afraid of crime and will support anything happening to other people if they think it might reduce that.
1. The word "bail" doesn't occur in the story anywhere. Even if he were to be extradited, he would have to be offered bail, especially after he waived extradition. Why was no bail offered?
2. Being informed of charges against you is one of our most basic constitutional rights. Why didn't this happen?
2. Now, I'm not saying that some horrible local bureaucracy couldn't have put this man through this, but if that's the case, why is his lawyer only suing AA? There are like a million civil rights violations in this story as it is told - it's difficult for me to understand why a lawyer wouldn't go after those responsible for those violations.
Again, I'm in no way saying I don't believe what happened to this man, but I would like to understand more of the missing details in this story.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22054162/michael-lowe...
I'm not doubting that this actually happened, but again, why isn't the lawyer suing the NM jurisdiction, too?
The experience reported here is absolutely normal for underclass people.
Not sure why people like to say this
> surveillance cameras caught the suspect boarding a flight headed to Reno. American Airlines reported the theft to DFW Airport police,
Why is AA reporting thefts from airport stores to police? Does AA have retail stores?
> American Airlines identified Lowe as the shoplifter seen in the surveillance footage
Why is AA involving itself in identifying shoplifters?! Providing footage I understand, but ID'ing?