U.S. Federal Air Marshals Kill Man Claiming to have a Bomb

[sniper]

Tragic in the extreme. Training and duty kicked in at the proper point, but the man and his Service can't win. Their actions and policies will be second guessed by uncaring media and an ill-educated public.

I believe the Marshal deserves a commendation for excellent marksmanship.

Although you can't make anyone do what they do not wish, if she is the least bit like mine, the the wife would have seen that proper medications were taken.
Screaming "He is mentally ill!" during a situation of clear and present danger does not get one "home free".

 

[AJ_Dual]

In some news accounts the wife is making statements that she blames herself for knowingly taking a risk by convincing her husband to get on the plane when he had not taken his meds. (Ran out on the trip?) Assuming that's true, I see two possibilities of what he was thinking in his disordered state (Manic, or the depressive swing, we may never know.)

To my admittedly armature analysis, the depressive state could have indeed created a desire for "suicide by cop". Who knows what kind of dark thoughts he may have been obsessively stewing during their travel after the meds ran out.?

Or, perhaps the manic stage was causing a severe impulse control problem. Everyone knows you are ABSOLUTELY NOT supposed to say or joke about "bomb", "gun", "knife", "hijack", or "terrorism" in airports or aircraft, even before 9-11. In certain kinds of mental illness, the mis-wiring of the brain causes a loss of impulse control and a nearly irresistible urge to do the forbidden thing.

It's somewhat like a really severe case of the joke where you tell someone, "Okay! Whatever you do. DON'T think about a pink elephant!" Of course it's an impossible task, because by knowing that you're trying to not think of a pink elephant, you're thinking of one. His bi-polar state forced him to act out inappropriately, even if he didn't want to.

It's within the realm of conceivability that terrorists could use a man/woman team to act as a distraction, where the woman screams "Don't worry! My husband is just mentally ill!" as a ruse to buy time/sympathy for the male suicide bomber to self-detonate, or gain cockpit access etc.

The culpability lies with the man and the woman for running out of his meds, however that's a catch-22 for them as well. What were they supposed to do? Not go home where they could get more meds for him? Just a sad situation all around. The Air Marshall did what he had to do. "Better safe (for everyone else, at least) than sorry." rules the day post 9-11.

If anything, in a very indirect and round-about way, Osama Bin Laden killed this poor guy.

 

[James S]

"bipolar" though doesn't mean crazy. It's a depression disease, not something like schizophrenia where the voices might be telling you to run from the cops.

Even if someone was severely depressed they would be able to take instructions from a guy with a gun in an airport. Course, some depressed people choose to commit "suicide by cop" where they force the officers to shoot them. This could have happened in any interaction with the police, not just in an airport.

It's horrible, but I cannot fault the marshals. It's good to know that they are serious, right up to killing someone.

Course, it's unlikely that someone really carrying a bomb would make comments about it under their breath and be stupid enough to run through an airport. But then, you can't quite be held to the same rules of sane behavior if you are carrying a bomb, so what do I know.

EDIT: AJ, you and I are thinking along the same lines re suicide by cop.

 

[cslinger]

Like eveybody else said. This is a super sad situation for all involved but the right thing was done based on the information at hand during that critical moment. Unfortunitely it turned out bad. Sad for the deceased family but also for the poor guy who did the shooting. He will take that with him for the rest of his life and he is as much a victim as the victim so to speak.

Personally I am glad that the training and plan was in place as well as the people to carry it out. Not to say that I am glad it turned out this way just that we do have to be prepared.

 

[Empath]

Before saying the guy was suicidal and deserving of what he got, let's try to shake ourselves loose from our ever growing propaganda machine.

The story we first got:
A guy goes running down the aisle of the plane claiming he has a bomb in his bag. He rushes from the plane, pursued by air marshals bent on protecting the lives of the public from this madman. Blended in with that is the claim of his wife rushing after him trying to notify everyone that he's only mentally ill, and off his medications. Outside the plane, the bomb threatening madman fails to heed the orders of the marshals and reaches into the "bomb-laden" bag. At that time, the marshals decide to empty their weapons into him.

It does sound justified doesn't it?

Now, here's what were hearing from some passengers:

They didn't hear anything from him as he rushed down the aisle and bolted from the plane. He was pursued as he ran, by air marshals. His wife was trying to explain that he was mental and off his medications. The passengers did hear shots fired.

The passengers claimed that there was much agitation from the couple, and it was creating uneasiness among the passengers. The crew was trying to assure the passengers that air marshals were aware of his "suspicious" behavior and had the situation under control.

