JetBlue Has Grandmother Arrested For Refusing To Delete An Unflattering Video Recording
Marilyn Parver is taking her story to the media after JetBlue had her arrested and walked off the plane in handcuffs for refusing to delete a video recording she made of an altercation between passengers. She told Christopher Elliott that JetBlue accused her of interfering with a flight crew (a federal crime) and threatened to blacklist her by adding her name to the dreaded "no-fly list."
I am a 56-year-old grandmother who has never had so much as a speeding ticket. But on July 26th, I was taken by armed officers, in handcuffs, off JetBlue flight 195 for refusing to delete a video I had taken of a minor altercation between passengers over a screaming kid.
The flight crew made up a charge of interfering with the crew. My recording proves I did nothing wrong. I never even stood up. I was left with the threat that I will never be able to fly on JetBlue, that I will go on the no-fly list, and have a report written about me filed with the FAA.
Parver has turned the footage over to ABCNews (apparently we should watch for her on Good Morning America) so that ABC's legal team can fight off the pitbulls at JetBlue.
The Kingman Daily Miner also has a description of the incident:
Approximately 30 minutes after the dispute, Parver said she was approached by the flight crew who were asking passengers questions about the altercation. When Parver told them she had recorded the incident, they requested she accompany them to the back of the plane, Parver said.
There she showed the video to three or four crew members, Parver said.
"After viewing the video, they demanded that I delete it," Parver said. "I asked, 'Why?' The head-stewardess went as far as to tell me that I had broken a law by using an electronic item during the flight."
At that time, another flight attendant accused Parver of wanting to put it up on YouTube, a video-sharing Web site.
"I do not even know how to download a video on the Internet," Parver said.
After refusing and returning to her seat, the crew asked Parver to return to the back of the plane again, she said.
"This time they told me that the captain demanded that I delete the video," Parver added.
Parver requested to speak to the captain by telephone to confirm the demand. She was not granted this request.
"If the captain had nicely asked me to delete the video, I don't think I would have disobeyed a pilot," Parver said.
Parver again refused the flight crew's request. At that point, one attendant told Parver that if she disobeyed the captain, federal agents would be involved and she could face criminal penalties.
"This was all a case of bullying," Parver said.
Grandmother arrested after refusing to delete JetBlue fight video [Elliott]
Woman detained by airline over video [Kingman Daily Miner]
This is a test using rich text formatting and html links. It's the generic "company" ad that should appear on all posts with the Company category if they don't have an ad attached to a specific company.
Post a comment
Comments:
go grandma go!
I'm fed up with the whole airline world behaving like a bunch of bullies... from security all the way to the attendants. ridiculous.
Well, this story being in the media is certainly more unflattering than whatever was recorded on that video.
What's up with big business bullying grandmothers today? First Target, now Jet Blue...
Awesome. Seriously, you can't use terrorism or whatever crap you want to justify your gestapo tactics against innocent people. I hope they get sued.
Wonder what she used to make the video with, I would think if a Gma can make a recording she probably knows how to put it on YouTube.
Should have sent the message to "tips@consumerist.com" or your e-mail. Then you could have deleted it w/ease.
Jet Blue used to have a good reputation. So sad they have fallen off so much.
I'm guessing something on the video didn't jive w/the stories the crew told or had recorded already. It's easier to modify someones testimony by asking the correct questions than to have the un-impeachable video.
The pilot should have just ordered her out the emergency door, right there in mid-air. He's allowed to summarily execute anyone he chooses, right? HE'S THE CAPTAIN DO NOT INTERFERE WITH HIS JUSTICE!
What a bunch of dimwit jerks. I imagine they were trying to save face, and recording that is a dick thing to do, but shocking abuse of authority
you can delete it then retrive it right back w/ software downloaded free from the internet. No big deal as long as you have the memory card.
I guess "jetting" involves persecuting grandmothers for petty rule violations.
The real irony here is that she offered that recording to the crew to help them resolve the dispute.
"After viewing the video, they demanded that I delete it," Parver said. "I asked, 'Why?' The head-stewardess went as far as to tell me that I had broken a law by using an electronic item during the flight."
Uhhh, hello flight attendant, maybe you need to go back to flight attendant classes. Cameras are approved electronic devices allowed to be used during a flight the last time I checked, along with portable DVD players, certain game systems, CD and MP3 players and laptops. You just can't use cell phones or have anything with wifi enabled, I think.
It would be one thing if she was standing in the aisle with it on a tripod or something, but just sitting in her seat filming should be fine. I know the pre flight blahdy blah says you must obey all crew instructions by federal law, but that is just absurd, and i wouldn't obey absurd instructions like that either.
Jetblue is my favorite carrier, but this is just appalling. I could understand them not wanting the video out and about it maybe, it showed a flight attendant doing something highly inappropriate, but they have no right to demand you not film passengers as far as I know. I myself and my boyfriend have used cameras before on flights to take photos out of the plane windows and whatnot.
Still, I think we need a little more info from both sides to make a clear judgment.
