Advertisement

Sports

Sports

Baggy pants lead to New Mexico football player’s arrest

June 17, 2011

Advertisement

— A University of New Mexico football player’s saggy pants led to his arrest and removal from an airplane at San Francisco International Airport, authorities said Thursday.

DeShon Marman, 20, was boarding a flight Wednesday to Albuquerque, N.M., when a US Airways employee noticed his pants were below his buttocks, and his boxer shorts were showing, Sgt. Michael Rodriguez of the San Francisco Police Department told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Marman refused the employee’s request to pull up his pants and failed to comply immediately when she asked him to get off the plane, Rodriguez said, adding Marman injured a police officer when he was being arrested.

The player was arrested on suspicion of trespassing, battery of a police officer and obstruction of a police investigation, Rodriguez told the Associated Press.

Marman’s mother, Donna Doyle, told the newspaper her son was emotionally fragile after the funeral of his close friend, who died 11 days after being shot.

A US Airways spokesperson said the airline forbids inappropriate attire.

College Football

UNC forced to make records public

Raleigh, N.C. — North Carolina has released documents showing a group of Tar Heel football players accumulated more than $13,000 in parking citations over a 31⁄2-year period.

The school released the documents Thursday, a day after the state Court of Appeals denied the school’s request to delay the release of those records pending an appeal. A Wake County Superior Court judge had ruled in April that the school withheld documents it should have provided to requesting media outlets covering the NCAA investigation into the football program.

The documents show that the players combined for 395 citations between March 2007 and August 2010, though the records don’t specify which players received each violation. The citations ranged in penalty from $5 for improperly displaying a parking permit to $250 for parking in a fire lane or in a handicapped parking space.

The citations totaled $13,185.

College Basketball

UK changes Calipari’s win total

Lexington, Ky. — It turns out Kentucky coach John Calipari hasn’t reached 500 career victories after all.

The school says it will change Calipari’s career record because of 42 vacated victories from his time at Memphis and Massachusetts. In a statement, Kentucky said it had consulted with the NCAA and determined it was “in error” to have celebrated Calipari’s 500th career win against Florida on Feb. 26.

The school says it will report Calipari’s career record “consistent with the NCAA’s official records and statistics.”

NBA

NBA gets ‘A’ for diverse hiring

The NBA received the highest grade ever issued on racial and gender hiring practices among men’s professional leagues, continuing a recent trend.

The league received an A+ for race and an A- on gender for a combined A in this year’s Racial and Gender Report Card from the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida.

While the NFL and Major League Baseball have shown significant improvement on racial and gender hiring in recent years, the NBA is the only men’s pro league to receive a combined A. TIDES has been studying diversity hiring in sports since 1987.

“I think it’s the leadership of (NBA Commissioner) David Stern,” said Dr. Richard Lapchick, director of TIDES.

Mavs fans celebrate title

Dallas — The face of the Dallas Mavericks laughed, sang and even seemed to tear up.

For Dirk Nowitzki, the only thing that could come close to being an NBA champion for the first time was celebrating it with the fans in his adopted hometown of Dallas.

An estimated crowd of 200,000 crammed downtown Thursday for a parade in the team’s honor, with another 20,000 or so filling the arena for a rally filled with emotional moments.

MLB

Pirates catcher’s wife attacked

Pittsburgh — A man attacked the wife of Pirates catcher Chris Snyder in a traffic dispute while Snyder sat in the car, unable to get out because he’d had back surgery, Pittsburgh police said.

Carla Snyder and the scooter-riding man, Subhash Arjanbhi Modhwadia, nearly collided Wednesday. The 44-year-old Modhwadia followed her to a gas station, kicked the vehicle and swung at Carla Snyder, police said. He also ripped a mirror off the car.

NHL

Wild name Yeo as new coach

St. Paul, Minn. — For the second time in two years, Chuck Fletcher is sticking his neck out on the rising star instead of the recycled vet.

The Wild general manager hopes the second time goes better than the first.

Mike Yeo, who at 37 is even younger than his predecessor Todd Richards was when hired as Wild coach, will become the youngest coach in the NHL when he’s introduced at a news conference at 11 a.m. today.

The bold hire for a team that’s missed the playoffs for three consecutive years comes after Yeo completed his rookie American Hockey League season by guiding the Houston Aeros to the Calder Cup Finals.

Comments

jaywalker 3 years, 6 months ago

To the headline: Good. Has to be the most idiotic k fashion statement of all time.

ivalueamerica 3 years, 6 months ago

so you are ok with government intervening in our lives to control fashion statements you hate? Honestly, I find it disgbusting, but seriously, you want bigger government intrusion, but you hate a nanny state? which is it?

geekin_topekan 3 years, 6 months ago

Sagging and returning from a homey's funeral after someone pulled a gat? I hope his football career takes off because his alter ego is a lost cause at 20.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 6 months ago

Who'd have thought that dressing like Larry Harmon in his alternative-lifestyle rodeo days would become popular with certain sectors of the population?

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

I'm the last person to excuse athletes for criminal behavior, but it sounds like this guy, probably still in shock and overwhelming grief, was essentially arrested for violating an unwritten dress code. Bad taste in clothing styles shouldn't be a criminal offense.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Your subtle racism amuses me, LJWorld. I agree with deec. He was arrested for violating a dress code that likely wasn't posted. You're flying on a plane. Who cares? Why do people care this much about this stuff?

tolawdjk 3 years, 6 months ago

And yet, when confronted with it, he refused the simple act of pulling his britches up.

Fine, sure, didn't know the code. Once it was pointed out to him, he decided to be a horse's hiney.

MISTERTibbs 3 years, 6 months ago

@ deec and llama - while I agree that bad taste in style is not a criminal offense, the young man was given the option of pulling up his pants or leaving the plane. When he refused to do either, it became trespassing then he apparently allegedly injured the police officer who was assisting him on how to leave the plane, that becomes battery of the officer. Compliance in either of the initial requests could have avoided any of the charges lodged against him.

