Monday, April 17, 2017

United Airlines: Bride and Groom Booted Off. Who is Telling the Truth?

Who is telling the truth?

With Statement Analysis, we break down the words to seek for truth.  If we had specifically quoted statements we would know for certain.  Yet, even here, we may guess.


A bride and groom headed to Costa Rica for their wedding got kicked off their United flight out of Houston on Saturday afternoon.
The incident took place on United Airlines Flight 1737 which was headed from Houston (IAH) to Liberia, Costa Rica (LIR).

The couple, along with their friends, were flying from Salt Lake City and had a layover at George Bush Intercontinental Airport. 
Michael Hohl, the groom, said he and his fiancé, Amber Maxwell, were the last to board the plane.

According to Hohl, they noticed a man was spread across their row napping when they approached their seats, 24 B and C. 

Not wanting to wake the man, Hohl said they decided to sit a three rows up in seats 21 B and C. He said they didn't think it would matter because the flight was half full with multiple empty rows.

Here they "decided", which speaks to an agreement and discussion between them.  This is, according to the context, as they are standing over the sleeping man in their seats.  This means a discussion occurred, rather than one suggesting, or asking the flight attendant.  

Note the number three in their statement. We must now consider that due to its possibility of deception, were there other seats they went to before 21B and C?  Remember, we must consider that a decision often indicates back and forth thought and verbal processing.  

Although it is not a direct quote, the journalists used "said", so we are presuming the words are their own.  If not, the analysis cannot be applied. 

The groom is speaking: 



We thought not a big deal, it’s not like we are trying to jump up into a first-class seat," said Hohl.“We were simply in an economy row a few rows above our economy seat.” 

Note he does not speak for himself even with what he thought.  He next tells us what it was not ("not a big deal") and then further, in the negative, tells us what they were not doing:
"not like we are trying to jump..."
One should question if they were trying to move to higher paid seats, even if not first class.  

Then, note the additional unnecessary word "simply" is added.  We should now consider a more complex thought pattern.  


In a Boeing 737-800 like the one the couple was on, United considers Row 21 "economy plus," an upgrade.

After sitting, Hohl said a flight attendant approached and asked if they were in their ticketed seats. 

The couple explained they weren't and asked if they could get an upgrade, but instead they were told they needed to return to their assigned seats. 

Note he does not say which spoke, nor what caused a flight attendant to even ask if they were in their ticketed seats.  There is very likely missing information here.  

On empty flights, once boarding is completed, attendants will frequently allow some movement within paid parameters.  

Next we do not have a quote, but if this is accurate, it helps us understand what happened: 

Hohl said after complying with the flight attendant's demand, a U.S. Marshall came onto the plane and asked them to get off. 
The couple cooperated and got off the plane without incident, but they still don't understand why.

The word "comply" indicates a submission.  This is very different than cooperation.  Given that this came after "said" and where the groom refused to speak for himself, "I said...", we must consider that it took an elevated effort on the part of the flight attendant to get these two to move. 




"They said that we were being disorderly and a hazard to the rest of the flight, to the safety of the other customers," said Hohl. 

United Airlines claims they actually tried to sit in an upgraded seat "repeatedly" and they "wouldn't follow crew instructions."

When people do not follow simple early instructions, psychologically, it is a risk for all. This is something society has long established for civility. 

If you repeatedly have minor traffic violations, you could lose your license as a "habitual offender."  It means you pose a risk because you do not follow rules/laws.

When people immigrate to a new country, they do so lawfully to show the country that they are law abiders.  (Often, they are leaving countries because of lawlessness). 



The airline provided this statement on Saturday:

"We’re disappointed anytime a customer has an experience that doesn’t measure up to their expectations. These passengers repeatedly attempted to sit in upgraded seating which they did not purchase and they would not follow crew instructions to return to their assigned seats. We’ve been in touch with them and have rebooked them on flights tomorrow."

The bride and groom were rebooked for another flight the next morning, but Hohl said they won't be flying United again and described the whole situation as "quite strange."

“I think customer service and the airlines has gone real downhill,” said Hohl. "The way United Airlines handled this was really absurb.” 

