The Phil Mocek Incident

[gonzalu]

But you DON'T use it or show it to a neighbor when getting into your daily missile, correct? What about when you go into the supermarket? Your house?

[Gerard]

But you DON'T use it or show it to a neighbor when getting into your daily missile, correct?

Uh HUH?

[gonzalu]

[megatop412]

I think the screening process is only one component of an effective safety program. We have all gotten quite used to carrying our ID's over the course of our lives, the implicit assumption is that it contains verifiable information about your identity. Maybe the TSA doesn't scan people's licenses or other ID's, but maybe they should(just playing devil's advocate here). If you produce a fake ID, for whatever reason, that means you can be considered a criminal, and that makes me not want to be on a plane with you. If you did that, what's to stop you from engaging in other criminal activities that might affect me? I'm just taking this to its logical conclusion. Plus, the last several times I have flown, my ID was studied by the gate agent as well as the TSA staffer at the head of the line(that's how it's done in Philly anyway), and they checked to make sure the name on the ticket matches the name on the ID. Verifying identity is a completely separate issue than screening for dangerous items, but they certainly complement each other. Plus, with large beaurocracies like the TSA that put little children's names on the no-fly list among other things, I would think that it could help to have an ID they can run. A ticket in your hand only says you're in possession of a ticket, and nothing else.

So all of a sudden there's a backlash about carrying a photo ID? I don't understand this. Every time I have to interact with a cop, whether its spotting, or speeding, I expect to have to show ID. I think the same rule should have to apply in an airport. The screening process has flaws and everyone knows it(remember the 'pistol-packing granny' case 2 weeks ago), so it shouldn't be the only method of defense. So no, I don't think just a screening is enough since its obvious people can sneak guns on planes.

I'll say it again- when you enter an airport and then a plane you bear some level of accountability to your fellow passengers and should be able to produce an ID. It isn't a playground. Besides, the licenses that we faked years ago to buy beer were a little easier to forge than what most states issue today. Lastly, I'm sure people whose job it is to look at ID's and passports all day long get pretty decent at being able to spot a fake or altered ID. If we're going to operate off the assumption that ID's could be faked easily enough, then what is the point of having any ID at all?

[AirlineReporter]

So Phil M, I am one that is NOT a fan of the TSA by any means.

I wonder what has this incident done? Do you think policies have changed to better inform TSA officials? What has been worth the $34,000?

David

[gonzalu]

I think the screening process is only one component of an effective safety program. We have all gotten quite used to carrying our ID's over the course of our lives, the implicit assumption is that it contains verifiable information about your identity. Maybe the TSA doesn't scan people's licenses or other ID's, but maybe they should(just playing devil's advocate here). If you produce a fake ID, for whatever reason, that means you can be considered a criminal, and that makes me not want to be on a plane with you. If you did that, what's to stop you from engaging in other criminal activities that might affect me? I'm just taking this to its logical conclusion. Plus, the last several times I have flown, my ID was studied by the gate agent as well as the TSA staffer at the head of the line(that's how it's done in Philly anyway), and they checked to make sure the name on the ticket matches the name on the ID. Verifying identity is a completely separate issue than screening for dangerous items, but they certainly complement each other. Plus, with large beaurocracies like the TSA that put little children's names on the no-fly list among other things, I would think that it could help to have an ID they can run. A ticket in your hand only says you're in possession of a ticket, and nothing else.

So all of a sudden there's a backlash about carrying a photo ID? I don't understand this. Every time I have to interact with a cop, whether its spotting, or speeding, I expect to have to show ID. I think the same rule should have to apply in an airport. The screening process has flaws and everyone knows it(remember the 'pistol-packing granny' case 2 weeks ago), so it shouldn't be the only method of defense. So no, I don't think just a screening is enough since its obvious people can sneak guns on planes.

William, that's exactly the point, thank you for pointing it out. YOU have decided to simply trust whatever you are told to do or behave like and that's that... that is entirely your prerogative and your right. What I am trying to say, and what those folks that test the system are trying to say is, just because you told us to, does not mean we have to. William, have you really considered why you give your ID wherever you go? You don;t care why you are eing asked? You don't care if it is required or not required. Why do you trust the government implicitly? Remember now, there is a test at the end :-) YOU ARE the government... you, me, everyone. WE are the law makers, the law enforcers, the law reviewers, WE!!! us, you and I.