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

According to this http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Mans-Baggy-Pants-Cause-Planes-Evacuation-Jail-Time-123994104.html he said he would pull up his pants when he had a free hand, i.e. when he got to his seat. According to this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004270/Deshon-Marman-pulled-flight-arrested-wearing-baggy-pants.html "One of the flight attendants on that aircraft was offended by the fact that she could see the outline of his private area,’ Sergeant Michael Rodriguez said.

‘He was not threatening anybody direct, but being on board an aircraft and being disruptive to the aircraft crew interferes with their duties and that could be a safety factor,’ he told KGO-TV" It sounds like the whole episode was precipitated by an attendant who couldn't keep her eyes above the waist.
For heaven's sake, this is a 20 year old kid who just buried one of his best friends. I've buried enough close friends and relatives to understand that in the first several days, you function in zombie mode.

Rae Hudspeth 3 years, 6 months ago

Thank you. Well said. Honestly.. "the outline of his private area"? I'm sure the flight attendant would not have been nearly so offended had he been a lanky dude in skin-tight Levis. I've noticed that no young woman in a deep V-neck shirt, bending over her suitcases and exposing all her upper "private areas" has even been asked to disembark an airplane.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

I saw snowboarders -- yes, they were white guys -- sporting the look while in competition. I couldn't believe it. They were having to pull their pants up in the middle of stunts. One guy landed hard, with just boxers between him and the hard-packed ice. You could tell it hurt. Made me laugh at the absurdity of it all.

The only way this style of allowing pants to fall past your buttocks and show your undies is when adults -- I mean old people -- start to adopt it. Once we see Regis on tv sporting the look or we see friends of your dad in the mall hanging onto their falling pants will this ridiculous style end. Sadly, it is a style "inspired" by prison wear, in which the prisoners are not allowed belts. Nice.

So grown men, time to take one for the team by letting your pants fall past your hips. Show the kids how stupid it really looks.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

The problem is less his pants than his selfishness. The fact that his underwear was showing, and perhaps the outline of his privates did not matter to him at all. He could care less who saw, be they a little old lady or a group of children. He just doesn't care. He can offend anyone he wants, whenever he wants, and if someone objects, too bad. He's being selfish to an extreme. Now, something bad has happened to him. He was removed from a plane which I'm sure caused him some inconvenience. He may face criminal charges. A couple of posters suggested race may be an issue. Because he cared so little for the feelings of his fellow travelers, I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for him. If he loses his air fare, oh well. If faced with charges that will require time and expense on his part, oh well. If he has to do some community service even if he doesn't think he's done anything so bad to deserve that fate, oh well.
I have a limited amount of sympathy to give. I'll save it for someone more deserving.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

"Because he cared so little for the feelings of his fellow travelers, I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for him."

Please cite the feelings of his fellow travelers. I don't see any quotes from them. And are you telling me that you give a survey to people you fly with?

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

I would guess he was totally oblivious to the other passengers, due to the fact that he was flying back to college from one of his best friend's funerals. My guess is he was barely functional. At least that's how I felt immediately following the funeral of a loved one.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

Perhaps I was less than clear. I, like many I know, have had generalized discussions about the style in question. As a parent, many of my conversations have been with other parents. There is a general consensus that the style is inappropriate around children. I have no idea if children were present on that plane and I have no idea if children were in the airport. There probably were as their absence would be quite unusual.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

So, then, if someone's pants are slightly too tight, or if a woman wears a low cut shirt or a tight sweater, or if a white man without a belt bends over to pick something up - these people should all be arrested, then. Right? Or at least kicked off a plane?

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Someone is defensive. Did I strike a nerve?

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

You've resorted to attacking me personally (see below), and you're upset because I'm argumentative? I have a different opinion from you. Tough. That's how life works. I don't see it your way. The "race card" isn't some trump card, it doesn't make his actions right or wrong. It's merely pointing out that people are more prone to let something go that a white person does than something that a black person does because of perceived threat: http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/bernd.wittenbrink/research/pdf/cwpjg10.pdf

I'm not even making a value judgment about this. I'm just saying that you can't jump to a rapid conclusion in this instance, because groups of people are often pushed toward a wrong decision by one overreaction. It's possible that the flight attendant overreacted.

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

i don't care for the style either. I think it's rather silly. But it has been around for , what, 20 years now? I don't see how it is particularly inappropriate around children. They see it all the time if they watch tv. I knew a guy at a previous job who fancied himself a cowboy and wore the garb to prove it, including skin-tight pegleg jeans. You could clearly see his... attributes. Do you think he would have been confronted about his garb while boarding a plane?

jaywalker 3 years, 6 months ago

I see the 'look' quite often down here, it's not race specific but I do see it more often on young black men. What' makes the 'style' even more idiotic is where it came from: Prison. Apparently new cons immediately become someone else's "property" when they first go in. So their "owner" takes their belt as a symbol of subservience.

So, in essence, these guys are walkin' around sportin' that they're somebody's $!@&!.

Brilliant.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

I love your "It's not about race, but ..." comment.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

Most correctional institutions don't allow belts because of hangings (self-inflicted or otherwise). Although a popular rumor, the baggy pants look, called "jailin'" I've just learned, doesn't have anything to do with homosexuality or symbolic ownership. It is about ill-fitting pants and no belts in prison. http://www.snopes.com/risque/homosex/sagging.asp

It is still a really stupid inspiration for a fashion style.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

"@ deec and llama - while I agree that bad taste in style is not a criminal offense, the young man was given the option of pulling up his pants or leaving the plane."

