Fireworks and green laser

J

jesse

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
16,015
Location
...
Display Name
Display name:
Jesse
I decided to take up the 150 tonight to fly over the city and enjoy all the fireworks people were launching. A beautiful night, flying along with some music playing over bluetooth, and the windows open. The view was pretty good at about 1500 AGL.

After about 30 minutes of flying a big circle around the city everything suddenly went green in the cockpit. I wasn't sure if someone had managed to hit me with fireworks or what the hell just happened. I banked away from the green and then saw it over my shoulder. Some idiot was tracking me with a laser.

I started looking around on the ground trying to establish where I was over the city which isn't exactly that easy to do with absolute precision. I reported the approximate location to Omaha approach. I flew about a half mile circle around the source of the laser and after a few minutes determined the precise street corner it was coming from (72nd and Hook DR). The offender kept tracking me every chance they had. That gave me plenty of time to determine an address and verify that I was right. A few more reports to Omaha approach and they told me Lincoln police was investigating.

After the flight I drove to the location in my truck and talked to someone that was standing outside. They told me that some local kids were doing it but they wouldn't give me a name. I gave that information to Lincoln police whom seemed barely to moderately interested.

I doubt the idiot knew that they were committing a felony nor did they know how annoying their attack was. I am planning on printing a few flyers and hanging them on that block so that they will understand and hopefully not do it in the future.
 

Attachments

  • laser.pdf
    60.3 KB · Views: 140
Last edited:
Sorry you were the victim of this hooliganism.

Seems like you are setting yourself up for harassment by making it so personal.

"I did talk to people in this neighborhood whom said it was local kids doing it. This incident was reported to the Lincoln police and they are investigating."

Should be who.
 
I agree that you may be setting yourself up for harassment. I would set up a gmail address for the poster, since the one posted is probably traceable to you by anyone who sees it.

You can also set up a google voice number so they can call and leave a message - also not traceable to you by the inept.

I would also offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the culprits. I'll pledge $25 towards the reward.
 
Last edited:
It was a great night for flying Jesse, but I was self grounded. ;)

Keep up the pressure on LPD. You might want to call the local news also. Channel 8 is good at covering local stuff like this.
 
did you get the names of the people who wouldn't give you the names of the kids? Police could talk to them. If they don't tell them, it's obstruction.
 
Last edited:
If the local police were truly "uninterested" I'd contact the state attorney's office and ask why a potential felony was such a low priority. And since AFaIK, it's a federal crime I'd send the same query to the local FBI office. Non-withstanding your paper hanging, chances are that if the perps conclude that law enforcement doesn't care, they will continue or even escalate their "fun".
 
Just another good reason for flying low wing aircraft. Makes for a good laser blocker. Yeah I'd make it personal as well! As you said it's a federal offense and more importantly putting your life and those on the ground in danger. It's not some harmless prank. It's a flat out crime, just as bad as if someone shot at you.
 
raider said:
If they don't tell them, it's obstruction.
Click to expand...

Short of a court order, you are never under a legal duty to talk to the police about anything.

Obstruction requires an affirmative act. If you lie to the police, that's obstruction. If you refuse to talk, it's not.
 
I'd ping the nearest FBI office with the info. You might get lucky and get it handed to a field agent that suffers from 'little man syndrome' and is willing to unleash his 'authority' on some punk high school kids.

Or better yet, borrow Steve's IAR and put those hard attach points to use. ;)
 
Hope that the perps get caught. I know that the local police in parts of the DC area have pursued and caught folks doing this.

Side note: in certain cities - I learned this in South Texas - folks enjoy firing pistols into the air on holidays like July 4 & Jan 1. Bad enough that folks on the ground get hurt from bullets returning to earth, I quickly figured out that I don't want to be flying low over a city on those nights.
 
Ron Levy said:
See http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/report/laserinfo/ for more on reporting laser incidents. Please follow up by making the appropriate report. And tell the FBI about the local police's apparent lack of interest.
Click to expand...

Thanks -- filled out the report and faxed it.

Agree that it's probably a better idea to use a different e-mail on that flyer.

I also reached out to LNK PD again, we'll see what they say, if blown off next step will be the FBI.
 
Steve Foley said:
Short of a court order, you are never under a legal duty to talk to the police about anything.

Obstruction requires an affirmative act. If you lie to the police, that's obstruction. If you refuse to talk, it's not.
Click to expand...

it really depends on the circumstances and how the report is written - especially if construed as deception by a lawyer -- plus, this isn't a misdemeanor. I'm a cop.
 
Steve Foley said:
Short of a court order, you are never under a legal duty to talk to the police about anything.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true. The police do not need a court order to require that you identify yourself in most situations where they would become involved, including this one. You don't have to speak in order to do that (presentation of your DL would be sufficient in most cases), but you cannot refuse to identify yourself. That would not be obstruction, but it is still a crime when the police have reasonable suspicion that a criminal act has been perpetrated. IIRC, Terry v. Ohio is the precedent.

