Mid-Air Intercept by ICE

[gotWXdagain]

For example say you're walking home at night and happen to be walking by a bank with a robbery hold-up alarm going off that officers are responding to (wrong place at the wrong time). The above happened to me back in high school, and because I was the only pedestrian in the immediate area I was instantly a bank robbery suspect - but by explaining who I was and where I was going in the FI I was ruled out as a suspect very quickly and sent on my way. By putting myself in their shoes (I'm very interested in law enforcement anyway) and understanding the procedures they were following, I didn't feel like my rights were violated by answering a few questions and clearing up their misunderstanding.

In that case, when I'm asking why I'm being questioned, if they don't tell me "There's a report of a bank robbery in the area" or something similar, I would still feel inclined to tell them to pound sand. If they want to waste their time getting warrants on all the random passerby in the area, that's their problem.

 

[gotWXdagain]

While the dog hitting on the wing was very clever, I think there IS one minor detail being missed here. That would be the composite wings. Is someone REALLY going to destroy the composite wing, fill it with dope, patch it, and re-paint it to appearing new to smuggle dope in? IIRC fiberglass can't mate with composite, so that goes out the window, and getting rolls of composite is, well, likely quite difficult.

AND.... I was asked why I flew direct from SDL to DZB w/o a stop, remember? That would mean putting fuel in the wings. They were full. Topped off when I departed, and I told them that. I landed AT minimums.

So much for the smuggling dope in wings theory.

One thing you mentioned in your OP was that the K9 officer was trying to get the dog to hit on many things. Could you explain that further?

 

[GX]

One thing you mentioned in your OP was that the K9 officer was trying to get the dog to hit on many things. Could you explain that further?

The dog was in training, I believe. The K9 officer was a local cop from Horseshoe Bay who showed up with a Teuvarian (sp?) and was shadowed by a guy wearing a red collared shirt. He was directing the officer. He started at the baggage compartment, and got nothing. He worked around the airplane directing the dog to search, and would pull off, re-search, pull off, re-search, and move on. This happened all around the airplane. Hew went to the exhaust pipes, and hit on those, pulled off, hit on them again, and sat. The handler pulled him off of the pipes, and re-directed to the wing root. Search, pull off, re-search, pseudo hit, pull off, sit.

I said to the agent who was babysitting me, "Nice false hit times 2." He looked at me and smirked.

There was the PC to search, and so they commenced. All of the bags went onto the ramp, and I knew those had nothing in them, so I was laughing. By this point I was irked, but trying to not be sarcastic, or rude. The dog went to our bags, searched, and bolted for the airplane. The handler pulled him off of the plane, and brought him back to the bags. Search, bolt, re-search, bolt, re-search, (the cop kept pointing at my camera bag and saying, "He's acting like he wants to hit..." No. He doesn't.) Finally the dog locked in, and searched. Cop pulled him bach, and had him re-search. Literally six or seven times. They cop tried to pull the panel surrounding the exhaust pipes off, and I said to the agent, "No way." He made the cop stop.

Then he put the dog on the wing, and into the cabin. The dog kept trying to jump out. He'd get put back in, do a search, and try to jump out. It was when he was put on the wing that he scratched frantically at both door sills to the cabin. If you're familiar with the Cirrus, there's no space between the seat, and the door sill. Further, if I was at 11,500, flying my plane, getting high, I'd leave the weed either in the console, or on the dash, not crammed into the space between my ass and the door sill. Don't wanna crush precious buds, you know? And there would have been a pipe in ready access of both of us.

Common sense failed all of these guys on this night.

 

[inigo88]

While the dog hitting on the wing was very clever, I think there IS one minor detail being missed here. That would be the composite wings. Is someone REALLY going to destroy the composite wing, fill it with dope, patch it, and re-paint it to appearing new to smuggle dope in? IIRC fiberglass can't mate with composite, so that goes out the window, and getting rolls of composite is, well, likely quite difficult.

AND.... I was asked why I flew direct from SDL to DZB w/o a stop, remember? That would mean putting fuel in the wings. They were full. Topped off when I departed, and I told them that. I landed AT minimums.

So much for the smuggling dope in wings theory.

