• ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Jesus christ, man. The article literally says he made the Steward show the pictures on his phone. Did you fail reading comprehension back in grade school?

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Lawyers for the family suggested that the flight attendant removed the phone and erased images of the girl before letting her father see his iPhone photos.

      That does not say the phone was most definitely his in any way, shape, or form.

      For all you know the father demanded to look at his phone, he let him, the father found nothing and claimed he must’ve taken the phone back and deleted the photos. That does not prove fucking shit, it’s one sides story that is so far not backed up by any evidence.

      • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        You wanted the quote from the article. I gave you the quote from the article. Don’t go claiming “well the article might not be true” yadda yadda yadda. Don’t go changing the argument to something else after I showed you that you were wrong, dumbass.

        • Deceptichum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, you gave me a quote that doesn’t back-up your claim.

          If you read the article, it seems the phone was most definitely the flight attendants.

          If you read the article, the only link between the phone in the seat and the one in the attendants position is the suggestion of a third party lawyer.

          No where is a definitive claim laid out that they are the same phone.

          Is it so hard for you people to stop trying to ruin innocent people’s lives with your witch hunt?

          • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The guys phone was taped to the seat, thats not even being questioned

            The only thing in question is if there were photos on the phone that was taped to the seat, a phone which he said belongs to him.

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Who do you expect to question it?

              Who else has the journalist spoken to other than comments from the family’s lawyer?

              • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                The guy being accused.

                If it wasnt his phone, he would immediately clear himself by saying “hey boss, my phone is right here in my hand, the kid is lying about that being my phone, mine was never in that bathroom.”

                The phone was, as reported by the FBI, given back to the man being accused before they asked him to let them look at the photo gallery.

                If it wasnt his phone, they wouldnt have given it to him in the first place. Very easy way to clear his name, when the girl accused him on the plane.

                • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  How do you know that’s not what happened?!

                  You are literally taking one sides story at face value and using the lack of something being reported as damning evidence.

                  And it was not reported by the fucking FBI, it was the family that said the FBI cleared him. The FBI has announced nothing and you believe they have because you’re trying to justify blaming an innocent person.

                  • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    … Because the guy was removed from working, and american airlines wouldnt let people openly think they hired a pedophile if they immediately proved he wasnt a pedophile on the plane?

                    Think that through for a second dude, why would the company risk their name being dragged through the mud in a lawsuit if, while the plane was literally still in the air, multiple eye witnesses could confirm and corroberate that the accused employee immediately showed that his phone had not entered the bathroom?