Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Hangar Talk
Man In Sagging Pants Arrested >

Man In Sagging Pants Arrested

Search

Notices
Hangar Talk For non-aviation-related discussion and aviation threads that don't belong elsewhere

Man In Sagging Pants Arrested

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-16-2011 | 07:41 PM
  #1  
vagabond's Avatar
Thread Starter
Administrator
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 8,025
Likes: 0
From: C-172
Default Man In Sagging Pants Arrested

Say, I was in SFO on Wednesday, but I missed this little spectacle!

From San Francisco Chronicle:

A dispute that began after a passenger refused to pull up his sagging pants led to his arrest and removal from a plane at San Francisco International Airport on Wednesday, police said. Deshon Marman, 20, a University of New Mexico football player who was in the city to attend the funeral of a close friend, former Lincoln High School standout David Henderson, was being held at San Mateo County Jail on suspicion of trespassing, battery and resisting arrest.

Marman grew up a block from Henderson in the Bayview neighborhood, and the two were teammates at Lincoln High School and City College of San Francisco before they transferred to separate four-year universities.

Henderson was shot May 26 on Kirkwood Avenue and died 11 days later.

On Wednesday, San Francisco police got a call about 9 a.m. that someone was exposing himself outside a US Airways gate, Sgt. Michael Rodriguez said.

An airline employee spotted Marman before he boarded Flight 488, bound for Albuquerque, and complained that Marman's pants "were below his buttocks but above the knees, and that much of his boxer shorts were exposed," Rodriguez said.

The employee asked Marman to pull up his pants before he boarded the plane, but he refused, Rodriguez said. Marman allegedly repeated his refusal after taking his seat on the plane.

"At that point he was asked to leave the plane," Rodriguez said. "It took 15 to 20 minutes of talking to get him to leave the plane, and he was arrested for trespassing." Marman allegedly resisted officers as he was being led away.

Marman's mother, Donna Doyle, said he was still in an emotionally raw state after attending Henderson's funeral Tuesday, where he spoke of his intention to honor his friend's memory by making it to the NFL.

Doyle said she had encouraged her son to leave soon after the funeral.
"I didn't want him to stay here in the city because of what happened to David," Doyle said. "A lot of it is jealousy. These kids are trying to make it, they're going off to college and other people get jealous."

She added that her son was targeted at the airport "because of the way he looks - young black man with dreads and baggy pants. But he's a good kid trying to make it, and he's going through a lot. And then this happens."

Valerie Wunder, a spokeswoman for US Airways, said the airline's dress code forbids "indecent exposure or inappropriate" attire.
Marman was being held on $11,000 bail.
Reply
Old 06-16-2011 | 08:04 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: Skeptical
Default

He was not arrested because of "the way he looks," he was arrested because of the way he acts.

Time to take some responsibility for the way you raised your son, Mom. But then again I guess responsibility wasn't a lesson he learned in the first place!
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 06:51 AM
  #3  
detpilot's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,262
Likes: 0
From: Trying not to crash
Default

From the link on the right of the article (Emphasis mine):

Jake Tommerup, 57, of Phoenix, who was aboard flight 488, said he had been annoyed by the hour-and-a-half delay. But he also said he was stunned by US Airways' reaction to what, in Tommerup's mind, amounted to little more than a questionable fashion choice.

"When I get on a plane and see a 13-year-old girl with her whale tail" - exposed G-string underwear - "and fat old white guys with plumber's crack sitting down, and middle-aged ladies in halter tops and tons of cleavage - if you're not going to kick those people off the plane or ask them to cover up, then let's admit the hypocrisy."
Not saying the gentleman didn't have attitude issues, but this guy makes a good point.
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 07:13 AM
  #4  
USMCFLYR's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
Default

What is next - a national uniform?
This fashion police stuff goes both ways (e.g. the lady kicked-off SWA for the 'sexy' outfit).
Legislating fashion is going to be a slippery slope.

USMCFLYR
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 08:13 AM
  #5  
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,625
Likes: 0
From: Pilot
Default

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
What is next - a national uniform?
This fashion police stuff goes both ways (e.g. the lady kicked-off SWA for the 'sexy' outfit).
Legislating fashion is going to be a slippery slope.