And we don't know how long they gave him, or how low his pants actually were, or if the flight attendants were being honest... We are going based on hearsay. The fact is, nearly every comment here assumes that a flight attendant was correct. And you do so in part because this is a young person, in part because this is a black person, in part because they don't acquiesce to the ideal you have established for how this person should conduct themselves.

"When he refused to do either, it became trespassing"

He purchased and was rightly ticketed on the airplane. I don't agree with it becoming trespassing, and I don't agree that we have any right to presuppose that this young man didn't comply. In fact:

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/06/17/us-airways-pilot-orders-evacuation-of-plane-and-arrest-of-man-wearing-baggy-pants/

"He reportedly said that he first refused a demand to pull up his pants upon entering the plane because his hands were full but did ultimately pull up his pants when he reached his seat."

"then he apparently allegedly injured the police officer who was assisting him on how to leave the plane, that becomes battery of the officer."

I don't believe that, either. If he bumps into a police officer on accident, is that battery? Or is it the police officer being too sensitive?

"Compliance in either of the initial requests could have avoided any of the charges lodged against him."

Ah, but we have seen reports that he did comply, as soon as he had his hands free.

"One of the flight attendants on that aircraft was offended by the fact that she could see the outline of his private area,’ Sergeant Michael Rodriguez said.

A legitimate concern, but that happens all the time by accident, and we don't arrest people for it.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

Amazing that you complain that everyone believes the hearsay statements of others, yet you have somehow become a mind reader by stating the intentions of those people. They conspire against him because he is young, they conspire against him because he is black, they conspire against him because he doesn't acquiesce his conduct to what others believe. You got all that information, how?
And while you're so quick to criticize the statements of flight crew, etc., you're equally quick to believe the young man's statements.
This man will have his day in court, if charges are filed. And he has an option of a civil suit if he believes he has been wronged. A civil suit, I might add where the burden will be significantly less. If this does go to court, I'll bet he wears a belt.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Where did I make a statement about the intentions of these people directly involved with this situation? I posited a POSSIBLE intention. Not an absolute intention. In fact, I am complaining exactly because people HERE are making an absolute statement. I am complaining about what I do see, firsthand, which is the comments section on this story.

There are numerous studies detailing how people are treated differently. I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable to have it pointed out to you that the situation would have been drastically different if this were someone else; but people have stereotypes about athletes - especially young black athletes.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

But while you complain that others are stereotyping, you're stereotyping.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Sorry you feel that way. I'm not. The responses are right above you. I have the info in front of me to make the decision.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Hmm. I guess you've never used Google or read a story from another source.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

If you look up seven posts, you'll notice the source I looked at which has a photograph of the young man. So, yes, I did cite one. Thanks for your concern, but you should probably check before you make a statement like that.

MISTERTibbs 3 years, 6 months ago

So you're telling me, a black man, that I'm being racist because I think this spoiled punk got what he deserved?

As others have pointed out, if he was that traumatized, maybe he should have stayed home for a couple more days. I'm sure his coaches would understand.

I don't know why I even bother responding, since it seems all you want is to be contrary just to keep the argument going. But you can't drop the race card when you're talking to a person of that race. The kid needs to learn to show respect. If it was a coach that told him to pull up his drawers I'm sure he would have complied a whole lot more promptly than what he did (IF he did since that part of the story is hearsay as well.)

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Maybe. I'm saying, for everyone, there's an element in the mind that may not be conscious, that probably doesn't make any of the white people here comfortable or happy, which judges this situation differently because of the variable of the man's race and age (and status as an athlete). Three strikes, basically. Change the situation. It's a 65 year old white man. I doubt this makes headline news, unless it was from the other perspective about the actions of those involved (there'd probably be outrage on behalf of the person removed from the plane in that case). I'm not saying you're doing so intentionally, but there's a racial motive here. Your language implies that you've already judged this kid as a spoiled punk. You think he just needs to be "decent."

I don't want to keep the argument going, per se, but I'd love it if people would consider this, rather than dismissing it as "nah, no way anyone is racist. Kid's just a punk." That's a lot to assume about someone you don't know.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

We can't assume anything, actually. That's my whole point. I do have a substantiated reason to suspect he was treated differently because of race.

sr80 3 years, 6 months ago

How's your buddy Rep. Weiner doing ? I'm sure he enjoys your moral support !

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

If he'd been a young woman to whom god had been kind in the chest region wearing a skin tight sweater and an uber-high mini-skirt or hot pants cut a wee short, would she have been asked to cover up? Doubtful.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

There's virtually no chance. They certainly wouldn't have called the police on her, much less would they have stopped a plane to remove her.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

They let her take her flight. And they didn't arrest her after she fixed the problem. And this article is enormously sympathetic to the woman in this article, while the article in this paper is decidedly not biased toward the athlete. How is this the same?

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

Sigh

It is obvious you want to pick a fight over this article. You responded to Deec's statement that a woman would not be asked to cover up with the response that there would be no chance of that happening.

The article I linked to shows that yes, a woman was asked to change her clothes and ended up having to cover up with a blanket due to the flight attendant's belief that she was wearing inappropriate attire for the flight.

You said there was virtually no chance that a woman would be asked to cover up. I linked to an article that showed that, indeed, a woman had been asked to cover up in response to your assertion.

See how that works?

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Sigh

"They certainly wouldn't have called the police on her, much less would they have stopped a plane to remove her."

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

It is interesting that you claim racism as the reason for this happening to the young man and then turn around and make sexist assumptions.

Women have been removed from planes due to "reasons" that have offended flight attendants' sensibilities. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6522262

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Interesting thought. Maybe there is an underlying sexism. Or maybe an exposed breast used to nurse a child is no different to me than a kid with sagging pants and underwear on, still covering up what needs covered.

My presupposition was incorrect. You are right to point that out. And I'm sorry for the assumption I made.