At some point, I expected a detail from them, though we do not know how the journalist presented this. 

Analysis Conclusion:

After taking a black eye for its recent removal of a 69 year old passenger, this one goes to the Airline:

This man is not telling the truth and likely were unruly, unsettling and were trying to jump to seats they had not paid for.  

18 comments:

John mcgowan said...

OT:

Search for Facebook Live killer expands to nearby states as ex-girlfriend breaks silence

Snipped:

Stephens, who worked with children and teens at a behavioral health agency in northeastern Ohio, blamed an ex-girlfriend, Joy Lane, for his violent behavior. In a Facebook Live rant, he said that she was the cause of him “snapping,” after they broke up.

On Monday morning, Lane sent a text to CBS News, explaining that Stephens was a “nice guy,” while offering condolences to the victim’s family.

“We had been in a relationship for several years. I am sorry that all of this has happened. My heart & prayers goes out to the family members of the victim(s). Steve really is a nice guy…he is generous with everyone he knows. He was kind and loving to me and my children. This is a very difficult time for me and my family Please respect our privacy at this time.”

BBM

http://www.crimeonline.com/2017/04/17/search-for-facebook-live-killer-expands-to-nearby-states-as-ex-girlfriend-breaks-silence/

Anonymous said...

Timing is suspect. Provoking an incident for headlines and freebies?

Anonymous said...

She dont say why they not a couple no more. Nic guy & generous & kind & loving but broke up. Missing info for real.

Anonymous said...

INDIANA. USA

Ten tons of drugs, 11 1/2 years in prison for Indy pastor

Tim Evans, and Mark Alesia IndyStar
Updated 35 minutes ago
ST. LOUIS —

ima.grandma said...

Off topic: Colton Clark 9 year old

http://kfor.com/2017/04/17/trial-for-couple-charged-with-murder-of-missing-oklahoma-boy-to-be-moved/

Katprint said...

I think it is probably true that they tried repeatedly to sit in empty seats that were more comfortable (more legroom -- like bulkhead seats or emergency aisle seats) than their assigned seats. However, assuming United's version of events is true, United's response of insisting that they return to their less comfortable seats and leave the more comfortable seats *empty* solely because they had not paid for the "upgraded" seats reflects poor customer service on United's part. The subtext is, we want you to suffer unnecessarily so that you will pay for an upgrade next time resulting in bigger profits for United.

Further, United's use of an Air Marshal to remove them from the plane under these circumstances was inappropriate; sitting in a more comfortable seat is not a crime. United lets people sit in those particular seats all the time; it is unclear why allowing this couple to sit in those seats would have been dangerous. The couple's story and United's story are generally the same except the couple says they "complied" with the crew's instructions to return to their original seats and United says they did not. United recently demonstrated its willingness to falsely claim a passenger was being "disruptive and belligerent." I would love to hear from the Air Marshal which set of seats he removed them from ie whether or not they had returned to their assigned seats as instructed.

Anonymous said...

I thought someone was sleeping in their seats and thats why they moved.

Esme Phe said...

They decided to disobey the rules to get attention. Selfish people.

Esme Phe said...

“Steve really is a nice guy…he is generous with everyone he knows. He was kind and loving to me and my children”

Really is a nice guy. Is generous with everyone he knows. NTP?

He was kind and loving to me and my children. Past tense.

Did he stop being kind and loving to her and children?

People don't just snap. They are tightly wound before it happens. I think his ex girlfriend knew he was potentially dangerous. He might have told her what he planned to do.

Esme Phe said...

I realize that past tense is expected with a break-up. However, it seems odd to me that she highlights how nice he is, but not nice enough to still be kind and loving to her and her children? Was it such a bad breakup that she requested no contact?

Peter Hyatt said...

a "really nice guy" could be anything. It could be from:

The author's experience of not knowing someone genuine, to her own reference point, to others not considering him nice and on to so much else. We would need a greater context (the overall) and the lesser (the sentences around this) to learn why.

There is weakness which is appropriate and weakness which is inappropriate.



Anonymous;

Anonymous Anonymous said...
I thought someone was sleeping in their seats and thats why they moved.

