possible FAA action... flight or fight?

Don't talk to us. Contact AOPA Legal Services NOW! Do not discuss
anything here -- it's public and can be used against you.

Call an aviation lawyer if you're not a member of AOPA Legal Services.

Now.

"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Don't talk to us.
Why not?

Contact AOPA Legal Services NOW! Do not discuss
anything here -- it's public and can be used against you.

What did he possibly say that could be used against him? He never admitted
to doing anything wrong or unlawful.

Call an aviation lawyer if you're not a member of AOPA Legal Services.

Now.

Paranoia can destroy ya.

Well, maybe, but then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to discuss
his problem with these NG's.

We had a series of violations charged at our airport and everybody got that
ol' time religion all of a sudden. An FAA agent came and carded a bunch of
us and wrote several people up. He was very courteous and fair about it,
and iirc everybody who got into compliance, except for a student pilot who
had stolen a 172 and had 3 other souls aboard w/o a signoff, was let off the
hook, once they began walking the straight and narrow. It made me rather
admire the FAA for their reasonableness.

Either one of the chosen NG's is a good place for issues like the original
poster's to be discussed. And he looks to be fairly anonymous.

there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to discuss
his problem with these NG's

If one is careful and circumspect enough, yes. However, it's easy to
slip up by accident and say something here, publicly and archived, that
one might wish they hadn't, and this might adversely affect the outcome.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

jls wrote:
"Blanche" wrote in message
...

Don't talk to us.

Why not?

Contact AOPA Legal Services NOW! Do not discuss

anything here -- it's public and can be used against you.


What did he possibly say that could be used against him? He never admitted
to doing anything wrong or unlawful.

Not yet, but the thread could easily develop into details that might not
be helpful.


Call an aviation lawyer if you're not a member of AOPA Legal Services.

Now.


Paranoia can destroy ya.

Yes, but "only the paranoid survive" to quote a famous businessman.


Well, maybe, but then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to discuss
his problem with these NG's.

A lawyer could give you lots of reasons not to have such a discussion here.


We had a series of violations charged at our airport and everybody got that
ol' time religion all of a sudden. An FAA agent came and carded a bunch of
us and wrote several people up. He was very courteous and fair about it,
and iirc everybody who got into compliance, except for a student pilot who
had stolen a 172 and had 3 other souls aboard w/o a signoff, was let off the
hook, once they began walking the straight and narrow. It made me rather
admire the FAA for their reasonableness.

The trouble is that the FAA isn't reasonable or unreasonable, its
various employees are or are not reasonable. The complication is that
you don't know in advance which one will show up.


Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote:

What did he possibly say that could be used against him? He never
admitted
to doing anything wrong or unlawful.

Not yet, but the thread could easily develop into details that might
not
be helpful.

That would require an FAA employee, deciding to "take a shot" and spend
hours browsing all the discussion groups on the net to try and connect
facts posed under a pseudonym to their violation case. If they have
proposed a sanction, that means they feel they have the facts to meet
their burden of proof. Why would they spend such time? All orig poster
has to do is change the date and location of the violation, and the type
aircraft. This denies the FAA any ability to prove the poster is the
violator, as if such evidence to be potentially introduced in litigation
were not rather bizarre and all that important.

Fred F.

"TaxSrv" wrote in message
...
"Matt Whiting" wrote:

What did he possibly say that could be used against him? He never
admitted
to doing anything wrong or unlawful.

Not yet, but the thread could easily develop into details that might
not
be helpful.

That would require an FAA employee, deciding to "take a shot" and spend
hours browsing all the discussion groups on the net to try and connect
facts posed under a pseudonym to their violation case. If they have
proposed a sanction, that means they feel they have the facts to meet
their burden of proof. Why would they spend such time? All orig poster
has to do is change the date and location of the violation, and the type
aircraft. This denies the FAA any ability to prove the poster is the
violator, as if such evidence to be potentially introduced in litigation
were not rather bizarre and all that important.

Fred F.


Yes, a voice of reason. The questions and discussion can be posed
anonymously and as hypotheticals. Therefore, no admissions against penal
or civil interest.