I'll bet you that 99% of US Customs & Border Protection officers are not going to be smart enough to:

a.) Know that fuel is kept in the wings, and
b.) Understand Materials Engineering enough to know how composite construction works. and
c.) know the range characteristics of your airplane, and how it would change based on subtracting the volume displaced by a couple kilos of xyz drugs.

Although in their defense, couldn't you remove the wing and go in through the root?

Anyway, I agree with Mike. Your business partner owes you an explanation.

 

[BeReal]

inigo88 - I've only seen Border Wars a couple of times. I'd like to see it more, but I don't always have control of the remote.

With regard to cooperating with law enforcement, I used to believe that if you were innocent, you were better off cooperating with them. After many years working in a criminal defense/appellate law firm, I've seen too much go wrong to recommend this to anyone. If you review the cases where hundreds have recently been exonerated by DNA via the Innocence Project and even the Dallas County DA's office, you will usually find a naive suspect who knows he or she is innocent, and therefore cooperates and submits to interrogation, who gets tripped up by sophisticated and even dishonest interrogation techniques. Not all law enforcement officers have MikeD's integrity.(See a documentary called "Murder on a Sunday Morning.")

There has been a study of exoneration cases that shows that around 25% of them were the result of false confessions, and an even greater percentage are due to faulty identifications. I would rather spend one or two nights in jail for not cooperating and waiting for a lawyer than to have my statements twisted and distorted and end up in prison sweating out an appeal process.

 

[MikeD]

Further, if I was at 11,500, flying my plane, getting high, I'd leave the weed either in the console, or on the dash, not crammed into the space between my ass and the door sill. Don't wanna crush precious buds, you know? And there would have been a pipe in ready access of both of us.

Common sense failed all of these guys on this night.

You would be surprised what perps do that goes against what you and I might consider "common sense".

 

[MikeD]

inigo88 - I've only seen Border Wars a couple of times. I'd like to see it more, but I don't always have control of the remote.

With regard to cooperating with law enforcement, I used to believe that if you were innocent, you were better off cooperating with them. After many years working in a criminal defense/appellate law firm, I've seen too much go wrong to recommend this to anyone. If you review the cases where hundreds have recently been exonerated by DNA via the Innocence Project and even the Dallas County DA's office, you will usually find a naive suspect who knows he or she is innocent, and therefore cooperates and submits to interrogation, who gets tripped up by sophisticated and even dishonest interrogation techniques. Not all law enforcement officers have MikeD's integrity.(See a documentary called "Murder on a Sunday Morning.")

There has been a study of exoneration cases that shows that around 25% of them were the result of false confessions, and an even greater percentage are due to faulty identifications. I would rather spend one or two nights in jail for not cooperating and waiting for a lawyer than to have my statements twisted and distorted and end up in prison sweating out an appeal process.

Again, it depends on what you are doing when you talk about cooperating. If you've been brought in for questioning and read your Miranda rights for something, then exercise your rights and get a lawyer.

This is far different from, say, a traffic stop and the basic cooperation of identifying yourself, providing the appropriate documents, etc. And the stop lasting no longer than reasonable to take care of the business at hand.

 

[Qutch]

inigo88.....With regard to cooperating with law enforcement, I used to believe that if you were innocent, you were better off cooperating with them. After many years working in a criminal defense/appellate law firm, I've seen too much go wrong to recommend this to anyone. If you review the cases where hundreds have recently been exonerated by DNA via the Innocence Project and even the Dallas County DA's office, you will usually find a naive suspect who knows he or she is innocent, and therefore cooperates and submits to interrogation, who gets tripped up by sophisticated and even dishonest interrogation techniques. Not all law enforcement officers have MikeD's integrity.(See a documentary called "Murder on a Sunday Morning.")

..... I would rather spend one or two nights in jail for not cooperating and waiting for a lawyer than to have my statements twisted and distorted and end up in prison sweating out an appeal process.

I can't recommend anything different than you BeReal, for others, but for myself, I often do the opposite. I've found a lot of the investigators think somewhat like MikeD, and if you're straight with them, in the right, and know your stuff going in, they can be a help to you. But you have to know what you're doing and be straight.

