Jury: You Do Not Need to Show ID to Fly; Yes, You can Video TSA!

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

Jury Finds Phil Mocek Not Guilty of All Charges From TSA Arrest
By Keegan Hamilton, Sat., Jan. 22 2011 @ 12:40PM

After an hour of deliberation Friday evening, a Bernalillo County, New Mexico jury found Phil Mocek not guilty of all four charges he faced after refusing to show his ID and using a video recorder at a TSA checkpoint in 2009. If you're keeping score at home, that's Mocek: 1, TSA:

According to Edward Hasbrouck of the Identity Project, Mocek did not testify, and the defense rested on Friday without calling any witnesses or presenting any evidence. Hasbrouck attended the trial; he writes: The jury found that even without rebuttal, the TSA and Albuquerque police had failed to satisfy their burden of proving any of the four charges: concealing his identity, refusing to obey a lawful order (it was never entirely clear whether this was supposed to have been an order to turn off his camera, an order to leave the airport despite having a valid ticket, or an order to show ID, none of which would have been lawful orders), trespassing, and disorderly conduct.

- SNIP -

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/01/jury_finds_phil_mocek_not_guilty.php


Capitol Hill man beats the TSA, acquitted of charges in New Mexico ID case
By jseattle

Capitol Hill software developer, civil liberties advocate, member of the Hill's Chamber of Commerce and, yes, frequent CHS commenter Phil Mocek announced this weekend that he was acquitted of all charges stemming from his arrest after refusing to show identification to TSA agents at the Albuquerque airport in November 2009.

Mocek was in New Mexico this week to be tried on misdemeanor charges including concealing his identity from officers who responded when he tried to pass through airport security without an ID in the 2009 incident. Mocek had been in the state to attend the International Drug Policy Reform Conference on behalf of the Cannabis Defense Coalition. He recorded video of his interaction with the TSA agents and police officers in the incident, a portion of which Mocek has posted online (and we've embedded in this post).

Seattle Weekly reports it took the New Mexico jury all of an hour to find Mocek not guilty. What the confused and agitated officers didn't know at the time is that Mocek has been flying without identification for years. The Seattle Times talked to the "Freedom Flyer" about his dedication to exercising his rights to travel anonymously back in 2008. With this acquittal, you can notch another victory in Mocek's long march to fight for those rights. For more on the incident, see the Seattle Weekly's Phil Mocek: On Trial For Being TSA Checkpoint Worker's Worst Nightmare. You can also follow Mocek on Twitter at http://twitter.com/pmocek

http://capitolhillseattle.com/2011/01/22/capitol-hill-man-beats-the-tsa-acquitted-of-charges-in-new-mexico-id-case

Ahhh. Jury Nullification at its finest!

[elias49]

1. Excellent!

The TSA is over the top.
Average Americans need to get some of their constitutional rights back.

[PBS Poll-435]

14. I forget where in the Constitution that it mentions a 90 ton device that is

Full of jet fuel.


:dunce:

[rustydog]

17. Then yhou must "Show your Papers" when you gas-up your vehicle

there thousands of gallons of gasoline are ripe for terror attacks!
You have to "Show your Papers" when you go to the massively crowded county fair every year!
You had better show your friggin ID when you ride rapid transit...

Surrendering rights to a percieved threat is the action of cowards and opportunists.

[PBS Poll-435]

18. What right exists in the Constitution to board a hollow fuselage?

Don't we call driving a car a privilege and not a right?

[Populist_Prole]

19. If you did no wrong you've nothing to fear

:sarcasm:

Isn't that always what these RW "law and order" types think?

[hobbit709]

2. We need more of this.

[hlthe2b]

3. You should update us Monday when they follow up with

reaction and possible ramifications....;) (per the Seattle Blog)

[Xipe Totec]

4. I don't think this was jury nullification.

He simply did not break any laws.

[n2doc]

5. +1 n/t

[backscatter712]

16. It was an upholding of our highest laws.

Specifically, the Bill of Rights...

[snot]

22. Agreed --

The only thing the jury nullified was the gov't's attempt to nullify the Constitution.

[woo me with science]

6. Good! Keep fighting! This outrageous assault on the Fourth Amendment must not stand. nt

[yodermon]

7. so the order to show ID at TSA checkpoints is unlawful?

well shit.

[Xipe Totec]

8. Not quite.

It is not unlawful to go around without your papers. He did not have ID on him, except for his boarding pass, so he had no ID to conceal. Hence the charge of concealing identity is bogus.