Obstruction requires an affirmative act. If you lie to the police, that's obstruction. If you refuse to talk, it's not.
Click to expand...
If you are a suspect, that is true, but if you are merely a witness, and will not be incriminating yourself by what you say, I believe they can charge you if you refuse to tell them what you know about a criminal act perpetrated by another. That may vary some between states, but I believe it is generally true.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Sorry you were the victim of this hooliganism.

Seems like you are setting yourself up for harassment by making it so personal.

"I did talk to people in this neighborhood whom said it was local kids doing it. This incident was reported to the Lincoln police and they are investigating."

Should be who.
Click to expand...

Many of the green lasers can cause permanent damage to the eyes, which in my opinion goes far beyond hooliganism.

But maybe you are right, the minor grammatical error is much more important to the discussion than felony assault.
 
GPS? you could fly over the spot and look at the LAT/LONG again a good reason to iPad and just hit the screen shot and there is your lat long when its configured to display it. . .
 
Ron Levy said:
I believe they can charge you if you refuse to tell them what you know about a criminal act perpetrated by another.
Click to expand...

I'll go off and do some research, but I believe this is an incorrect statement.

ETA:

This is from Terry v Ohio in the concurring opinion by Justice White:

There is nothing in the Constitution which prevents a policeman from addressing questions to anyone on the streets. Absent special circumstances, the person approached may not be detained or frisked but may refuse to cooperate and go on his way. However, given the proper circumstances, such as those in this case, it seems to me the person may be briefly detained against his will while pertinent questions are directed to him. Of course, the person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest, although it may alert the officer to the need for continued observation.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
if they find out you were withholding info, yes. say the perp discloses that info.
 
comanchepilot said:
GPS? you could fly over the spot and look at the LAT/LONG again a good reason to iPad and just hit the screen shot and there is your lat long when its configured to display it. . .
Click to expand...

I didn't have an iPad or GPS with me. All I had was a VOR with no DME but I was able to determine the precise address with street maps.
 
raider said:
if they find out you were withholding info, yes. say the perp discloses that info.
Click to expand...

"yes" what?

If you are saying that withholding information from the police constitutes obstruction, can you please provide a citation?
 
If subpoenaed to appear, and the testimony you are asked for is not self-incriminating (or subject to another privilege, such as spousal privilege or attorney-client, that sort of exception), I believe that the refusal to testify would subject the witness to a contempt of court citation, for which one available punishment is confinement in the local Greybar Motel.

Then, Mr. Witness gets to answer the age-old question: "You wanna be the husband, or the wife?" :D
 
Jack Spectre said:
Many of the green lasers can cause permanent damage to the eyes, which in my opinion goes far beyond hooliganism.

But maybe you are right, the minor grammatical error is much more important to the discussion than felony assault.
Click to expand...
Hooliganism includes felony assault, even murder. Perhaps I'm slightly more comfortable using the term than most Americans because of spending a few years of my youth in England in the company of same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooliganism
Hooliganism refers to behavior that is unruly, bullying, or vandalizing... The first use of the term is unknown, but the word first appeared in print in London police-court reports in 1894 referring to the name of a gang of youths in the Lambeth area of London—the Hooligan Boys,and later—the O'Hooligan Boys. In August 1898 a murder in Lambeth committed by a member of the gang drew further attention to the word which was immediately popularized by the press.
 
Two issues...

First, in many circumstances, you cannot refuse to identify yourself upon legitimate demand by the police to do so. You may not have to answer any other questions, but they generally have the authority to require that you identify yourself.

Second, after further research, it appears that refusing to answer questions about criminal activity in which you have no part and no reason to believe your answers might incriminate you is legal in some jurisdictions and obstruction of justice in others.
 
Hindering prosecution.

575.030. 1. A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution if for the purpose of preventing the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another for conduct constituting a crime he:

(1) Harbors or conceals such person; or

(2) Warns such person of impending discovery or apprehension, except this does not apply to a warning given in connection with an effort to bring another into compliance with the law; or

(3) Provides such person with money, transportation, weapon, disguise or other means to aid him in avoiding discovery or apprehension; or

(4) Prevents or obstructs, by means of force, deception or intimidation, anyone from performing an act that might aid in the discovery or apprehension of such person.

2. Hindering prosecution is a class D felony if the conduct of the other person constitutes a felony; otherwise hindering prosecution is a class A misdemeanor.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Two issues...

First, in many circumstances, you cannot refuse to identify yourself upon legitimate demand by the police to do so. You may not have to answer any other questions, but they generally have the authority to require that you identify yourself.
Click to expand...