@Git Em SteveDave displays attention-grabbing vanity:
They probably were not worried about a court case and more worried about the video being on youtube. Either way this looks really bad for Jet Blue.
Kudos to Ms. Parver for not taking any crap from "authority" (yes, those are ironic quotes). I wish more people took a stand on such matters. And shame on JetBlue for running a typical corporate culture of hostility against its customers.
Since that night, Parver has written formal complaints to the Federal Aviation Administration, the Aviation Consumer Protection Agency, the TSA and JetBlue. Parver said FedEx has confirmed delivering her complaints to the Aviation Consumer Protection Agency and so on. Parver has left a complaint with TSA on their Web site, which they keep sending back to her telling her to contact other agencies. "They weren't doing anything on it but passing the buck to other people," Parver said.
And this pisses me off royally -- it's the same exact experience I've ever had contacting government consumer protection agencies. They're all scumbags. Time to not only get rid of incumbents in Congress but to fire all the consumer protection heads and clean house.
Hmm...and why exactly did the Las Vegas Metro Police decide to incarcerate her without an arrest citation or any other documentation? Sounds like the Gulag, where you go in and no one knows what happened to you...
Yes, here it is on their website:
Electronic Devices Permitted in Carryon Bags
Camcorders
Cameras and Camera Equipment: the checked baggage screening equipment will
damage undeveloped film. We recommend that you put undeveloped film and
cameras containing undeveloped film in your carryon baggage, or take your
checked baggage containing the undeveloped film to the checkpoint and ask the
screener to conduct a hand inspection.
Laptop Computers
Mobile Phones
Pagers
Personal Data Assistants (PDAs)
and if they allow you to carry it on with you, then logically a reasonable person would expect to be able to use it.
The golden rule is don't fuck with a Grandma.
I know this isn't going to be popular, but I think I would have just deleted the video. Why was she video taping 2 passengers arguing over a child? Are the people she was taping mad? I would be. Is this all worth the bruhaha?
Oh airlines, when will you learn? Harassing a passenger who's already upset because of your own stupidity just makes them more determined to destroy you.
I wonder if this would still go in if airlines couldn't count on federal bail-outs regardless of how or why they've stopped being profitable.
all this coverage everywhere and not a single posting of the video? if this happened to me, i'd post it everywhere. I would have had no intention to post it but after they treated her like that, it should be on digg, youtube, consumerist, abc, etc etc etc.
This is getting really out of hand. Flight attendants should not have the power to do this type of a thing.
Remember the good ol' days when stewardesses were hot and no self respecting man would be a steward? More people need to remind them they are nothing more than flying waitresses, so drop the attitude.
Do the stewardesses not go through some sort of training like "this is the stuff you can legally tell a customer to and they have to comply with, and this other stuff you can't tell them to do because they can thumb their noses at you and post it on Consumerist?"
Because frankly, this seems like a case of the latter. These people were stupid enough to think they could get away with ordering a passenger to delete a video for no legitimate reason. Should we really put them in charge of the safety of hundreds of people in an emergency?
Ah Jet Blue. I remember a long time ago I was flying with them as an unaccompanied minor (16) and I fell asleep on the plane. A stewardess apparently thought I was dead or something and started freaking out about a medical emergency until some body poked me and woke me up. I thought it was hilarious.
@: What you're not supposed to check is very different from what you're allowed to use in-flight--you certainly can't use a mobile phone aloft, for instance.
I do think that taking pictures of other people on the flight without their permission might be considered disruptive, but it doesn't sound like that's what JetBlue was claiming. Instead, it sounds like the classic "We really don't want you to do this, and we'll throw whatever prohibitions we've got at you whether they apply or not."
It amazes me that some people can accept the actions of "Authority" without complaint. The state of individual rights is constantly eroded by those that want to take the easy way out.
"Delete the video" why, they have no right to ask.
"Can I see your receipt", ditto.
People are much like sheep, just follow blindly. Good way to get to a police state!
@: Ummm yeah... love the attitude there. But I will remind you that flight attendees are trained for emergency situations including how to calm or restrain passengers and facilitating a speedy evacuation. If you think that they are merely trained to get you your Jack and coke, then you clearly have no idea what modern aviation training is like.
Their behavior here in unacceptable, but their lack of hotness has nothing to do with it.
Surely you don't have to do ANYTHING a flight crew tells you to do. I mean, I assume they can only order you to do something that is necessary for the safety of the aircraft and legal.
@bravo369: Seriously, where is this video? That's what's going to get JetBlue talking.
Someone get granny on the horn and teach her how to use YouTube to administer justice.
Additionally, is it really illegal to run the camera inside the plane? I mean, we've got fricken laptops with WiFi flying around. Why not a video camera?
I don't buy it.
2 weeks ago, on my Northwest flight from Memphis to Pittsburgh, a flight attendant flipped out on a young-ish (20 something) couple who were taking pictures of each other with their digital camera in the last row of the plane. The couple asked what they were doing wrong and the FA said the camera could interfere with the sensitive flight equipment.