Women no more deserve to be asked to leave a plane than this man did. That being said, I feel like the woman in the NPR story was a lot more prone to get support from the general public than the man in this story - but that's neither here nor there, you're correct to point out that my assumption was flawed, and I thank you for that (seriously).

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

You are welcome.

If you read the articles about the young woman asked to cover up, you'll notice she behaved passively. She is also not physically intimidating (i.e. slender, not much muscle, etc).

It is possible that part of the overreaction is due to the physical build of a football player rather than the color of his skin. You talk about racial threat in one of your posts but I am willing to bet if you compared the body types of those in your articles, you will find more correlation of threat with physical size.

Also, do you think this would have made the news if the young man involved was not an athlete? I don't believe we would have heard about it if it was just your average Joe Plane Traveler.

I think you are making some assumptions about the behaviors of the people involved that may not be correct.

I think the flight attendant overreacted to the saggy pants but I don't think it was racially motivated due to several reasons:

1) Saggy pants are not a racially exclusively fashion trend. Young men of all races engage in this type of dress.

2) We have no idea of the tenor of his response. He may have been polite to her. He may have responded dismissively. When people perceive that their instructions are being blown off, it can escalate the situation.

3) You make the assumption that the flight attendant, the pilots & the police are all white. All we know is that the young man is black. What if the flight attendant that overreacted was black? What if the pilots were black? Would that change your perception of the situation?

There are too many unknown factors with this situation to start to make charges of racial discrimination.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

No, she would have been given help with her bag.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

Just to summarize, on one side we have a flight attendant who objected to the man's attire. The man's response was such that the flight attendant felt it necessary to call the pilot. The man's response was such that the pilot felt the need to place the man under citizen's arrest, clear the plane of all the other passengers, delay the plane and call the police. The police felt the man's response was such that it was necessary to place him under arrest for resisting arrest and battery on a police officer. That's one side of the equation. On the other side of the equation we have him.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Groups of people have never been racist or overreacted, eh?

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

Just use some common sense. Flight attendants are trained to deal with passenger issues, under the most stressful conditions. Pilots, by the very nature of their jobs, deal with incredibly stressful conditions. They are trained to be level headed. To think they would over react, delay the flight, order all other passengers off the plane and then place the person under citizen's arrest, to do all this without substantial provocation is a stretch. Add the flight attendant and the police, it stretches common sense well beyond they breaking point. A far, far, far more likely scenario is that the young man acted like a disruptive jerk and brought this upon himself. But if you want to believe it was the flight attendant, pilot and police that were the problem, go ahead. Common sense tells me otherwise.

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

Yes. The pilots are always level-headed and would never refuse to take-off without a very good reason or substantial provocation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384592/Muslim-religious-leaders-told-leave-U-S-domestic-flight-pilot-refuses-aboard.html

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Okay. You don't get it, and that's fine. I'm not going to hold your hand. You're right, racism doesn't exist, and you have the right to assume that the six paragraphs (averaging less than four sentences) above is enough to assume the person in question is guilty.

The point is, substantial provocation from a young black man is perceived as much more threatening to some people than substantial provocation from a white man or woman. And so, the reaction tends to be stronger. http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/bernd.wittenbrink/research/pdf/cwpjg10.pdf

Plenty of other research on "racial threat" you should look into. It's fine if you wish to deny it, I can't make you understand it.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

The problem is that racism does exist and that it's a terrible thing when it happens. But did it happen here? There is no evidence of that, just your assumptions. What's more, you've been presented with a much more plausible explanation.
Racism and discrimination do exist, and as I said, when it happens, it's a terrible thing. Those that discriminate on the basis of race and those that are racists are committing horrible acts in my opinion. I have a very low regard for those people. So low in fact, that it's right up there with those that commit horrible crimes. But just as I would not accuse someone of a horrible crime without evidence, I would not accuse someone of racism without evidence. llama726, that's what you're doing. You've done it repeatedly. Do you really feel comfortable with that position? Especially in light of the strong probability that another explanation makes much more sense. Please, racism and discrimination are horrible realities in our society. Save those claims for the incidents where they really exist.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

I posted a video below. I'd like you to take a look. It won't change your mind, but your explanation isn't any more plausible than mine, and I have sociological studies to back my assertion that people are more aggressive in response to black people in perceived threats than white people.

I appreciate your appeal to emotion, but you have no reason to say your explanation is more probable or plausible than any other possibility. You can't really quantify that.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

You say you have studies, fine. But just as you called me out earlier in this thread, when I said that the passengers were offended, I'll call you out this time. Did this flight attendant over-react and if so, was the cause racism? Did this pilot over-react and if so, was it because of racism? Did these police over-react and if so, was it because of racism? If you can answer yes to these questions and provide evidence, then you are right and I will offer my apologies. If you cannot provide evidence that these individuals behaved inappropriately and that their actions were motivated by race, then you are wrong and you owe an apology. I await you response.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Innocent until proven guilty. I didn't say they were for sure racist. I posited it as an option, based on the studies I've seen.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

Right, you didn't say they were for sure racist. You merely implied it, over and over and over and over again. And you did it with zero evidence that it did in fact happen in this case. Having lived in the Bay Area for many years, I can say from experience that few cases like this ever see the inside of a courtroom. So in all probability, he will forever be presumed innocent. He'll win that battle not on the merits of the case, simply because the courts are so backed up that they choose not to deal with cases like this. Those that believe he behaved like a selfish jerk can go on believing that while those that want to play the race card can believe they are correct.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Stop being so immature about it. I'm not "playing the race card" simply to argue. I'm showing you that people in authority positions often think young black men are more threatening than young white men, or old white men, or old Asian men, etc.