I am a law abiding citizen, not part of a herd of robots. I like to know why I have to or am supposed to do something. Please do not take that right away. Curiosity is the only thing keeping sane free citizens from those who are oppressed. Too much trust and someone will eventually have more power to do more as they are not questioned or challenged.

It is a fine balance between being civil and being ignorant. I like being civil which gives me the capacity to question and challenge, not be ignorant and not be an a**hole. Let's put it another way:

--Take a LAWYER, a Supreme Court Lawyer, years of experience, tons of hours in front of the bench. Knows the justices by first name and even has dinner with them.
--Said lawyer presents a case to the court asking if it is constitutional for a government agency to require government issued ID.

Would you say that is OK vs someone, a regular citizen, challenging a government agency demanding and requiring, with threat of arrest, ID? BTW, the minute a Police Officer or any person in a position of authority tells another person that they are "in trouble" that could be considered threatening and intimidating, both of which are considered offensive. NO ONE can threaten you, ever. You can ONLY be charged with a crime, arrested and charged with that crime. Processed, arraigned, brought up on criminal charges by a grand jury of regular citizens and then go in front of a judge in either a jury trial or not and then convicted of the crimes of which you are charged. That is the ONLY way I know someone can get you in trouble...

...well, for me, telling my mom is another way to get me in trouble

I'll say it again- when you enter an airport and then a plane you bear some level of accountability to your fellow passengers and should be able to produce an ID. It isn't a playground. Besides, the licenses that we faked years ago to buy beer were a little easier to forge than what most states issue today. Lastly, I'm sure people whose job it is to look at ID's and passports all day long get pretty decent at being able to spot a fake or altered ID. If we're going to operate off the assumption that ID's could be faked easily enough, then what is the point of having any ID at all?

Who said it is a playground? PLAYING ALONG is what makes it a playground! Come on now... do you believe that Mr Mocek was acting like a child? He seemed pretty grown up to me. Regardless of what he was intentionally doing or not, he had a purpose when he intended to test the system instead of ignoring it and allowing it to be for the sake of being. It takes guts to do what he did as a Citizen with Rights... I know I am a coward because I would never have done it. But I admit I am afraid to test it... I go along with it just to not make a scene... but I know I may be giving up my rights by doing so... that is the whole point here. This is NOT anything to do with terrorism. YOU WELL KNOW that said terrorists are not going to use a hard target but a soft one. I worry more about the construction trucks entering JFK left and right 24x7x365. I don't see no metal detectors at those check points... NONE!!

And next time you're on a plane, try this. Ask the person next to you if their ID was really a valid one, given to them by a government agency. Ask them to prove it... and no, 3D holograms have been cracked already. This is why credit card companies have three forms of verification ... I NEVER have to show ID when I use my credit card, ever! As a matter of fact, William, the LAW does not require it! :P and most credit card companies do NOT require it either. The businesses ask for it to protect themselves from chargebacks.

[Zee71]

"I worry more about the construction trucks entering JFK left and right 24x7x365"


This has some truth Manny, and I am concerned too. One day I was having lunch near where some of the construction trucks would line up and get escorted to the ramp, but at time there were none. As I'm having my lunch a security vehicle pulls up next to me and asked if I needed an escort to the ramp? Is it really that simple? Sure they probably would have taken my plate number, etc. but if I played along I'm sure I would have been driving on the ramp. I can only hope the screening and inspection process for entering the ramp area is beefed up.

[gonzalu]

I have to say this though, when I went to the Singapore and the ANA press events, security was SUPER TIGHT!!!!! I was almost cavity searched and I had to submit my ID way in advance and be CLEARED. And I was NOT FLYING...

While at the Singapore event, to get into the airplane cabin, there were two private security guards at each door (that's 4 total) and they screened EVERYONE very very hard... even the pilots, the Singapore engineers, and food people, OTHER security guards from other agencies were screened. I left the plane for a second to put down my coat and almost could not get back in. I was very impressed. None of the four guards smiled nor made idle chat nothing... they were extremely professional.

[Gerard]

Where did Mocek go? Maybe Nick and Mannys back-and-forth scared him more than the TSA and APD combined.

[gonzalu]

Where did Mocek go? Maybe Nick and Mannys back-and-forth scared him more than the TSA and APD combined.

Ha! I doubt it... I am sure he has other more purpose related websites and blogs to deal with than our somewhat dedicated site here. Besides, I am a NOBODY in the grand scheme of things... no reason to be afraid of me for anything LOL... That would be hilarious. Although come to think of it, I would have shot a much better video ... perhaps even use asteadycam! nyah nyah nyah

[NIKV69]

Where did Mocek go?