I'm less trusting of the Prosecutors. I've had no contact with ICE. But I've had some FBI, State Police and other agencies act just like MikeD. If they think you're being straight with them, they'll try to help. They've helped me wrap things up pretty quick in a few situations. Maybe Mike would disagree, don't know.

But again, that's just me. Can't recommend it for others without knowing their situation and their knowledge level.

.

 

[GX]

I'll bet you that 99% of US Customs & Border Protection officers are not going to be smart enough to:

a.) Know that fuel is kept in the wings, and
b.) Understand Materials Engineering enough to know how composite construction works. and
c.) know the range characteristics of your airplane, and how it would change based on subtracting the volume displaced by a couple kilos of xyz drugs.

Although in their defense, couldn't you remove the wing and go in through the root?

Anyway, I agree with Mike. Your business partner owes you an explanation.

These guys were all aircrew and AIO's. Their business cards read pilot, and AIO. These guys knew the drill. I'm sure they know that the wing is composite, and they knew enough to ask about the direct, non-stop flight from SDL. Remove the wing and go in through the root? Yeah. Let me thrash my $230,000 airplane, make it not flyable, not airworthy, and unreliable, and fly it myself, with my gf on board half way across the country. Does that even make ANY sense to you? Because to me it sounds like you're grabbing straws at this point.

 

[MikeD]

Remove the wing and go in through the root? Yeah. Let me thrash my $230,000 airplane, make it not flyable, not airworthy, and unreliable, and fly it myself, with my gf on board half way across the country. Does that even make ANY sense to you? Because to me it sounds like you're grabbing straws at this point.

Not likely to one you may own. But to stolen aircraft, its been known to be done; as have many things. You'd be surprised. Remember, you have to think beyond what "makes sense", until you know otherwise.

 

[Qutch]

.
A word about Prosecutors and Defense Lawyers

One thing that tempts me to deal directly with investigators sometimes (depending very much on the circumstances) is my distrust of Prosecutors and the damage lawyers sometimes do to their own client's cases. It's not something I'm sure I want to go into in detail on an open forum, but I've seen clients ruined (legally, but especially financially) by the lack of street smarts and competence of their lawyers. And I've seen Prosecutors micro-manage their investigators and disregard them, turning manageable cases into messes. (I'm sure Mike can think of some cases of Prosecutorial stupidity that he can't tell us about, and BeReal can think of some law firms to avoid.)

That's why, assuming there are no charges, I never say never to working through the investigative agencies if I think it's appropirate. As Mike said, they don't always want to waste time for no reason, or refer a case that isn't worthy. I'd recommend getting good counsel advising in the background, but personally, I prefer to deal with investigative agencies under the right circumstances rather than stonewalling them.

.

 

[GX]

Not likely to one you may own. But to stolen aircraft, its been known to be done; as have many things. You'd be surprised. Remember, you have to think beyond what "makes sense", until you know otherwise.

There's that term again... "surprised". They "knew otherwise" in the first 10 minutes. From there, it was all arrogance, and group-think. Nobody had the fortitude to say, "Hey... He's being honest, she's honest, stories match identically...time to shut it down. Let's pack it up, and move on. We missed on this one." It would leave me compelled to help whatever investigation they may have, and would have me respect them for showing some mutual respect.

Instead, they stood around as we were leaving convinced we had something to hide/they missed something because I told them "NO. You may not search the airplane", even though a dog and their own eyes (all 20 sets of them) said something differently. THAT is what I find "surprising".

Honestly, I don't care if I completely grenade their investigation, and make them start at 0. They need my help far more than I need theirs. Just how it goes sometimes.

 

[Qutch]

.....seems to be something to do with your partner or that particular airplane. At least thats where the focus appeared to be. And again, it doesn't come from nowhere. Someone, for some reason, is interested in one or both of those. It would behoove both you and him to try and find out why.

So, speaking in general terms (not his specific situation) what are the options for finding out? Assuming the partner doesn't blurt out the reason, or has nothing to do with this, what's the next step in finding out? A FOIA could take forever and might be inconclusive. Pay2 on post #45 mentioned a similar situation happening to him. Where does a pilot go from here if he really has no idea what happened, and wants to know this isn't going to happen again?