Now, it's been explained in this thread that being bipolar does not dictate that type of activity. So, what does? Anyone with social problems due to their paranoia, that requires medication in order to help them function, and if off their medications, is going to react in some manner to what was undoubtedly at that time what appears to be "they're out to get me". Panic sets in and the decision is made to remove himself from the "hostile" situation. He bolts for the exit. The air marshals, having determined that acting suspicious and then making a run for it, is near enough a crime and is intolerable, and reason to pursue him. Once out of the plane the unarmed man, aware that he doesn't stand a chance of getting away from those he's sure is out to get him, in desperation foolishly claims to have a concealed weapon, a bomb, thinking they wouldn't dare come near him if they thought he might have one. The marshals, now that they're dealing with something more than simple suspicious behavior, decides it calls for his immediate execution.

We've got the British executing a Brazilian a little while back, and managing to make it appear justified or foregivable. Now, we've got air marshals playing the same game; fully informed that they we're in pursuit of someone mentally unstable, and off his medications, and that the man hadn't yet committed a crime, they placed him in a position where he could not make a rational decision, and when it qualified as a crime, they executed him; they even managed to make it appear that they had no choice. What a beautiful kill. Is the license to kill a wonderful thing, or what?

As is usually the case, the officers involved are placed on administrative leave, as the investigation proceeds. The investigation will likely involve the "official" report, and the reports of the media. It will be interesting to see if the accounts of those present will be worth much.

Is the scene I've painted accurate? Of course not. But, apparently the scenes portrayed by the media and "official" count isn't either. Calling it a suicide is an inconsiderate injustice toward the man, his wife, and everyone close to him that loved him and worried over his illness and his social struggles. We don't have, nor are we likely to get the story, unless, like the mother of the Brazilian executed by the British, his wife, friends, and true witnesses dedicate themselves to the truth of the situation.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/08/airplane.gunshot/

Incompetence, is the word.

 

[greenLED]

I wonder if language played a role too; he was originally from Costa Rica, although he's apparently lived in the US for a long time. I mention this because I've witnessed people revert to their mother tongue in a dangerous situation.

Since we're venturing into "if-land", I wonder if he wanted to say he was afraid of a bomb on board, and panicked because of this and his mental state. Having lost control of his actions and unable to properly verbalize his fears, he could've said the wrong thing, truly not understand the level of danger he was putting himself under, or not understand what the Marshals were saying. His intention could've been to show the Marshals the contents of his bag, for all I know. We can only guess at this point. The CNN story has another person's account saying that he was agitated even before the final lag of their trip.

It sure is weird that I'm reading slightly different accounts from different news sources.

Incidentally, the Costa Rican news report Mr. Alpizar's family had no knowledge of him having any disorders. They're talking about him as being a "normal and coherent" person. Link

It's such a tragedy, for everyone involved. What kind of world do we live in? :shakehead

 

[Jumpmaster]

Once out of the plane the unarmed man, aware that he doesn't stand a chance of getting away from those he's sure is out to get him, in desperation foolishly claims to have a concealed weapon, a bomb, thinking they wouldn't dare come near him if they thought he might have one. The marshals, now that they're dealing with something more than simple suspicious behavior, decides it calls for his immediate execution.

That is against the law and is called a "terroristic threat".

Now, we've got air marshals playing the same game; fully informed that they we're in pursuit of someone mentally unstable, and off his medications, and that the man hadn't yet committed a crime, they placed him in a position where he could not make a rational decision, and when it qualified as a crime, they executed him; they even managed to make it appear that they had no choice. What a beautiful kill. Is the license to kill a wonderful thing, or what?

It was my understanding that they shot him AFTER he made the terroristic threat. I don't think the air marshals had adequate time to do a full psychological profile on the individual or to be able to determine right at that second if he really had a bomb.

This would be akin to him pointing his finger in a jacket pocket, saying "I have a gun", and pointing the "gun" at them. What would you be saying if he had had a bomb and detonated it? Is it no longer a crime because he's mentally ill? Does that mean they shouldn't take the threat seriously?

It's sad, yes. Maybe he should have been sedated? Or maybe not flying?

JM-99

 

[IlluminatingBikr]

Empath,

I really hope I misunderstood your post completely, but if you are saying what I think you are, then I'm really in disbelief.

If the man is mentally unstable, that's all the more reason for him to actually be carrying a bomb. Ordinary Americans don't carry bombs on airplanes with them. However, a mentally unstable person, who is not thinking like the rest of is, would however, be more likely to do something such as carrying a bomb with him on the airplane. Besides, judging mental disorders takes a great deal of time, and even then people can be unpredictable. Had those two marshals been psychologists, as well as air marshals, I think they would have very likely done the exact same thing. Besides, if he is mentally ill, does that mean whatever he says should just be discounted, and holds no merit?

