Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 23:10:01 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-4953853@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.173.17; envelope-from=danny.miller@verizon.net
From: "Danny Miller" <danny.miller@verizon.net>
References: <redirect-4952350@logan.com>
In-reply-to: <redirect-4952350@logan.com>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched!
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Content-language: en-us
Thread-index: Acv/jR6o3zwlVspnR0em/PLIo2RDpQA1j9Dw

I'm with you on this, Karen.  Offer no information, answer no questions, =
and
allow no search without proper authority.  Doing so ALWAYS has the =
potential
to come back and bite your ass really hard!  I won't go into the details =
but
this is the voice of a very bad experience talking.

Danny Miller
N 38=B0 43' 25.7"
W 77=B0 30' 38.6"


-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Farnsworth [mailto:farnsworth@charter.net]=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 3:00 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: FW: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched!


William,

=20

To each his own, but I see a little more in this than you do. This seems =
to
be happening more and more; acting on bad information. The case that =
drew
the most attention was the King incident. Handcuffed and treated quite
rudely.

=20

When you stand on you right to not have your airplane searched without a
warrant they say things like, "if you have nothing to hid why won't you =
let
me search"?=20

=20

To me this is part of the trend to allow the government to be all and =
know
all.

=20

I will tell them, "no warrant, no search".

=20

Lynn Farnsworth

=20

________________________________

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of
William Wilson
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 08:05
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched!

=20

Seems pretty standard to me.  They checked out a tip that proved to be
bogus.  I don't see any rights violations here or anything out of the
ordinary.

The main lesson IMO is that, while there are plenty of cops who abuse =
power,
for the most part if you behave in a civilized manner and realize they =
are
just trying to do their job, most of them will treat you fairly.  That =
seems
to be what happened here.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Bob Rickard <r.rickard@rcginc-us.com>
wrote:

Fellow LML'ers

=20

It seems inevitable that the govt will search you at some point.  Just =
some
info on what happened to me yesterday, you can hopefully use this to =
react
appropriately for your situation.  This is the third incident just at =
our
little airport in Missouri of this happening...

=20

Bob Rickard

IV-P

=20

On 18 April, 2011, I filed IFR from KGEU to K1H0 direct, with my wife on
board.  At 0845L, I departed KGEU VFR and picked up my filed IFR =
clearance
to K1H0 at FL210 with ABQ center.  The flight was uneventful and I =
cancelled
IFR approximately 10 miles from K1H0 with St. Louis Approach and landed =
at
1443L.  Upon landing and taxi to my hanger (P3) at Creve Coeur Airport, =
I
was surrounded by 6 Maryland Heights Police cars and about 10 officers.  =
I
exited the plane and was approached by the supervisor and asked if I had =
any
identification.  I produced my military ID (I am a LtCol in the Air =
Force
Reserve flying F-22's) as well as my driver's license, and asked the
supervisor what the problem was.  He told me that he got a "tip" from =
the
Federal Government that there may be a federal fugitive on board by the =
name
of Robert Mcrae.  He wasn't sure of the name and asked me if I knew =
anyone
by a name similar to that, to which I answered "no" to all.  He also =
stated
that he was surprised to see a woman in the plane with me since his
informant said there would be two men in the plane.  I inquired as to =
who
would give a tip like that, and he was vague.  A this point my wife =
exited
the plane and was asked to produce her ID as well and was questioned as =
to
what we were doing and where we were going and where we came from.   It =
was
apparent to the supervisor pretty quickly that my wife and I were not
federal fugitives as they ran our ID's, but he asked to search the =
airplane
anyway.  I told him that I was aware of my rights and he could not =
search
anything without a warrant, and he was quick to add "or your permission" =
and
"I could have the dogs come out".  (side note - they don't need a =
warrant to
have the dogs check out your aircraft - if the dogs find something and
indicate, then they have probable cause to search you without a warrant. =
 If
the dogs find nothing they cannot search your aircraft until a warrant =
is
issued).  I told him that I would play nice, had nothing to hide, and =
that
my plan was to take my belongings out of the airplane and put them in my =
car
to go home, and I would allow him to see what I took out and visually =
see
inside the cockpit and baggage compartment, but I was not allowing a =
search
of the airplane.  He agreed to this. I took my 2 pieces of luggage out =
of
the back and showed him the contents briefly (not a complete search but
opened up the zipper and showed clothes on top) as well as the couple of
vases we had bought in Phoenix and lunch/sodas we had in the cockpit.  =
They
saw nothing of interest and returned my wife's ID, but kept mine and =
made
further calls.  The supervisor indicated "I'm on overtime, I am outta =
here"
and left, but another officer checked with "EPIC" (unsure of the =
spelling)
which he told me was an international consortium that traded information =
on
travel, etc.  He told me he was aware of my trip earlier this year to =
Mexico
and the Cayman Islands (honeymoon cruise) but there was nothing to get =
me in
trouble.  He then returned my ID and let us go.

=20

=20