You are taking exception to racist in the context of outward, overt racism. I think it can be more subtle.

sr80 3 years, 6 months ago

That reminds me of the LA riots,they were p.c. ain't that right 726 ?

kernal 3 years, 6 months ago

If his butt was hanging out for the world to see and the shape of his front of was noticible under his boxers, it's indecent exposure. We weren't there, so who knows if he "accidentally" bumped the officer. I suspect he mouthed off and that's what got things rolling. Attitude speaks volumes.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Why do you suspect that? Do you have a rational reason, or do you just assume everyone in this situation acted appropriately except this young man?

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

A bit - working full time and going to school full time doesn't leave a ton of time for sleep.

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

We don't know if it was a polite refusal to comply immediately (My hands are full right now, ma'am but I will pull them up as soon as I get to my seat) or not (Can't you see that my hands are full? I'll pull them up when I can!).

Most people assume since he is a young athlete (regardless of race) the latter is closer to the statement used. Most people assume that young athletes tend to be self-entitled and spoiled and more likely to lip off., especially at the college level.

If you also look at how our young athletes are treated at KU (those that behave badly are rarely punished or the punishment is much less than a non-athlete), the assumption is going to be that most young athletes behave similarly and treat others who do not kowtow to them poorly.

I think you are mistaking those attitudes for ones about race.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

How can you say that's because he's a young athlete, any more than I can say it's because of him being a young BLACK athlete?

labmonkey 3 years, 6 months ago

Pants on the ground, pants on the ground. Lookin like a fool with your pants on the ground.

deec 3 years, 6 months ago

I don't blame everyone else, just the prudish or prurient attendant who couldn't keep her eyes off his nether regions. He had his hands full. He said he would pull up his pants as soon as he could, which he did when he got to his seat. There was no reason for him to be hassled in the first place. Who cares what other people are wearing? How was this guy's clothing in any way a threat to the security of the flight? There was no problem until the attendant chose to make an issue of somebody's clothing.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Heh. Someone is being a little too defensive tonight.

jaywalker 3 years, 6 months ago

"I love your "It's not about race, but ..." comment."

Actually, the words were "it's not race specific but...." Nevertheless, please share why you "love" that comment. It wouldn't be because you're the type of person who runs around screaming "Witch!" at anyone who merely mentions race, now would it? Naaaaw.

Joe Hyde 3 years, 6 months ago

In Act I, Scene Two, the young man will go before a judge on the charges of resisting arrest and battery of a police officer. If he walks into the courtroom with his pants so low the judge can see his a$$, betcha he gets an extra 30 days in the slam.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

There are a number of reasonable points worthy of consideration in this instance, but many of you are unwilling to consider them.

1) http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/New-Video-Shows-Saggy-Pants-Dispute-124129129.html

In the video, he isn't acting out of line - but two uniformed men are confronting him, needlessly, as the problem was already addressed. He was already seated, with his pants up, and ready to fly.

The article, though, mentions that he reportedly pulled his pants completely down. I don't know if that's what happened, but that would be a poor decision on his part, I agree. But, he seemed to be fairly reasonable with the captain and the police officer while he was aboard the plane.

2) Many people are upset about me talking about racism. Racism doesn't have to be outright, consciously different treatment. It can be unconscious. I feel like it isn't the only factor here (the fact that he's an athlete and that he's young, and that people tend to defer to the authority figure also play into this). I'm not accusing you guys of being Klansmen. I'm simply saying that you can't deny that race was one factor in this. Enough that this young man was likely treated differently (specifically, the police were called on him) than others might be treated.

3) I'm also not saying this man is innocent completely, either. The provocation of the authority figures in this instance was unnecessary, based on the video I am seeing. The video isn't the complete story. There's room for him to have made bad decisions before and after this. That being said, at the point we're at in the video, if people left him alone and he wasn't still causing a disturbance, the greatest good for the most people would be not to evacuate the plane and arrest the man, but rather to simply fly the plane as scheduled. The situation was made worse by both sides, but people are siding with the authority figures merely because they side with the authority figures by default.

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

llama726 (anonymous) says… I'm simply saying that you can't deny that race was one factor in this. Enough that this young man was likely treated differently (specifically, the police were called on him) than others might be treated. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is the problem. You are making assumptions here. You have no way of knowing that he was treated differently from anyone else who wears saggy pants. You assume that because he is black and he was wearing saggy pants that the issue was his race & not the pants or of his initial refusal to comply with the flight attendant's request that caused the problem.

You have a 3 minute video to view and that is it. If you have viewed the video, he is not calm and collected. You can see by his head movements that he is agitated and it does appear that he is talking pretty loudly. While I imagine most people would be agitated when confronted by any person in authority, it never helps the situation. And when one person gets agitated (whatever the reason may be), it puts all involved on edge and situations escalate.

He may have complied with the request to pull up his pants, but we don't know how he complied. We know it was not done when requested. We don't know the tenor of his response. We are not witness to the request and everything up to the point where a pilot & a police officer come to talk to him. This is not sufficient information to make a determination of the situation and it is certainly not sufficient information to make a determination that race was any sort of factor.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

He began to talk loudly about a minute into the video, after being surrounded by individuals who are confronting him for a problem he has solved. If he had been a wealthy first class business traveler, I feel like he would have been apologized to, or at least left alone. In this case, he felt he was being treated unfairly, and stated so, respectfully. At no point in the video did he become disrespectful and even acknowledged "this is your plane" to the captain. If his hands were full, the request was unreasonable.

I think you're entirely (and some people here, deliberately) missing the point of my race comments. I know it is uncomfortable to consider, and I also know that people believe for some reason that I think this is the only factor. It simply isn't, and I'm aware of that, but it is considered. Look at the study I mentioned, and search around in sociology / psychology journals evaluating racial bias and racial threat. In MANY cases but not all, authority figures perceive a greater threat based upon a person being black. And that's probably playing in, in this case. One thing that you do not know about me is that I rarely speak in terms of absolutes. When I do, it's typically hyperbole.