USMCFLYR
I think anytime you are intentionally showing your underwear in public, be it male or female, it is not unreasonable to ask them to cover up.
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 08:31 AM
  #6  
USMCFLYR's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
Default

Originally Posted by Red Forman
I think anytime you are intentionally showing your underwear in public, be it male or female, it is not unreasonable to ask them to cover up.
We need to remind Madonna of that next time then
Remember when it became fashionable to wear your underwear (ladies that is) as OUTERWEAR?

Also - it certainly seems to be in fashion now to wear shirts which expose the bra straps. No attempt even to cover them up. I'm no fashionista, but it seems that this is heading down a dangerous road - especially if we start talking about LEGAL consequences. A private industry or employer (which the airline is) ought to have the right to dictate dress codes, but arresting someone (not just denying thiem service - remeber the No Shirt/No Shoes/No Service signs...) for wearing the pants hanging down and exposing boxers soulds like we might be headed for the same type of society that stones women to death for not covering their face (yes - a purposeful exaggeration ). And I don't want that!

This type of *fashion* is certainly not favored by me personally. I think it is rude, crude, and ill-mannered - but then I get to have my opinion about such dress without having someone arrested for it. Of course this person's behavior after the fact was more than likely the cause for his actual arrest than his attire.

USMCFLYR
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 10:49 AM
  #7  
airline NooB's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Default

There is no contitutional "right" not to be offended.

Folks need to learn to cope rather than expend so much time and effort SEEKING out things to ***** about.

We've gone from a nation of resiliance where nearly any transgresion would roll off our backs like water off a duck and we'd stay focused....to now if someone does something to offend ANYONE...we strap-on our capes and run to the rescu of their delicate sensibilities. Completely forgetting about whatever it was we were suppused to be doing.

Sounds like we lack real problems so we have to go looking for a "cause" to advocate so that we can feel useful.

Tell the complaining passenger: If it aint illegal, then its LEGAL! Sit down. Shut up. Strap in. Hold on.
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 11:37 AM
  #8  
detpilot's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,262
Likes: 0
From: Trying not to crash
Default

Originally Posted by airline NooB
There is no contitutional "right" not to be offended.

Folks need to learn to cope rather than expend so much time and effort SEEKING out things to ***** about.

We've gone from a nation of resiliance where nearly any transgresion would roll off our backs like water off a duck and we'd stay focused....to now if someone does something to offend ANYONE...we strap-on our capes and run to the rescu of their delicate sensibilities. Completely forgetting about whatever it was we were suppused to be doing.

Sounds like we lack real problems so we have to go looking for a "cause" to advocate so that we can feel useful.

Tell the complaining passenger: If it aint illegal, then its LEGAL! Sit down. Shut up. Strap in. Hold on.
THIS. +1

If it's against the law to show underwear, then apply it universally. If not, then suck it up... comment on how stupid you feel a fashion choice is, and move on with your day.
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 01:12 PM
  #9  
smugglersblues's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Default

The airline, as a private enterprise, has the right to enforce a dress code. Slipery slope my foot !
Reply
Old 06-17-2011 | 01:27 PM
  #10  
SenecaII's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
From: Piper passenger
Default

Dont suppose the other person was gunned down because of gang activity. If these young kids knew the real origins of this fashion style they wouldn't be so quick to wear their pants around their knees, exposing their boxers. This so called "fashion Statment" started in our prison systems and the boys that wore their drawers low with their boxers exposed did so to let the population know they were submissive and easily available for a little (well you get the idea). As a private enterprise an airline has every right to ask him to cover up his underwear, when it offends other paying customers. His refusal to leave the plane is why he was arrested, its called "Trespassing on Private property." Saying he has the right to wear them that way is the same mindset that allowed our air-travel system to become greyhound. Look at the way air-travelers dressed 30 years ago. You guys really want aviation to reclaim some of its former respect, then I say eliminating this kind of garbage is one small way to start. YMMV
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
WeaselBoy
Major
94
07-29-2009 09:24 PM
Sir James
Major
4
02-17-2006 01:29 PM
Gordon C
Hangar Talk
2
12-04-2005 06:12 PM
Delta102
Hangar Talk
1
11-18-2005 08:30 AM
Sir James
Hangar Talk
0
08-04-2005 11:18 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices