Public executions?

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:31 am

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 65,00.html

At least one passenger aboard American Airlines Flight 924 maintains the federal air marshals were a little too quick on the draw when they shot and killed Rigoberto Alpizar as he frantically attempted to run off the airplane shortly before take-off.

"I don't think they needed to use deadly force with the guy," says John McAlhany, a 44-year-old construction worker from Sebastian, Fla. "He was getting off the plane." McAlhany also maintains that Alpizar never mentioned having a bomb.

"I never heard the word 'bomb' on the plane," McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. "I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous." Even the authorities didn't come out and say bomb, McAlhany says. "They asked, 'Did you hear anything about the b-word?'" he says. "That's what they called it."

When the incident began McAlhany was in seat 24C, in the middle of the plane. "[Alpizar] was in the back," McAlhany says, "a few seats from the back bathroom. He sat down." Then, McAlhany says, "I heard an argument with his wife. He was saying 'I have to get off the plane.' She said, 'Calm down.'"

Alpizar took off running down the aisle, with his wife close behind him. "She was running behind him saying, 'He's sick. He's sick. He's ill. He's got a disorder," McAlhany recalls. "I don't know if she said bipolar disorder [as one witness has alleged]. She was trying to explain to the marshals that he was ill. He just wanted to get off the plane."

McAlhany described Alpizar as carrying a big backpack and wearing a fanny pack in front. He says it would have been impossible for Alpizar to lie flat on the floor of the plane, as marshals ordered him to do, with the fanny pack on. "You can't get on the ground with a fanny pack," he says. "You have to move it to the side."

By the time Alpizar made it to the front of the airplane, the crew had ordered the rest of the passengers to get down between the seats. "I didn't see him get shot," he says. "They kept telling me to get down. I heard about five shots."

McAlhany says he tried to see what was happening just in case he needed to take evasive action. "I wanted to make sure if anything was coming toward me and they were killing passengers I would have a chance to break somebody's neck," he says. "I was looking through the seats because I wanted to see what was coming.

"I was on the phone with my brother. Somebody came down the aisle and put a shotgun to the back of my head and said put your hands on the seat in front of you. I got my cell phone karate chopped out of my hand. Then I realized it was an official."

In the ensuing events, many of the passengers began crying in fear, he recalls. "They were pointing the guns directly at us instead of pointing them to the ground," he says "One little girl was crying. There was a lady crying all the way to the hotel."

McAlhany said he saw Alpizar before the flight and is absolutely stunned by what unfolded on the airplane. He says he saw Alpizar eating a sandwich in the boarding area before getting on the plane. He looked normal at that time, McAlhany says. He thinks the whole thing was a mistake: "I don't believe he should be dead right now."

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:33 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4509516.stm

Probe after Miami airport killing
The flight originated in Medellin
Investigations have begun after US air marshals on board an American Airlines flight shot and killed a man who started acting suspiciously.

US citizen Rigoberto Alpizar, 44, fled before take-off in Miami, saying he was carrying a bomb, officials said.

It was later confirmed that Alpizar had no explosives in his luggage. Witnesses suggested that the Costa Rican-born man may have suffered from mental illness.

The fatal shooting was the first since more marshals were deployed after 9/11.

James Bauer, head of the US air marshal service in Miami, said that controlled explosions carried out on Alpizar's luggage confirmed he was not carrying a bomb.

There was no indication of any link to terrorism, but federal air marshals were deployed in airports around the US as a precaution, Mr Bauer added.

'Unstable'

Alpizar had arrived in Miami, Florida, from Ecuador on a flight that had originated in Colombia. He was boarding a flight to Orlando at about 1410 local time (1910 GMT).

I did hear the lady say her husband was bipolar and had not had his medication
Mary Gardner
Passenger
Accounts from inside the plane suggest that Alpizar began behaving erratically before he was challenged by the marshals.

"He didn't look stable," fellow passenger John McAlhany told the Miami Herald.

As he ran down the aisle of the plane, a woman assumed to be his wife shouted for him to stop.

Witnesses interviewed after the shooting described how Alpizar's companion tried to tell fellow passengers or air marshals that he suffered from bipolar disorder, or manic depression.

"I did hear the lady say her husband was bipolar and had not had his medication," said Mary Gardner, another passenger.

