A teenage girl who says she discovered a camera in an airplane bathroom is suing American Airlines - eviltoast
  • Deceptichum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Lawyers for the family suggested that the flight attendant removed the phone and erased images of the girl before letting her father see his iPhone photos.

    That does not say the phone was most definitely his in any way, shape, or form.

    For all you know the father demanded to look at his phone, he let him, the father found nothing and claimed he must’ve taken the phone back and deleted the photos. That does not prove fucking shit, it’s one sides story that is so far not backed up by any evidence.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You wanted the quote from the article. I gave you the quote from the article. Don’t go claiming “well the article might not be true” yadda yadda yadda. Don’t go changing the argument to something else after I showed you that you were wrong, dumbass.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, you gave me a quote that doesn’t back-up your claim.

        If you read the article, it seems the phone was most definitely the flight attendants.

        If you read the article, the only link between the phone in the seat and the one in the attendants position is the suggestion of a third party lawyer.

        No where is a definitive claim laid out that they are the same phone.

        Is it so hard for you people to stop trying to ruin innocent people’s lives with your witch hunt?

        • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The guys phone was taped to the seat, thats not even being questioned

          The only thing in question is if there were photos on the phone that was taped to the seat, a phone which he said belongs to him.

          • Deceptichum@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Who do you expect to question it?

            Who else has the journalist spoken to other than comments from the family’s lawyer?

            • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The guy being accused.

              If it wasnt his phone, he would immediately clear himself by saying “hey boss, my phone is right here in my hand, the kid is lying about that being my phone, mine was never in that bathroom.”

              The phone was, as reported by the FBI, given back to the man being accused before they asked him to let them look at the photo gallery.

              If it wasnt his phone, they wouldnt have given it to him in the first place. Very easy way to clear his name, when the girl accused him on the plane.

              • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                How do you know that’s not what happened?!

                You are literally taking one sides story at face value and using the lack of something being reported as damning evidence.

                And it was not reported by the fucking FBI, it was the family that said the FBI cleared him. The FBI has announced nothing and you believe they have because you’re trying to justify blaming an innocent person.

                • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  … Because the guy was removed from working, and american airlines wouldnt let people openly think they hired a pedophile if they immediately proved he wasnt a pedophile on the plane?

                  Think that through for a second dude, why would the company risk their name being dragged through the mud in a lawsuit if, while the plane was literally still in the air, multiple eye witnesses could confirm and corroberate that the accused employee immediately showed that his phone had not entered the bathroom?

                  • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Anyone would be stood down from the job after an allegation like that. It’s standard practice, it means nothing.

                    Think about man, why would a company risk talking about an ongoing legal case with the media. They send them the canned statement “we take this seriously blah blah blah” and that’s it.

                    You think the P.R. Team has more sway than the companies law firm?

                    Just because something was not said, does not mean it’s because it must be true.