If true, they should try making flight equipment a little bit more robust than to be sabotaged by a piece of equipment running on a couple of AA batteries. Basically, if a FA doesn't like what you are doing (maybe she was having a bad hair day and was afraid she'd be in the pictures) they can bully you around and hide behind the 'sensitive equipment' or 'pilot said so' bullshit.
@linus: I highly doubt it's illegal to record video on a plane. I know I've done it before on my digital camera, and that was considered perfectly fine. And if it's not illegal, I can't see how they can legally order you to comply and punish you if you refuse.
Here's the lesson:
Business needs to think through the ramifications of their behavior.
If the JetBlue attendants had just remembered the Rule of 7 (that you'll tell seven people about a bad experience) no one would have ever heard about this.
The video might have ended up on YouTube. It probably would have gotten five hits if it did.
Now it's going to end up on Good Morning America and get 5 million viewers.
What did JetBlue save by being difficult? In the other story, what did Target save? $30? JetBlue might get sued, and they should be sued, for false imprisonment. All over a tape that was taken legally, and would have never become some sensation?
JetBlue gave it all the credibility it needed by their behavior. Is there one person on this blog who wouldn't follow a YouTube link right now *just* to see what she recorded that got her arrested?
Think through the ramifications, big business. Sometimes letting things go or spending $30 saves you big time in bad publicity.
In a sense, she is violating the rights of that kid and the passengers by taking that video.
It appears that everything one does now can be recorded without your permission and even put on YouTube.
She has to think of the rights of the others too. If it was a minor argument - it is certainly nothing that drastic to take a video of
@backbroken: Well the problem isn't the camera per-say, it's that there's no way of knowing if a camera or any other electrical device will interfere with the electronics of the plan.
Mythbusters had an episode dedicated to this. While most electrical stuff doesn't interfere with the plane, it would be prohibitabily expensive to keep upgrading a plane's electronics to simply allow someone to use a iphone or something along those lines.
As freqently as technology changes, I completely understand this. But at some point in the flight, when using your MP3 player and other stuff is okay, why not other items?
@johnva: I wouldn't think so either but it may fall into one of those "terrorist" or "private property" loop holes.
@backbroken: Well, as I just said, I've taken digital pictures on planes numerous times. On at least one occasion that I did this I was sitting near the flight attendant and they saw me do this with no objection. As long as you don't have it on during the takeoff/landing, I don't believe it's true that a camera with no radio transmitter could cause interference.
Wow. Now I want to see what's on that tape. I'm guessing that it's possible there's something on it where a JetBlue employee perhaps said or did something they shouldn't have or thought it was possible someone would perceive it as such. Eeeeenteresting.
From the FAA website: [faa.custhelp.com]
In general, you may not use any electronic device on any aircraft that is being operated under instrument flight rules (IFR), or on any commercial flight. However, the following are permitted:
* Portable voice recorders
* Hearing aids
* Heart pacemakers
* Electronic shavers
Radios and other portable electronic devices, such as computers and headphones (regular or noise cancelling), may be permitted if the operator of the aircraft determines they will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system. Please check with the crew if your device (i.e., handheld GPS unit) is not covered in the passenger briefing. Note that each airline and pilot-in-command has final authority on the operation of electronic devices onboard any aircraft at any time.
@ceejeemcbeegee: Deleting a video and turning off a video recording device are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
@ceejeemcbeegee: Well, it's not surprising that they can ask you to stop. I'm just saying that I don't believe there is any physical reason that a camera would cause interference. And even if they can ask you to stop using it, I highly doubt they can order you to delete some electronic data. Could a flight attendant order me to delete a file on my laptop computer and then have me arrested if I refused?
It's called a Contract of Carriage. All airlines have one. Read it sometime because you will be surprised how they justify removing unruly passengers from a flight. Plus, I wouldn't want someone videotaping me without permission. Especially if I was arguing with someone. It is possible one of those passengers involved in the altercation asked a flight attendant to make the request and the attendant was obligated to conceal the identity of who made the request.
"After viewing the video, they demanded that I delete it," Parver said. "I asked, 'Why?' The head-stewardess went as far as to tell me that I had broken a law by using an electronic item during the flight."
So if you erase evidence that you've broken a law, it's like you never broke the law to begin with? Wow, Enron's shredding of documents was very forward-thinking. Now if I can just figure out how to reset that cop's radar detector after he catches me speeding, I'll be golden.
But in this case, she didn't do anything illegal in the first place, so there should be no reason for her to cover her tracks. Even if it were illegal, erasing it wouldn't have made if any less illegal.
@Erwos:
I'm with you, Erwos. As far as I'm concerned pilots and their crew have every right to practice Admiralty Law while flying the friendly skies.
Uppity about paying for the water that the TSA no longer allows you to bring from home? 50 lashes.
Unruly passenger refusing to obey arbitrary and ridiculous requests? Air keelhauling.
I thought one wasn't allowed to take photos or videos of airplanes or public transportation, because the "Terrorists might get the information."
But obstruction? That's bullcrap.