"I saw the woman... she was hysterical."

'Threats'

After storming up the aisle of the plane Alpizar reached the aircraft boarding gate, where he was challenged by undercover marshals travelling among the passengers, Mr Bauer said.

At some point Alpizar reportedly suggested that he was carrying a bomb in his backpack, before moving his hand towards the bag.

"The threat escalated," Mr Bauer added, explaining why the marshals then opened fire, killing Alpizar.

Police boarded the plane and ordered fellow passengers to brace themselves against their seats with their hands on their heads.

Sniffer dogs checked passenger luggage on the airport tarmac.

"They put a gun to the back of my head and said: 'Put your hands on the seat'. That was more scary than anything else," passenger John McAlhany said.

In a statement, American Airlines described the shooting as an "isolated incident", adding that none of the other passengers were affected or were ever in danger.

"'I don't know if they shot an innocent man or not. I don't think he was armed or had a bomb. I think he had a mental illness," Mr McAlhany added.

"I don't think they really had to shoot him, but I hope he didn't holler something stupid.''

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/w ... 509516.stm

allWorkNoPlay · Post by **allWorkNoPlay** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:56 am

He said he had a bomb. He approached the air marshalls with a bag and was reaching into it. They did what they had to do.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/12/ ... 8439.shtml

It's sad what happened, but that's the world we live in.

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:02 pm

Read all the articles posted, including yours... that man should not have been shot... no way

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Excusing excessive use of force is dangerous"Biggity

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:07 pm

i don't think the marshall was wrong in his actions given the cercomstances and what he was given to work with - they really should be equipped with other non lethal take down equipment like tazer guns, beanbag rounds etc

OldschoolGP · Post by **OldschoolGP** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:01 pm

I've been trying to visualize the whole thing from the marshall's POV. If you had him stopped on the jetway, and were giving him commands to put hands up or get down and he didn't comply, then he started reaching to open a bag, I don't blame them for taking action. Impulse, instinct, training, spur of the moment reaction. I'm sure after the first shot was fired, the other marshalls fired on reaction. It sounds was it was a horrible misunderstanding and a tradgedy no doubt, but they did what they were there to do.

jstillwell · Post by **jstillwell** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:11 pm

Holy fuck. The terrorists have won.

V8Mikie · Post by **V8Mikie** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:38 pm

Government agents are authorized the use of deadly force only when they have probable cause to believe the suspect poses a legitimate threat to the officers or to people around him. (graham v connor).

While tragic, I think there was enough probable cause in this case to justify the killing.

jstillwell · Post by **jstillwell** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:05 pm

It's not safe to be crazy any more.

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:10 pm

jstillwell wrote:It's not safe to be crazy any more.

guy could have just as easily run out infront of traffic - mental illness isn't safe - thats why they often get locked in a mental hospital

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:15 pm

V8Mikie wrote:Government agents are authorized the use of deadly force only when they have probable cause to believe the suspect poses a legitimate threat to the officers or to people around him. (graham v connor).

While tragic, I think there was enough probable cause in this case to justify the killing.

This man never said shit about a bomb...all eye witness accounts say so

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Propaganda"Biggity

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:19 pm

DiggityBiggity wrote:
This man never said shit about a bomb...all eye witness accounts say so

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Propaganda"Biggity

no all the eye witness accounts say he didn't say anything about a bomb while inside the plane

reading comprehension pwns jew :la:

GT86 · Post by **GT86** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:29 pm

Look at it from the marshals point of view. Their job is to protect the aircraft and it's passengers. The guy was acting strangely, was talking bomb, and wasn't complying with orders. Then he starts reaching into a bag. At that point, they didn't have many options.

While tragic, I don't blame the air marshals for firing. However, I do think they should have non-lethal options. Tasers would have taken the guy down without killing him.

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:39 pm

Kohburn wrote:i don't think the marshall was wrong in his actions given the cercomstances and what he was given to work with - they really should be equipped with other non lethal take down equipment like tazer guns, beanbag rounds etc

Pigs aim for the center mass - dead people don't need 50 years of medical help/disability - cheaper to murder them.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:47 pm

DiggityBiggity wrote:Read all the articles posted, including yours... that man should not have been shot... no way

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Excusing excessive use of force is dangerous"Biggity

Once again. Same with the guy in London who was running onto a subway.. If these people really did have bombs, and your significant other was on the plane/subway and got blown up, you would be claiming he should have been shot on suspicion before getting a chance to detonate.