[JohnyCanuck]

9. Will be interesting to see if they act to control that loophole. n/t

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

15. The General Counsel of TSA...

... was on the phone to the applicable wingnut TeaBaggers in Congress about thirty seconds after the jury's pronouncement.

[notesdev]

10. Also of note

that TSA workers are not police and cannot lawfully wield the powers of a police officer.

[Mist]

11. Hmm, new bumper sticker that should lead to some conversations:

The jury is to be commended as well, for their refusal to knuckle under to the TSA and self-important blowhards.

[JohnyCanuck]

12. Video of Mocek and his encounter with TSA (used by the prosecution)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc5DBUK1K8M&feature=player_embedded

From the Youtube description:
Video recording made by Phil Mocek at Albuquerque International Airport, just outside the TSA barricade, on November 15, 2009, from approximately 2:34 p.m. - 2:38 p.m. Mountain time. This video was presented by the prosecution in State of New Mexico v. Phillip Mocek in the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court on January 20, 2011.

Visible and audible in the video are Mocek, Albuquerque Airport Police Department officers Robert F. "Bobby" Dilley (116), Landrow "Wiggy" Wiggins (137), and Julio A. De La Peña (135), and TSA staff LTSO Jonathon Breedon, TSM Gerald Romero, STSO Anthony M. Schreiner, Greg Martinez, and BDO Laura Moots.

[david13]

13. How much did he spend on his attorney? How much time did he

spend on the case?
Is this something we all can do? I think not.
Ergo: it means nothing.
dc

[snot]

21. Disagree. If even .01% of passengers did it, this farce would have been over long ago.

[david13]

24. Yeah, but do you understand americans? Not .00000000000001

per cent of them is going to do that.
dc

[Warren DeMontague]

28. If .01% of passengers did that, then the flights would only be 99.99% as full.

Which is, after all, a start for the rest of us.

[progressoid]

23. It sets a precedent for future cases.

[david13]

26. Actually, it doesn't. The jury determines facts. There is no precedent

in facts, only in legal rulings, which are then taken up on appeal, and published.
The court (i.e., the judge) is the only one who can make legal rulings.
And my understanding of the case was that the jury found that the facts did not equate to guilt in his case.
The next case is then determined on the facts of that case.
dc

[LisaL]

38. What price do you put on standing up for your rights?

[Sirveri]

43. He didn't spend any money on lawyers, he didn't make a rebuttal.

Well he might have spent money on a lawyer, but he didn't need to bring one to court in order to simply sit there and do absolutely nothing, which is exactly what he did.

[snot]

20. [self-delete -- redundant of comment above.]

[Poboy]

25. Recommend

[Warren DeMontague]

27. No, that means the jury said it's not a crime to not show your ID. That does NOT mean

you can get on the plane.

If you think it does, really, good fucking luck with that. And I think you need to find other hobbies.

[ret5hd]

31. He's been doing it for two years.

Now what ya got?

[Warren DeMontague]

34. And in those 2 years, have they ever actually let him on the plane without an ID?

Now.... What have I got? I've got a head full of confusion over why people have a sudden bug up their ass over having to show! their! ID! :mad: at the airport :eyes:, that's what.

Last month is was the "porno scanners" and "Don't touch my junk". I'm wondering where the TSA outrage-du-jour talking points are coming from, honestly.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

35. You don't have to have ID to board a domestic flight.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. Okay.

Good luck with that. Really.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

39. He's been doing it for two years.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. I stand corrected.

He is a true hero of the people. Really making a difference on an issue that deeply affects us all.


Really.

[Richard Steele]

29. So? Do you imagine the TSA gives a rat's ass? This will change NOTHING they do.

NOTHING.

[Warren DeMontague]

30. It means that brave patriots who refuse to show their IDs before getting on airplanes

will have to find other ways to get where they're going.

[LisaL]

40. And if a lot of people decide to find other ways to get where

they're going, methinks airlines are going to be in trouble.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. Sure. Methinks that the planes won't be so fucking overcrowded.

Sounds like a win-win for the rest of us.

[Towlie]

32. I don't think that was jury nullification. What law are you saying he actually violated?

If the jury found that he acted within the law, that's not jury nullification. Jury nullification is when a jury finds a defendant not guilty even though he broke the law. It's a case where the jury rejects the law itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

[Matariki]

33. Now if it can be found that it's not legal for them to grope your crotch

we'll be on our way back to a civil and free society.

[erodriguez]

36. I flew without showing any ID. Though I did have my Credit card.

LaGuardia airport about 3 years ago. Absolutely no problem.