I'm not saying the captain belongs to the KKK. I'm saying, this man was treated undeniably differently. If this were an older wealthy-looking white man whose pants were falling down while he boarded the plane, the attendant's initial approach would have been different and the situation would have undeniably played out differently. We don't treat everyone the same. I don't know why people feel like that is so upsetting. It's true.

I object to the fact that everyone here assumes guilt on the part of the young man. I don't assume guilt at all. I say, simply, racially motivated actions occur, even if the motivation isn't conscious. This is one of the many items that played into this event. This is based on the factors which have already been brought up: He's an athlete. He's dressed a certain way (and that certain way is synonymous with, though not exclusive to, a certain perception that people have of young black men). He's physically imposing because he is an athlete. He's young (and people in authority often find youth to be rebellious). All of these are subtle, maybe even unconscious factors in how he was treated. So is his skin color. You can tell me, all day, that I can't prove that. I'm not saying he was treated incorrectly, given the circumstances. I'm saying that because humans are prone to error, I'm assuming essentially nothing about this case. If I were on the plane, I might have more of an opinion.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

One point to be made, in addition to the well thought out comments of Katara and cheeseburger, is the fact that the young man in question was asked repeatedly to listen to the captain. He repeatedly said no and continued with his diatribe. When the captain of an aircraft tells you to listen to him, you need to listen. When a policeman tells you to listen to him, you need to listen. If you do not, you may be asked to leave the plane and the police may be forced to physically remove you. Those would be the natural consequences of his actions.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

Of course, it remains to be seen if the airline can legally demand that people wear a certain type of cloth over their buttocks and genitalia. Was he covered? Yes. Just because someone in a position of power demands that others comply to their rules, that doesn't mean it is automatically legal. If someone is demanding that you do something that isn't breaking a law, do they really have the right to make such demands? Will you just instantly comply?

This is a stretch, but what if the pilot was a Democrat and didn't want someone wearing their "I Heart Santorum" shirt while flying? Could he demand that they cover it or have them removed? Or if someone was wearing a plaid shirt and striped pants with white shoes after Labor Day, could the captain demand they change for breaking such obvious laws of fashion? If the person with the baggy pants was covered and not literally exposing himself, then the analogy really is about as arbitrary.

Don't get me wrong, I think the baggy pants look is a ridiculous style that makes young people mimic jail-house manners. Totally repugnant ... but illegal? I'm not so sure.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

The problem with your analogy is that the plane itself is private property. Just like I can set arbitrary rules in my home, they can set arbitrary rules inside their airplane. Now they are involved in interstate commerce, so they must comply with certain rules the government sets. They cannot discriminate based on a variety of factors, such as race, ethnicity, religion, etc. But can each airline set it's own dress code? I think that is probably permissible. So Southwest Airlines may have a dress code that is different than American Airlines. I might say that my wife can smoke in my car, but our adult child may not. It's my car and as long as I'm not discriminating on the basis of certain protected classes, I can be as arbitrary as I would like. Of course, I'm not a lawyer. That's just my lay opinion.

Katara 3 years, 6 months ago

The pants thing was not illegal. The refusing to leave when asked to do so was.

Just as a store can institute a no shoes, no shirt, no service policy, the airline can dictate what type of dress code is acceptable for you to ride in their plane. Fashion sense, or lack of, does not put you in a protected class.

Do I think it is a smart policy? Nope, but it is one you need to abide by if you want to ride on that particular airline's plan.

Needless to say, the current policies of most airlines and the demands that one must subject themselves to in order to even get to the plane (TSA and all) are reasons I opt not to fly.

Now I must be off. Syfy is showing Moby Dick. Of which I am absolutely certain will follow the book exactly. You can't miss with a movie that stars Barry Bostwick!

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

At best, that's a bad business practice. The airline does not make an effort to inform customers of their dress code. They admitted to not even having an official dress code.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

jhf, I guess you are saying they would have to have a "No I Heart Santorum" t-shirt policy first before they could kick you off the plane for wearing such a shirt, correct? I am not a lawyer either (one of my few redeeming qualities, I might add), so I don't know what kind of arbitary dress codes are actually allowed by businesses. If it isn't readily available on a sign or something, can it really be enforced?

cb, from what we can tell, he wasn't showing any sign of unruly behavior until people started telling him to rearrange his clothing. Had they left him alone, there wouldn't have been a problem.

I'm not trying to defend the guy. I'm more curious about what types of dress codes can businesses enforce on their customers. From what I've seen when flying, I'm shocked to learn there is any dress code at all. People dress really poorly to fly anymore. I'll never understand those who wear flip flops on a plane. If something bad were to happen and you are fortunate enough to find yourself wandering around in the middle of a corn field after a crash landing, do you really want to be wearing flip flops?

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

From all reports, he wasn't showing his buttocks or genitalia. That isn't correct. He didn't actually break any laws, just the company's policies. Relieving yourself in public or yelling fire in a crowded theater would be against the law.

He also wasn't just wearing just a jock strap, either. He was covered, but in boxer shorts above his pants. It is a really bad looking style, certainly, and one I hope goes away yesterday, but we all agree it is a style of dressing some people are wearing today. We know about it and this guy isn't unique for doing so. It might be rude and ugly, but it isn't against the law.

My asking about a sign "or something" isn't meant about there being a literal sign. I'm just pointing out that a company has a rule saying they won't provide service if you do certain things and then don't tell their customers about it in advance, can they really enforce it? What if their rule is about wearing blue shoes? If they don't tell people about it in advance, can they rightfully toss you from their plane for breaking their made-up blue shoes rule? That is all I'm asking, and I don't know the answer.