The man verbalized his means to blow up the airplane when he said that he had a bomb. He then reached into his bag, showing that he also had the intent to do so. Are the air marshals supposed to just do nothing as this man potentially is about to blow himself up, along with hundreds of other people?

"..the man hadn't yet committed a crime," you say? Making terroristic threats isn't a crime? Even if you disagree with that, his crime would have been killing hundreds of innocent lives, so would it have been better if we waited for that to happen? Then he really would have committed a crime, and I'm sure we could prosecute whatever would have been left of him. We could really bring justice to those families who lost their loved ones.

I understand this situation is very unfortunate, especially considering he actually had no weapons on him, and was mentally unstable, but that does not change the circumstances under which the air marshals acted, and in that circumstance, I believe they did the right thing.

You talk about a license to kill being "wonderful"? Both of the air marshals have been marshals for three years. One worked border patrol for four years before that, while the other was a customs inspector for two. Both of clean records, and don't sound like people who want to kill just to kill.

 

[IlluminatingBikr]

Incidentally, the Costa Rican news report Mr. Alpizar's family had no knowledge of him having any disorders. They're talking about him as being a "normal and coherent" person. Link

Unforutunately, I was unable to login to that news site. However, I will say the following. While it is definitely possible that he did not have any disorders, it wouldn't surprise me if he did have a disorder, but it was kept between himself and his wife, and that the rest of the family didn't know about it. Plus he may have been totally "normal and coherent" when on his medication.

 

[Ericz23]

I guess he wont do that again....:lolsign:

 

[raggie33]

I guess he wont do that again....:lolsign:

i dont find that funny .how ever to each there own

 

[greenLED]

...it wouldn't surprise me if he did have a disorder, but it was kept between himself and his wife, and that the rest of the family didn't know about it. Plus he may have been totally "normal and coherent" when on his medication.

That's also a very sound possibility.

Incidentally, we just had a similar shooting nearby. Police stopped an agitated man out on the street. He wouldn't comply to their requests, and kept threatening the officers with a metal pipe. When the situation escalated further, one of the officers used a Tazer, but apparently it didn't work because of the man's thick winter clothing :huh: Finally, the man charged at the Officers, who fired and killed the man. Turns out this man was mentally unstable and off his medication.

I bring this up because I was trying to explain the negotiation process to a friend (not that I'm an expert). There is a point where a situation negotiation is not possible. In our local case, the police had some time to assess the situation and try to solve it with non-lethal options. There's no time to profile a suspect, reason with them, nor talk them out of their (alleged) plans, not if everything happens in a split second and one or hundreds of other lives are at stake. The Marshals had to do what they had to do. With the information available to me at this point, I don't see another option, and I don't see how this could've been prevented.


Ericz23, I don't see the humor in this sad event.

 

[Haz]

We may need to look at the all point of views to get a clearer picture. If the accounts from the media, and official report are exact and true to the event, then i don't think much needs to be said about the action of the Air Marshall and his actions was well justified. I just hope there wasn't manipulation from the actual story to justify what took place. From the incident in Britain, with the Brazilian man being shot, there was 2 versions of events, that vastly painted a different picture of the situation. The official report initially reported in the media suggests, he was non-compliant, acted suspiciously, jumped the ticket barrier, running briskly, wearing an unusually large coat, and from witness accounts, surveilance cameras suggests he was going on about every day routine, used a valid train ticket, wore a light jacket, walking casually and obeyed police instructions. Looking at the versions of events, it can change a persons point of view quite significantly.

 

[Empath]

Illumi9nating biker, and Jumpmaster, I didn't suggest that there was never any crime committed. When he claimed to have a bomb, he did commit a crime. However, if the passengers didn't hear him claim to have a bomb, then it would indicate he said it AFTER the marshals were in pursuit and he was leaving or out of the plane. My comment "..the man hadn't yet committed a crime," dealt with the beginning of the pursuit. The comment made after exiting the plane would not be a threat toward the plane, it would be a threat toward the officers. It's still foolish and illegal, and any rational person would recognize that could get you shot. The operative word there of course is "rational". They'd already been informed, he wasn't.

Again, I state that I don't have the facts, nor do you. The only thing I consider factual, is that there appears to be some terrible incompetence, bungling, and misrepresentation involved.

 

[Empath]

After reading more extensively, it appears that any investigation will consist only of whether the officers acted in accord with their training. Their training is the "license to kill" I mentioned. As long as their actions fit their training, legalities, ethics, and conscience isn't important. Instead of the officers being held responsible those things, the training is measured against them. If the training is found to be illegal, unethical, or sufficiently undesirable, then the it's the training that modified. The officers remain without blame.

This is the man they killed.

Well.... as is usually the case in these times, it looks like everything has to become a political issue. For those needing know how to align yourself with your party, here's the stand you're suppose to take.

