X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 07:51:19 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.63] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with ESMTP id 4957142 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:25:03 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.63; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=K+7RpejiZ3pPk9CB0mDh5Yohov1OO6C7eRiwHQ7TIM1Yh6Qw8knUnzhB56gqVoJt; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [216.57.118.194] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QEV8l-0001ya-7B for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:24:27 -0400 From: Colyn Case Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-448--950847951 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched! X-Original-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:24:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <1BCF40DC-F6B6-411D-8065-30C4B7EB486C@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da94085f27ab1b77dc794e33381745807d89b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.57.118.194 --Apple-Mail-448--950847951 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 forms 337? I would have to modify my w&b to carry that. On Apr 21, 2011, at 11:10 PM, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote: > Here is a copy of a fax CBP sent. See if you can find the mistakes! I = am a bit surprised they believe they can detain you if you do not have = your pilot logbook onboard. LOL!!!! > =20 > Jeff > =20 >=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Rickard > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Sent: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 11:49 am > Subject: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched! >=20 > We were able to get a copy of the fax that was sent to the local = police. The =93Tip=94 came from Customs and Border Patrol in CA. And = the local Police chief was actually apologetic because he knew it was = bogus. The tip itself is BS. They made it up. IF they had been = watching me or investigating me they would have known my wife was with = me and not some dude. That is the only part that is really a violation, = they are making up an excuse to get the locals excited, and then seeing = what they find. Another example was a guy accused of transporting = computer chips that were stolen. I can imagine them making up stories = over the coffee in the morning.=20 > =20 > How would the public react if any Fed agency routinely made up tips so = the cops would come to your house and want to search? Imagine the news = coverage. That is the same thing going on here. If they have something = on you, then absolutely go for it. But they did not in the 3 cases we = know about just at our local airport. > =20 > The lesson you derived is correct though. Know your rights, and also = know how you can help them do their job without violating your rights. = That is the best thing you can do (if innocent) while saying the least = amount possible. > =20 > Bob R > =20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = William Wilson > Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 7:05 AM > 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. >=20 > 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 = wrote: > Fellow LML=92ers > =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=85.. > =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=92s) as = well as my driver=92s license, and asked the supervisor what the problem = was. He told me that he got a =93tip=94 from the Federal Government = that there may be a federal fugitive on board by the name of Robert = Mcrae. He wasn=92t sure of the name and asked me if I knew anyone by a = name similar to that, to which I answered =93no=94 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=92s, 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 =93or your permission=94 and =93I could have the dogs come = out=94. (side note =96 they don=92t need a warrant to have the dogs = check out your aircraft =96 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=92s ID, but kept mine and made further calls. The = supervisor indicated =93I=92m on overtime, I am outta here=94 and left, = but another officer checked with =93EPIC=94 (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 > -- > For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --Apple-Mail-448--950847951 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 forms = 337?   I would have to modify my w&b to carry = that.


On Apr 21, 2011, at 11:10 PM, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote:

Here is a copy = of a fax CBP sent. See if you can find the mistakes! I am a bit = surprised they believe they can detain you if you do not have your pilot = logbook onboard. LOL!!!!
 
Jeff
 


 


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Rickard <r.rickard@rcginc-us.com> To: lml@lancaironline.net
= Sent: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 11:49 am
Subject: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched!

We were able to = get a copy of the fax that was sent to the local police.  The =93Tip=94= came from Customs and Border Patrol in CA.  And the local Police = chief was actually apologetic because he knew it was bogus.  = The tip itself is BS.  They made it up.  IF they had been = watching me or investigating me they would have known my wife was with = me and not some dude.  That is the only part that is really a = violation, they are making up an excuse to get the locals excited, and = then seeing what they find.  Another example was a guy accused of = transporting computer chips that were stolen.  I can imagine them = making up stories over the coffee in the morning. 
 
How would the = public react if any Fed agency routinely made up tips so the cops would = come to your house and want to search?  Imagine the news = coverage.  That is the same thing going on here.  If they have = something on you, then absolutely go for it.  But they did not in = the 3 cases we know about just at our local airport.
 
The lesson you = derived is correct though.  Know your rights, and also know how you = can help them do their job without violating your rights.  That is = the best thing you can do (if innocent) while saying the least amount = possible.
 
Bob = R
 
From: Lancair = Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of William Wilson
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 7:05 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: beware, you may be searched!
 
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=92ers
 
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=85..
 
Bob Rickard
IV-P
 
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=92s) as well as my = driver=92s license, and asked the supervisor what the problem was.  = He told me that he got a =93tip=94 from the Federal Government that = there may be a federal fugitive on board by the name of Robert = Mcrae.  He wasn=92t sure of the name and asked me if I knew anyone = by a name similar to that, to which I answered =93no=94 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=92s, 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 =93or your permission=94 and =93I could = have the dogs come out=94.  (side note =96 they don=92t need a = warrant to have the dogs check out your aircraft =96 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=92s ID, = but kept mine and made further calls.  The supervisor indicated = =93I=92m on overtime, I am outta here=94 and left, but another officer = checked with =93EPIC=94 (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.
 
 
 = <Air_&_Marine_Ops_Center_Guide_to_Checks_on_GA_Aircraft[1].pd= f>--
For archives and unsub http://mail.= lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

= --Apple-Mail-448--950847951--