He was covered, just in flannel or cotton, not denim. Is there that big a difference, really, other than we "know" that what we are seeing are traditionally just worn underneath our clothing? Styles change. There was a time when a woman couldn't go outside without a corset on, and certainly a man wouldn't have been allowed on a plane in shorts, a t-shirt and flip flops back in the '50s.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

I'm just guessing, Bea, but I suspect the rules are somewhere on the ticket in very small print. Or maybe on line when you purchase the ticket, or maybe on a the kind of link that we all say we read but never do. Something like that. Remember though. this man was not arrested for having baggy pants. He was asked to leave the plane. The company did not arrest him for that and they did not ask the police that he be arrested for wearing baggy pants. They were simply refusing him service because he did not comply with company rules. Later, when the confrontation escalated, he was arrested for other things, not complying with the flight crew"s instructions is an offense, I believe. And not complying with police instructions is an offense, I'm certain. It was those actions that lead to an arrest and of course we now know that he is accused of resisting arrest and battery of a police officer.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

Yes, he was arrested for his behavior, no doubt. Would he have acted that way had he not been told (not asked, since he didn't have an option) to pull his pants up? I doubt it. Did he overreact. OH YES! Again, not defending him. I'm just curious about the ability to dictate what type of material people choose to use to cover their skin.

Personally, I'd be against polyester. And those awful jumpers some women wear. Ugh. And socks with any type of sandals. And ... oh, I better just stop there.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Actually, the airline admitted there isn't a specific dress code.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

CB, I think Jesse's point, and certainly mine, is that just because we know which department in the store an item is purchased, that doesn't matter. If it covers the skin -- then it covers the skin. Flesh was not exposed. Genitals were not exposed. No exposure, no crime. Bad fashion, certainly, but not a crime. That is the only point. How many rules do you want dictating the things you do? The boxers exposed look might not be your cup of tea, but who says you get to dictate what tea others drink? If you think this is a liberal issue, then are you saying that being in favor of regulating personal conduct is a conservative issue? I thought conservativism was suppose to be about being hands off on regulations.

Can we really dictate the types of material clothing that covers skin is made of?

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

Women frequently wear low-cut tops and sports bras in public. That doesn't bother anyone, except you, for some reason. A jock strap isn't comparable to boxer shorts.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

Incorrect. I'm not arguing for a jockstrap in public, and certainly not on a plane seat where others will have to sit as well. Consider how much more flesh is exposed when wearing a jockstrap than someone having their boxers exposed above their pants. I'll bet you he was actually covered by cloth from his neck to the bottom of his feet.

To be honest, I'm not even arguing for boxers -- again, I think it a stupid looking style. I just don't know how a company can make an argument and it stand up in court in favor of certain types of material over other types of material when it comes to covering up a person's flesh. He wasn't exposed. Under dressed for the occassion? Sure, but he was still covered. A jockstrap doesn't cover.

ferrislives 3 years, 6 months ago

Pants on the ground Pants on the ground Lookin' like a fool with your pants on the ground!

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

How can you say that he was immature? I am not saying he WAS mature. I'm asking how you know he wasn't.

beatrice 3 years, 6 months ago

In other news, did you notice that John Calipari had 42 wins stricken from his record? That ain't right!

Talk about pulling a guys pants down in public!

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

http://espn.go.com/new-york/news/story?id=6673284

I feel like this is a good rundown of the situation.

http://www.theroot.com/buzz/deshon-marman-tells-his-side-sagging-pants-arrest

If the pilot indeed told him (when he said he was human, like everyone else) that he was not like everyone else, then indeed, the pilot acknowledges treating him differently.

Look, I don't see how you can say the kid was guilty if he was in his seat and ready to fly. I think it's POSSIBLE this was a disproportionate response.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

The link you provided earlier clearly showed the young man in his seat, stating his position, over and over again. When asked to listen to the pilot, he didn't. He kept on talking, stating his position. He would not let the pilot speak. So we hear his position, over and over again. I know when I ask to be heard and the person refuses, I have a tendency to stop listening. A normal response, I think. But again, it's a response to his behavior, in this case, speaking and refusing to listen.
It's hard to claim that you're being respectful when you're saying the word "sir" so many times but refusing to listen to the person in authority. Finally, he may have been in his seat and ready to fly. But his prior actions may have caused the pilot to have already made the decision that he didn't want him on the plane at this time. We're not talking about equal votes here. If the passenger is ready to fly and the pilot wants him off the plane, the pilot wins that argument. No question.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

I guess, jhawkinsf, that you are the best judge of this situation. You clearly know more about it than anyone else. When asked to listen to the pilot, he interrupted? Maybe he felt like he wasn't being heard? I didn't know you weren't allowed to state your position to someone when they make an accusation against you.

He's refusing to listen because this is his flight home, and he wants to stay on the plane. The motivation to try to stay on the plane is apparent, isn't it? You're saying that he's wrong because he refused to get off the plane. He paid for a ticket, and they're kicking him off for something he doesn't agree with. You'd just get off the plane in that situation? I wouldn't.

Again, I don't know how you can say he was treated fairly / appropriately. You simply don't know. You are assuming the pilot reacted in the best possible way. I'm assuming nothing, which looks like defending the football player, because you have this assumption that he is wrong despite having any real evidence to support that claim.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

If a pilot tells me to get off the plane, I get off. And I get off without an argument. And If I think the pilot is wrong, I still get off, no argument. If the police tell me to get off the plane, I get off, no argument. And if I think the police are wrong, I still get off the plane, no argument.

If I think they were wrong, I can then file a complaint with the airline or with the police department. I could file a complaint with the FAA. I can file a civil suit in court of I feel my civil rights have been violated. I could obtain the services of various advocacy groups that help protect civil rights if that's what I believe.

There is a right way of going about it, even if you believe your behavior and actions is correct and the behavior and actions of others are wrong. The path this man chose is clearly wrong.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

More power to you. I'm not as passive as you. It's not right (in my opinion) to sit by and allow someone to simply control you, especially if their reasoning for doing so is incorrect. And I'd try to mention that to the person. Of course, I'd try to be polite about it. I have a right to ask why I'm being treated differently, denied service, etc.