Maybe he opened a school that teaches airline travelers to fight an armed terrorist so next time they go through a check point they can tell the TSA they aren't needed. Since we can all regain control of the aircraft in case we run into any terrorists.

[Gerard]

Maybe he opened a school that teaches airline travelers to fight an armed terrorist so next time they go through a check point they can tell the TSA they aren't needed. Since we can all regain control of the aircraft in case we run into any terrorists.

Yeah WTF was that?
And I'm still trying to figure out what my "daily missle" is.

[gonzalu]

Yeah WTF was that?
And I'm still trying to figure out what my "daily missle" is.

Your car, Gerard... Just your everyday car. There are thousands each day out on the road... back and forth up and down. It was stated as a joke but not really. It is related to my point that there are many things we take for granted that have the potential to cause much harm and they go on day in and day out with little checks and balances. That was one of the points I tried to make.

[mirrodie]

Nicks school post... that was hilarious.


You know, I just read through this thread....one thing I've been thinking about since there was a big uproar in NY regarding NYS driving licenses:

Our licenses as a form of ID....is one big fat joke. YOu renew it every 8 years with an OPTION to renew the photo.

Now sure, I still have my college photo in there, but look nothing like my college pic.....what the heck kind of ID purpose is that/??!

[pmocek]

Mr. Mocek do you carry an ID with you? Do you have a drivers license?

I am licensed by the state of Washington to drive on public roads. I carry documentation of such when driving on public roads. If I plan to leave the United States, I carry my passport (and I carry it when I return, though international treaty obligations require our border guards to allow me re-entry to my home country regardless of whether I'm carrying a passport). At most other times, whether I carry any cards or documents with with me is just a matter of convenience.

Phil, as you state in your video above, you wanted a jury of your peers to see the evidence and find you not guilty for reasons of you believing you were within your rights.

It's not so much that I was "within my rights" but that I did not violate any law. It seems maybe you and others think of this trial as a test of whether intending to go through airport with no documentation besides one's valid boarding pass is lawful, or whether it's lawful to use your camera to record some public employees interacting with you and other people in public at a public airport. Those are lawful, but I wasn't charged with either of those things. I did not do what the police claimed I did. Officers Dilley, Wiggins, and De La Pena all lied in their reports.

The document checker guy didn't like me using my camera. His grouchy manager didn't either, and either tried to steal it from me or to grab my arm. They called the police, then reported, "First of all he's refusing to show ID. Second of all he's videotaping and taking pictures of the process." Breedon knew that I didn't have to show ID. He told me so in the first ten seconds of our interaction when I reached the front of the line. And the idea that it would be unlawful to use a camera in a public to get images or video of things that thousands of people see every day, is laughable. But that's what he told the police.

Albuquerque Aviation Police Department Officer Dilley told me to do whatever the security guards told me to do, and when I explained -- calmly and politely -- that I knew there was no rule against using my camera, he started to eject me from the airport. I immediately complied, walking away with him.

He then stopped and told me I had to show him ID. This was not based in law, and it would have been impossible for me to do so. He never asked who I was -- for me to identify myself -- only that I show him ID. I told him I didn't have it, so he took my bags, walked me over to the airport police office, and locked me in a cell. He made up a story about what had happened, claiming that I said and did things I not do, in support of his claim that I violated four laws, then signed this falsified report under penalty of perjury.

It's really that simple.

If the jury had not found in your favor, how would you have felt?

I suppose I would have felt that they were mistaken, or that they had been convinced by the prosecution that even though I was not guilty of the things of which I was accused, I should be punished anyway.

How would you have reacted?

I suppose my immediate reaction would have been about the same, but without the hugs from my partner, my parents, and my lawyers. Then, instead of seeking avice about filing a civil suit, I'd have saught advice about appealing the decision.

Would your life or views have changed as a result?

That would have depended on whether or not my appeal was successful, and whether jail time was imposed as punishment.

I ask because it sounds from your tone and demeanor that you are genuinely interested in what's right and wrong.

Very much so.

I would love to hear your opinion if the decision by the jury had been for the plaintiffs?

My opinion would have been that they were incorrect. I did not do the things of which I was accused.

Thank you for taking the time to openly discuss this case as well as your beliefs with us.

You're welcome. Thanks, again, for your interest in my case and in the surrounding issues.