April 17, 2017 at 1:15 PM Delete


Anonymous, I consider this to be a good and reasonable guess. Also, I wondered if

*they did not want to sit with someone since other seats were open;

the man in the seat had a middle seat.

We have a statement in training we use where the subject wrote, "he complied" and I explored the use of "complied": he was not trying to impress, he was telling the truth!

He pushed and pushed and finally threatened and the person "complied" with his coercion.

I think these two were quite the handful and I wondered if they had been drinking as well.

The narrative is condemn the airline after the video and we've had two deceptive "pile ons" seeking, perhaps, to cash in on the recent bad publicity.

b said...

“We were simply in an economy row a few rows above our economy seat.” He said above not ahead or forward. So he knew the seats were in a different class. Not sure if that means he is lying or not?

John mcgowan said...

Jenelle Evans: Hey, I Was Assaulted by an Airline, Too!

Snipped:

Although this is a Tweet, we can follow her pronouns.

"After letting the manager know at @AmericanAir I was rudely treated. Was assaulted at the airport. Tried to grab my phone out of my hands!"

"I was rudely treated"

On it's form this is likely true, but, by whom was she "rudely treated"? And what is "rudely treated"

"Was assaulted at the airport"

This not only lacks commitment with the dropped pronoun, Psychologically removing herself. It is also in the passive voice. Being "assaulted" (whatever that means), is up close and personal and we should expect her to own her words. Whom "assaulted" her?

Tried to grab my phone out of my hands!"

Again Who?

It's hard to know exactly what she means here because Jenelle isn't the best at communicating -- was the phone thing the assault here? Was being "rudely treated" the assault? Was she actually assaulted?

Considering her criminal record, you'd think she'd be a little clearer on this point.

American Airlines responded to her tweet, telling her "Your comments concern us, Jenelle. Please DM us with your record locator and details."

We assume she did DM them, because we haven't heard anything else about the situation, and she even deleted the original message.

But someone did tell her "Sounds like you were on United Airlines" and she responded with "Lmao for real... people need to stop the madness!", and that exchange is still up.

OK, now look, we don't want to say that Jenelle could be lying for attention ...

But her followers are more than willing to say so.

When one of her less assuming fans told Jenelle to let everyone know how things turn out, another replied "What happened is that she lied. She lies about everything."

Another theorized "Jenelle just needs to make sure she has income after MTV fires her so this will be her new job of suing companies!"

"She does this same exact thing every single time she flies," one person wrote. "By the way it's karma because she treats everyone badly."

If Jenelle really was assaulted at the airport, then we feel for her and hope that she gets justice or acknowledgement or whatever it is she wants from this.

And we'll just leave it at that.

Do i hear a "Band Wagon"? All aboard. ;)

https://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2017/04/jenelle-evans-hey-i-was-assaulted-by-an-airline-too/

Habundia said...

I came upon this article
https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/35057500/it-s-crushed-me-teen-parents-dont-know-where-newborn-is-after-being-discharged-from-hospital/#page1
Children having babies........It's often not a good thing.....I fear for this baby if this is how problems are dealed with by these parents.

Anonymous said...

Whoa.. what a response. Thanks crimeblog. Advice appreciated and so much info on youtubes that I didnt know about.

Sascha Stange said...

Well, it would be unfair to the people that paid for that class and the better service. (Same goes for the use of the bc washroom.)

I have now seen it twice how people tried to sit in business class without the right ticket. The attendants for that class have a seating list and spot immediately if someone has taken a seat they shouldn't have.

In both cases it took a longer exchange till the economy class passengers left for their assigned seats. In the second case the passenger snuck back in after service had concluded and the lights were dimmed. The crew probably spotted it but let it slip, tough.

Anonymous said...

Theres just not enough room on those flying chicken coops to be comfortable. Shoulder to shoulder and no roaming room.

BallBounces said...

No one is allowed to lie on the seats prior to take-off. Everyone must be sitting, seat belt on, chair in upright position. Their story fails from the get-go.

"asked if they could get an upgrade". Doesn't mention they offered to pay for it. So, they were trying for a free upgrade. They weren't aiming for first class, just economy-plus.