Sure, you could file a complaint. But this is an airline flight. You have to miss your flight, book another one - will you get refunded? You paid hundreds of dollars for basically nothing. What if I don't know a lawyer? Why do I have to invest the time, energy, and resources after the fact?

You're not wrong. I'm not saying you're wrong in that approach. Obviously, we're different people. I don't think it's invalid, though, to have an expectation of flying on a plane after you've bought a ticket with the intent to do so, and to become upset when that service is denied to you on the basis of your clothes. In particular, if there isn't a formal dress code.

You think he should immediately conform to authority. You assume because someone is in authority that they cannot be wrong, or that they should be followed without question. More power to you. I think you can question authority without impeding it, and I don't think, based on what I've seen, we can conclude that the initial actions warrants the response of evacuating the plane, getting the cops, arresting this guy, and delaying everyone for hours. It seems too extreme, based on what I've seen. But, there are other facts not as evident. It's possible his actions were that poor. Was he warned that the police were going to be called? There are too many questions.

Again, to make it simple - how can you say that he deserved to be removed from the plane in the first place? I don't care that you think he should have left as soon as the pilot asked him, why did the pilot get to the point of asking him in the first place? Was that warranted? Was it a response proportional to the person's actions? How can we be sure? These are tough questions. I know why people are getting frustrated with me, because I hate it when people ask me to consider something like this as a factor. I'm sorry that it is so frustrating, but I just want someone to give me a reasonable response as to why we can assume this man deserved to be removed from the plane. I don't think "because the pilot said so" is adequate.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

You're correct that we don't know exactly what happened that precipitated his removal. But we can take some reasonable guesses. And we can make some unreasonable guesses as well. I could say that this passenger made a homophobic remark to an Asian flight attendant who appeared to him to be somewhat effeminate. Or you can claim that racism played a part in this. Of course, I have no idea what the race or sexual orientation of the flight attendant was, I have no knowledge that any homophobic remark was made and you have no information that racism played any part in this. Those types of speculative remarks would be inappropriate because there is no evidence of that happening. They would be wild guesses at best. Having said that, does the making of these types of wild guesses sound like anyone in this forum? The biggest difference in the approach that this man took and the one that I recommended is that one would lead to an inconvenience and the other would lead to an even greater inconvenience, assuming we believe being forced off the plane, put under arrest and jailed in considered a greater inconvenience. Passivity is one thing. Knowing when you are in a no win situation comes with maturity. Hopefully, when this young man is my age, he will know the difference. Picking your battles will get you by whether it's on a plane in a marriage or at your workplace. My passivity has caused me to having never been arrested, a long and happy marriage and a successful career. Passivity, maturity, whatever you want to call it.

llama726 3 years, 6 months ago

"You're correct that we don't know exactly what happened that precipitated his removal. But we can take some reasonable guesses."

I've repeatedly asked for your reasons behind these reasonable guesses. You are simply insisting that your guesses are more reasonable than mine.

"And we can make some unreasonable guesses as well. I could say that this passenger made a homophobic remark to an Asian flight attendant who appeared to him to be somewhat effeminate."

That accusation hasn't been mentioned by either party, and is hardly relevant. A charge of racial motivation has been mentioned (see the articles I posted above). A charge of disorderly conduct has also been mentioned.

"Or you can claim that racism played a part in this. Of course, I have no idea what the race or sexual orientation of the flight attendant was, I have no knowledge that any homophobic remark was made and you have no information that racism played any part in this."

I have information about similar situations in which authority figures have reacted disproportionately to black people. I've seen studies about similar situations which reveal a greater sense of threat perceived by white people (the captain appeared to be white, as did the police officer) when dealing with a black man.

"Those types of speculative remarks would be inappropriate because there is no evidence of that happening."

There is no evidence (other than word against word) of anything, really, in this case.

"They would be wild guesses at best. Having said that, does the making of these types of wild guesses sound like anyone in this forum?"

I assume you mean me. I've substantiated my claims.

"The biggest difference in the approach that this man took and the one that I recommended is that one would lead to an inconvenience and the other would lead to an even greater inconvenience, assuming we believe being forced off the plane, put under arrest and jailed in considered a greater inconvenience."

And the one I recommended lets everyone fly where they paid to fly on the timetable that they paid to fly there.

"Passivity is one thing. Knowing when you are in a no win situation comes with maturity."

Why is this a no-win situation? How do you know when someone will not listen to your reasons?

"Hopefully, when this young man is my age, he will know the difference. Picking your battles will get you by whether it's on a plane in a marriage or at your workplace. My passivity has caused me to having never been arrested, a long and happy marriage and a successful career. Passivity, maturity, whatever you want to call it."

No doubt, he has growing up to do. As do I. As does everyone. I have been with the same woman for eight years, have been successful in every job I've taken, successful in academics, and I've also never been arrested - and I've spoken for myself in situations where an authority figure was involved - successfully, that is.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 6 months ago

When this discussion began, oh so long ago, we began with less information that we now have. But as this thread progressed, another thread was going on. It dealt with experts. You clearly stated your lack of respect for those that don't trust experts in the various areas of expertise. Earlier in this thread, I mentioned my expectation that the flight attendants had certain training in dealing with passenger issues, something like customer relations. I suggested that the pilot had specific training in staying calm in stressful situations and I know the police deal with unruly people all the time. They are trained in how to defuse volatile situations. Maybe not a Ph.D. in a certain subject, but experience that adds up to something like being an expert. And not one expert, but a group of them. On the other hand, we have a 20 year young person.
Follow your own advise from the other thread. Defer judgement to the experts. In this case, experts at operating an airplane in a safe manner.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.