If he has nothing to hide, and doesn't want to keep looking over his shoulder waiting to have his plane siezed, what other option is there but to walk in the Agency door (with advice of counsel) and ask? He's already on their radar. What does he have to lose by at least asking the Agency supervisors? And how should a pilot/aircraft owner in this situation ask the question?

@Pay2

 

[inigo88]

It depends who you are dealing with. If you are dealing with Air Interdiction Agents or Air Enforcement Officers, these guys are pilots and aircrew; so they have a very good knowledge of the above items.....likely as much as you. If you're dealing with an ICE ground agent, a CBP port of entry person, or a ground BP agent, then the above would very likely be true.

I knew I shouldn't have been so general. The AIA/AEOs almost certainly know more than me. I was only speculating on things they've probably routinely seen on the job. I meant to direct that at the ground agents, and especially local municipal LEOs (who can be pretty clueless on aviation issues). Case in point, the local cop who once detained my former CFI and one of her students for hours and was convinced they were drug smugglers because she was demonstrating a night landing with the landing light off, and therefore the airplane was "blacked out." (Yeah right...)

For the simple encounter....traffic stop, etc, or even most encounters; me personally as an LEO, I don't want to waste anyone else's time anymore than I want to waste my own, nor do I want to waste time with something that isn't there or someone that isn't doing anything wrong. So I try to expedite things as much as I can to help resolve a situation one way or another. Where it becomes problematic, is where I get the "roadside lawyer" or the person who wants to be an ass just for the sake of being an ass, or doesn't want to comply or be reasonable to simple or reasonable requests. Then, things become a pain in the ass because it starts to look like the person is being an ass for a reason, and that starts to create suspicion. Then, Ill take the time to see if there's anything to build on that suspicion, whereas I likely would've not cared previously.

This is exactly what I was trying to allude to in my previous post about FI's, said far more eloquently!

Does that even make ANY sense to you? Because to me it sounds like you're grabbing straws at this point.

Let's all take a step back. I wasn't accusing you or your partner of anything but your post seems awfully hostile. We're all just speculating to try to get to the bottom of this (so I guess we're all grabbing at straws). As much as I hope all LEOs are honest people and K9s are only used for their intended purpose, I understand that's a naive position. You were there and not us and if you say the K9 officer was trying to coax his dog into getting a hit to get PC for a search then well... that sucks. Make sure to document everything you remember extremely thoroughly should you need to show it to a lawyer later. As always hindsight is 20/20, but you probably noticed all of Qutch's videos had the following phrase in common: "Am I under arrest? If not, am I free to go?" This is a useful clarification to make because then at least the detaining officer can't claim later that "he was free to go at any time!"

There has been a study of exoneration cases that shows that around 25% of them were the result of false confessions, and an even greater percentage are due to faulty identifications. I would rather spend one or two nights in jail for not cooperating and waiting for a lawyer than to have my statements twisted and distorted and end up in prison sweating out an appeal process.

Man... that sucks. Again, I'm biased because I've worked in public safety around law enforcement in several capacities in the past, and I'm inclined from personal experience to try and cooperate within reason to clear up any misunderstanding. That's what I feel comfortable with though, and it's not an endorsement. My original comment was more directed at the situation I emphasized in MikeD's quote above, though I respect that you would be willing to sacrifice convenience and spend the night in jail to preserve your rights. If everyone were that passionate about preserving their civil liberties maybe we could finally get the patriot act rescinded.

 

[GX]

Let's all take a step back. I wasn't accusing you or your partner of anything but your post seems awfully hostile. We're all just speculating to try to get to the bottom of this (so I guess we're all grabbing at straws). As much as I hope all LEOs are honest people and K9s are only used for their intended purpose, I understand that's a naive position. You were there and not us and if you say the K9 officer was trying to coax his dog into getting a hit to get PC for a search then well... that sucks. Make sure to document everything you remember extremely thoroughly should you need to show it to a lawyer later. As always hindsight is 20/20, but you probably noticed all of Qutch's videos had the following phrase in common: "Am I under arrest? If not, am I free to go?" This is a useful clarification to make because then at least the detaining officer can't claim later that "he was free to go at any time!"