I almost agree with this, however the "legitimate demand" part is somewhat vague. The police need some reasonable suspicion that you are involved in criminal activity.

Second, after further research, it appears that refusing to answer questions about criminal activity in which you have no part and no reason to believe your answers might incriminate you is legal in some jurisdictions and obstruction of justice in others.
Click to expand...
Can you provide a jurisdiction where this is considered obstruction?
 
Ron Levy said:
Second, after further research, it appears that refusing to answer questions about criminal activity in which you have no part and no reason to believe your answers might incriminate you is legal in some jurisdictions and obstruction of justice in others.
Click to expand...

One can be compelled to testify in court (or face contempt charges unless the refusal is carefully conducted). As I understand it, one cannot be compelled to respond to questions (other than personal identification) from law enforcement. We have the right to remain silent...
 
okey dokey
 
Clark1961 said:
We have the right to remain silent...
Click to expand...
...only if we have reason to believe our answers might tend do incriminate us. Refuse to answer otherwise, and law enforcement can start the ball rolling to compel you to answer. They might not be able to arrest and charge you on the spot, but the wheels of justice will begin grinding, and you will be the grist. Just ask that Clinton aide who spent 18 months in a Federal pen for refusing to cooperate in the Whitewater investigation.
 
Ron Levy said:
...only if we have reason to believe our answers might tend do incriminate us. Refuse to answer otherwise, and law enforcement can start the ball rolling to compel you to answer. They might not be able to arrest and charge you on the spot, but the wheels of justice will begin grinding, and you will be the grist. Just ask that Clinton aide who spent 18 months in a Federal pen for refusing to cooperate in the Whitewater investigation.
Click to expand...

Which is what my post said Ron. Did read the part about being compelled to testify in court?
 
in general i have a reason to believe that talking with the cops about any criminal investigation might tend to incriminate me.
 
gismo said:
If the local police were truly "uninterested" I'd contact the state attorney's office and ask why a potential felony was such a low priority. And since AFaIK, it's a federal crime I'd send the same query to the local FBI office. Non-withstanding your paper hanging, chances are that if the perps conclude that law enforcement doesn't care, they will continue or even escalate their "fun".
Click to expand...

Oh you all know the answer to this... But no one will come out and say it...

Jesse was flying one of them there "little airplanes".

Same incident, pointed at an airliner, there'd be all sorts of self-aggrandizing LEOs running around like bees, figuring out who the hooligan was and treating them like a terrorist, while trying to "impress the boys here from DC who called this morning".

Seriously. No city police dept gives a rat's *** about lasers towards aircraft unless the aircraft is a bizjet, airliner, or the department is overstaffed and really really bored.

Felony? That's not their motivation. Felony that garners a phone call from the Feds asking the status of the investigation... that'd get attention.
 
Jack Spectre said:
Many of the green lasers can cause permanent damage to the eyes
Click to expand...
Not at typical ground to air distances with any handheld laser pointer I know of unless the victim is looking through something that magnifies.

http://www.laserpointersafety.com/resources/3-eye-hazards-02---50-50-and-NOHD-fade-v2.jpg

Ignore the following link:
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/page52/laser-hazard_diagram/different-lasers-compared.html

This one is full of good info:
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/page52/laser-hazard_diagram/different-lasers-compared.html

, which in my opinion goes far beyond hooliganism.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Even if there's no risk of permanent eye damage, a loss of control due to temporary visual effects is quite possible.

Maybe what we need is some focused retro reflectors on the bottom of the airplane. That would send the beam right back to it's source with an even tighter spread (brighter).
 
Last edited:
denverpilot said:
Oh you all know the answer to this... But no one will come out and say it...

Jesse was flying one of them there "little airplanes"....
Click to expand...

No!

"Professional Flight Instructor and Commercial Pilot, Jesse Angell..."
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Wrong. Watch the "don't talk to the cops" video that's in Troy's parallel thread.
Click to expand...
No, right -- ask the Clinton aide to whom I referred above, who spend 18 months in the pen merely for refusing to answer questions where she had no chance of self-incrimination. There's a process that unwinds before that happens, but at the end of the day, that Fifth Amendment right applies only to questions whose answers might tend you incriminate you.
 
Ron Levy said:
No, right -- ask the Clinton aide to whom I referred above, who spend 18 months in the pen merely for refusing to answer questions where she had no chance of self-incrimination. There's a process that unwinds before that happens, but at the end of the day, that Fifth Amendment right applies only to questions whose answers might tend you incriminate you.
Click to expand...

Refusing to testify before a grand jury is not the same thing as refusing to talk to a police officer. My first statement was "short of a court order". When a judge tells you to answer the question, which I'm sure happened in in the grand jury, that is a court order.
 
Whatever, Ron. You might want to actually watch it, you're wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top