I like the mental illness causing someone to run out into the street analogy. Someone goes wrong in the head, bad things can unfortuntely happen.

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:48 pm

GT86 wrote:Look at it from the marshals point of view. Their job is to protect the aircraft and it's passengers. The guy was acting strangely, was talking bomb, and wasn't complying with orders. Then he starts reaching into a bag. At that point, they didn't have many options.

While tragic, I don't blame the air marshals for firing. However, I do think they should have non-lethal options. Tasers would have taken the guy down without killing him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the deceased a passenger as well?

As for the bomb talk, I'm not convinced there was any talk of it, especially while on the acft.

No one ponders what would have happened if he was white?

At that point, they didn't have many options.

1) Kill him

2) Shoot at extremities

3) Tackle him

4) Calm him

Let's start this process by understanding that what we hear from the pigs is about justifying this. After watching the LOvelace trial and the suppression of the audiotaped evidence not admitted at court due to it being mandatory IA stuff, the estblishment is all about covering shit up. DO I think there was a grand conspiracy? No. But do I think they were trigger-happy pigs with immunity in their pockets? Sure. There was no premeditaion, just incompetence and overzealous behavior.

So don't be too quick to believe all the releases to the media, as these guys just want to keep their jobs so they'll say anything, just like the other murderer, OJ.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:52 pm

EBSB52 wrote:
GT86 wrote:Look at it from the marshals point of view. Their job is to protect the aircraft and it's passengers. The guy was acting strangely, was talking bomb, and wasn't complying with orders. Then he starts reaching into a bag. At that point, they didn't have many options.

While tragic, I don't blame the air marshals for firing. However, I do think they should have non-lethal options. Tasers would have taken the guy down without killing him.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the deceased a passenger as well?

As for the bomb talk, I'm not convinced there was any talk of it, especially while on the acft.

No one ponders what would have happened if he was white?

At that point, they didn't have many options.

1) Kill him

2) Shoot at extremities

3) Tackle him

4) Calm him

Let's start this process by understanding that what we hear from the pigs is about justifying this. After watching the LOvelace trial and the suppression of the audiotaped evidence not admitted at court due to it being mandatory IA stuff, the estblishment is all about covering shit up. DO I think there was a grand conspiracy? No. But do I think they were trigger-happy pigs with immunity in their pockets? Sure. There was no premeditaion, just incompetence and overzealous behavior.

The guy is perceived a threat to more than himself, so he is killed. I dont know of many rational people who would screw with people at the airport. Remember than Penn-Teller article about putting a boot screen on their laptop that said "Time to detonation.. 10. 9. 8....". If I were to do something like that, I would assume I would be killed in the security line. I think these people that screw with the feds near public transportation are all well deserved qualifiers for the Darwin awards.

Also as far as trigger happy Police: Do you honestly think patrol officers are generally at or above average intelligence? These people dont get paid a whole heck of a lot of money, so I am not expecting performance. Lets double our Tax money and hire some better ones then with better screening, training, etc.

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:58 pm

EBSB52 wrote:No one ponders what would have happened if he was white?

funny I don't remember any articles stating the race of the officers - there are a lot of black and hispanic us marshals - especially hispanics that are fluent in spanish as the one was..

by you statement you think the marshall was white and shot him because he wasn't - which only shows how racist you are - race never even entered my mind untill you brought it up

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:04 pm

This man never said shit about a bomb... then they ask him to lay on the ground, he has on a fanny pack... so he goes to move it aside, and they blow him away

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:44 pm

DiggityBiggity wrote:This man never said shit about a bomb... then they ask him to lay on the ground, he has on a fanny pack... so he goes to move it aside, and they blow him away

From all the news stories aggregated that I could read:

1. The guy was running down an isle in an Airplane (not an elegant manuver I can imagine)
2. Woman shouted he was mentally ill
3. Man was not taking perscribed medication for known mental condition traveling on public transportation.
4. Trigger happy feds on board in high stress environment.

1+2+3+4 = qualifying for Darwin award.