As for me, that pretty well destroys any wish I have to discuss it. I'm out of it.

 

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

I was never even in it and I'M out of it!

 

[Jumpmaster]

Again, I state that I don't have the facts, nor do you. The only thing I consider factual, is that there appears to be some terrible incompetence, bungling, and misrepresentation involved.

The key incompetence here was a glaring lack of judgement by his wife (knowing his unstable condition) allowing this individual to get on a commercial aircraft in the first place...APPARENTLY BY HER OWN ADMISSION:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178064,00.html
"She said it was her fault, that he was bipolar," said Mike Beshears, a Flight 924 passenger who works for a vacation club in Orlando. "He was sick and she had convinced him to get on the plane."

As for me, that pretty well destroys any wish I have to discuss it. I'm out of it.

I almost forgot...how rude of me...BYE!!!

JM-99

 

[flashfan]

At first blush, the shooting certainly seem justified. As armchair analysts however, we may never know all of the facts.

Some observations based on limited information and brain capacity.

*It is assumed that the marshals had to believe the guy really had a bomb, despite the fact that he and his backpack must have passed through TSA before boarding the flight. Not a great testimonial of TSA...

*Excuse my ignorance, but if the guy really had a bomb, could a bullet have triggered it to go off?

*It doesn't excuse anything, but it seems like the guy panicked. And unless you have actually experienced panic, it may be hard to understand just how incapacitating it can be. Reason and rational thinking disappear.

*I agree that the guy's wife has a lot to answer for in this instance-- she'll have to live with the "guilt" for the rest of her life.

The challenge is to prevent tragedies like this from happening again. Is it possible?

 

[BB]

I did not see this mentioned yet here--

There was apparently a reason that the Air Marshal's may have been at a heighten state of alert:

WCBSTV

Dec 8, 2005 1:47 pm US/Eastern
Miami Airport Shooting Under Investigation

Knew Of Incident Before Miami Passenger Killed

(CBS) QUEENS CBS 2 has learned that a disturbing security breach at JFK Airport is now being linked to yesterday's deadly shooting outside an American Airlines plane in Miami.

CBS 2 was first to report that federal screeners allowed a man to pass through security at Kennedy after his sneakers tested positive for explosives.

When the passenger's sneakers tested positive for explosives, the Transportation Security Administration screeners kept the sneakers but never called any member of law enforcement before letting the passenger board his flight. Days later, sources say, he became a wanted man in a nationwide manhunt.

Federal sources told CBS 2 that when two air marshals opened fire killing a Miami-bound passenger who threatened he had a bomb, they were aware of a nationwide manhunt for the man who attempted to board a plane wearing sneakers that tested positive for explosives.
...

Sources at the FBI told CBS 2 that they have located Badawi and no charges are pending. Preliminary tests at an FBI lab were negative for TATP, however one law enforcement source told CBS 2 that since the TSA had stored the sneakers inside a bin in a locker, it's unclear who may have come in contact with them.

There are still conflicting reports between federal agencies about the intensity of the manhunt for Badawi.

In the end, all federal sources agreed that the system failed, and we may have dodged a serious security bullet this time.

-Bill

 

[TonkinWarrior]

Facts:

1. The subject's behavior was out-of-bounds and highly suspicious -- exactly the type of behavior that Fed Air Marshalls (FAMs) are trained to monitor VERY closely... for OUR safety.

2. No cops, including FAMs, are responsible for the therapeutic medication of members of the public.

3. I am certain that the subsequent investigation will reveal that, in the heat of the moment, that (a) the FAM identified himself as such to the deceased, and (b) the deceased failed to instantly comply with the FAM's order to cease suspicious actions and raise his hands. Monday-morning quarterbacking ain't the same as in-the-moment decision crunch-time.

4. ALL cops, including FAMs, are trained to shoot for "center mass." (Note: so are civilians who take advanced firearms training.) That means: shoot to STOP. Period. Not to warn. Not to wound. To terminate the threat -- now. To do otherwise would risk the lives of air passengers and bystanders. The snotty ruminations about this crucial issue by Katie Couric on today's NBC "Today" TV show ("Oohh, why couldn't he have, like, shot him just a little, like, in the finger?") underscores the disconnect between naive-Lefty-Soccer-Mom blissninnies... and reality.

5. The FAM performed admirably, under stress, and eliminated the "Threat" exactly as he was trained to do. He deserves a medal.

6. The skies will be safer as a result of this FAM's performance, skill, and professionalism.

Why? In a larger sense, this case was a "test" of the U.S. airline-security system. It passed. However, I have no doubt that certain weepy pundits and wimpy politicians will now seek to create a "mental health" exemption for travellers... and terrorists.

Message to them: take your Prozac and call me in the morning.