I am quite irked. What I experienced is not what I served my country for. It's simply not the true ideal of freedom and democracy. My gf's brother was killed Iraq. Is THIS was he defending and protecting? Is THIS the ideals that he gave his life up for? His name is Spencer Karol. You can look him up to put a real face with a real name. I'm sure he won't mind. If there is a cookie cutter "good guy", I'm that guy. And to be looked at through the glare of complete and absolute suspicion makes me wonder what it's like for the guy who hasn't served, or been initiated into the Gov't agency club, yet is just as All-American Patriot just like you and me.

I'm irked that all of my after action has lead me to people saying, "You need to get a lawyer, or go have a sit down conversation and hope for the best. Or go the spotlight route, and get the media involved." What that says is that there is no accountability on the part of these agencies. I'm irked that I was not able to find out who the OIC was in my situation. I asked a simple question, and was pretty much blown off. Yet they expect full and complete cooperation on my part. This is while they say,
"And oh, btw, alienate all of your friends, find us some dope, and call us when they ask to move a load of weed over state lines. We'll protect you. Promise. But shhhhh. Don't tell ANYONE this happened."

I'm irked that nothing about this was textbook (by an agent's own admission here), yet, it went down, as it did. I'm sure I'm missing minor details, as we all do when we after action events, but nothing in this story is embellished, or exaggerated.

I shouldn't have to be fearful about getting run over by some nameless, poorly identified Government agent when I get into my car, airplane, or boat, and travel across state lines to conduct business. THAT is not what I served for. I should not have to continually ask if I am under arrest, or being detained when approached by an agent of the Government that I pay for through tax dollars. That is not the definition of freedom. I should not have to deal with an agent asking me "what I'm hiding" in my own airplane after flying 4.2 hours, and after they endanger my life by nearly running me over in a twin engine turboprop airplane. That is not the freedom that I swore to uphold.

So, yeah, I'm hostile about it. My apologies.

 

[Qutch]

I am quite irked. What I experienced is not what I served my country for........That is not the definition of freedom. I should not have to deal with an agent asking me "what I'm hiding" in my own airplane ........

Could be it's not really about what you're hiding in your airplane. It's about what they're hiding in theirs. Maybe someone is checking to make sure you are not unauthorized competition. (Fast & Furious 2011?)

Former DEA Director - Rob Bonner


How Stuff Works - Drug & Gun Smuggling
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/dis...cret-warriors-contras-and-narcotics-video.htm

Ron Paul


.

 

[GX]

Funny you mention that, Qutch.... Osama is dead. The Taliban has been removed from power. And yet, we still occupy the single largest heroin producing country on the planet. Coincidence, isn't it? Surely not! We're there to spread the holy Gospel of freedom and democracy around the world!

Buuuuut....it's easier for me to travel through the airports of terrorist breeding cities of Dubai and Bahrain and the evil Chinese empire than it is any US airport.... There's no conspiracy here, simply life experiences galavanting around the world in service of my country.

Anyways... As a previous poster said; Better to let a sleeping dog lie than consume my life with this mess. And I think he's right.

 

[GX]

So.... a development. I passed the numbers to my biz partner, and he called one of the agents. Agent (pilot) stated that they were meeting the C210 for dinner at a local watering hole, and I was the guy in the "wrong place at the wrong time". Stated they are conducting ramp checks (though not FAA agents?) all over SW and Central Texas. It's what they do all day. Said that there was no mid-air intercept, but rather that they "just happened to be there when we were" (with no traffic calls and no announcements in the pattern?)

Also stated that I "consented to the search" (why the dog?) and that everything was standard protocol.

Kept talking about what a nice plane we have (that the dog scratched the snot out of...) and that it was merely coincidence. At least he was nice enough to talk on the phone to biz partner, but after reading all of the thread, we know it wasn't standard protocol.

 

[Qutch]

So.... a development. I passed the numbers to my biz partner, and he called one of the agents........Kept talking about what a nice plane we have (that the dog scratched the snot out of)......

Damn it Canassis, stop complaining. Our boys didn't have anything else to do and they needed the practice taking a Cirrus apart. So, your plane suffered a little minor damage. It's hardly noticeable.

.

 

[GX]

^^^^^ Eh.... It's merely a flesh wound.