Air Cocaine story airs on Netflix

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
No. But in PUJ Private Terminal they have the same X Ray machine that everything goes through. Included whats in your pocket. The CDs I was playing on the plane to Spain. So Pablo told me about not having them..................
Then it would seem the fault/corruption of the system was at the X-Ray machine operator that failed to notice cocaine in every bag before they were loaded on the plane, no?

While a pilot may have ultimate authority, if the pilot is not notified that cocaine is in every bag after being X-ray checked, why would they do anything but fly the plane.
 

Ecoman1949

Born to Ride.
Oct 17, 2015
3,525
1,891
113
gentlemanly rebuttal moneyman! de Manolo is one of the reasons I log onto this forum.
Agreed. DR1 is an interesting mix of diverse viewpoints. Part of the reason I keep posting. All forums have their wags and Hijo wears that mantel well. The moderator’s jobs and the posts would be boring without characters like him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CristoRey and Big

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
Actually YES THEY ARE ! They have to perform "due diligence" !
Carrying one Passenger and not minding about "his" 26" Suitcases makes them at least accomplices at best.
Even when you board a Big Plane, very often the Pilot or at least the Co Pilot is behind the flight assistant "screening" who (or what) goes on board.
Where are the regulations on this? That a pilot must inspect bags already through X-Ray machines and on the plane?
 

SKY

Gold
Apr 11, 2004
15,027
5,143
113
Then it would seem the fault/corruption of the system was at the X-Ray machine operator that failed to notice cocaine in every bag before they were loaded on the plane, no?

While a pilot may have ultimate authority, if the pilot is not notified that cocaine is in every bag after being X-ray checked, why would they do anything but fly the plane.
You have no clue about this. The drugs were smuggled on that plane with the pilots help. No chance it was put on the plane from a regular airport............Stick to "Overstay" .............
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
You have no clue about this. The drugs were smuggled on that plane with the pilots help. No chance it was put on the plane from a regular airport............Stick to "Overstay" .............
And nobody has answered the question I asked about if the bags are already on the plane and have been through X-Ray machines, why would the pilots have the right to open them.
 

SKY

Gold
Apr 11, 2004
15,027
5,143
113
And nobody has answered the question I asked about if the bags are already on the plane and have been through X-Ray machines, why would the pilots have the right to open them.
They NEVER went through ANY X-Ray machine. They were smuggled on that plane somewhere else with help of those two pilots..........No airport in the World would miss the drugs on any X-Ray machine or even loading by hand. This was a hundreds of millions of Dollars operation and the pilots were in on it....................
 
  • Like
Reactions: CristoRey

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
They NEVER went through ANY X-Ray machine. They were smuggled on that plane somewhere else with help of those two pilots..........No airport in the World would miss the drugs on any X-Ray machine or even loading by hand. This was a hundreds of millions of Dollars operation and the pilots were in on it....................
Then how was that lack of X-ray scanning allowed to happen?

Once again, a little simpler this time, the bags are already on the plane. How they arrived there is not the pilots' business.
What right do the pilots have to open them?
 

SKY

Gold
Apr 11, 2004
15,027
5,143
113
Then how was that lack of X-ray scanning allowed to happen?

Once again, a little simpler this time, the bags are already on the plane. How they arrived there is not the pilots' business.
What right do the pilots have to open them?
You just don't get it. This plane made an unauthorized landing in a place OTHER than any airport and the drugs were put on it. Planes can land on long strips of grass, load up, and take off again in the middle of the night somewhere............These pilots were top notch.............And they were certainly in on this whole operation....I am done here. You think they went like a tourist through an airport with 26 suitcases filled with drugs just keep posting...........
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
They NEVER went through ANY X-Ray machine. They were smuggled on that plane somewhere else with help of those two pilots..........No airport in the World would miss the drugs on any X-Ray machine or even loading by hand. This was a hundreds of millions of Dollars operation and the pilots were in on it....................

And that connection to the pilots was never proven to the satisfaction of French courts since their conviction was overturned and the pilots acquitted.
Free to roam around France at will. Different approaches apply in the DR, of course, to such cases.

You made assumptions that were never proven.
 

slowmo

Well-known member
Aug 1, 2016
1,236
872
113
I assumed that since the pilot reported the drugs to the authorities, he was likely not in on the operation.
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
Lack of direct proof is why the pilots were ultimately acquitted in France

As the series shows, the investigation by Christine Saunier-Ruellan focused on why three flights were flown with the same pilots and the same passenger. On the March 2013 flight that resulted in the pilots’ arrest, the manager and stewardess were told that the client did not need her services—

Through intercepting the pilots’ devices, she found what she thought were suspicious messages sent by the pilots, from “nature of cargo confirmed” and “we did what we had to do.” Saunier-Ruellan also discovered Internet searches on Fauret’s personal computer that were about the drug trafficking situation in Ecuador and the penalties.

She questioned if these were all signs that the pilots knew that cocaine was in the 26 suitcases, but no definitive link could be made between the messages and behaviors and the luggage. “The appeals court considered these arguments solid enough to overturn the conviction,” says Olivier Bouchara, Cocaine Air co-director.

At one point, she even went so far as to bug former President Nicolas Sarkozy’s phone because he had flown that airline in the past. But he had nothing to do with the plane full of cocaine and appears in Cocaine Air to set the record straight on any misconceptions.

“In the case of the two pilots, she didn’t have direct proof,” Bouchara says. “What she had were indications, or circumstantial evidence.”
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
I assumed that since the pilot reported the drugs to the authorities, he was likely not in on the operation.
Yeah, I don't think there was any reporting of cocaine by the pilots.... But I could have missed that little detail.


According to the AeroTime report dated July 9, 2021, the court dismissed charges after a convicted intermediary admitted the pilots had been "scammed."
Why would a convicted intermediary say the pilots were scammed?
 

JD Jones

Moderator:North Coast,Santo Domingo,SW Coast,Covid
Jan 7, 2016
14,997
11,104
113
Lack of direct proof is why the pilots were ultimately acquitted in France



The investigation by Christine Saunier-Ruellan focused on why three flights were flown with the same pilots and the same passenger. On the March 2013 flight that resulted in the pilots’ arrest, the manager and stewardess were told that the client did not need her services—

Through intercepting the pilots’ devices, she found what she thought were suspicious messages sent by the pilots, from “nature of cargo confirmed” and “we did what we had to do.” Saunier-Ruellan also discovered Internet searches on Fauret’s personal computer that were about the drug trafficking situation in Ecuador and the penalties.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me three times, and nobody is going to believe you.
 

El Hijo de Manolo

It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous!
Dec 10, 2021
5,594
3,727
113
Dominican Republic
I agree my post wasn’t scintillating but needed to add weight to the fact that pilots do have the ultimate authority to decide what goes on their aircraft. You and I have on and off days posting on DR1. I’ve always enjoyed your tongue in cheek superlatives but labeling my post the worst in the history of man? I don’t agree. I think many posts in the overstay thread come close to that. Haven’t heard much from you lately. I hope all is well with you. Tonight I’m dining with friends. Wish you were there to break bread with me and enjoy the banter. Your perspective and sense of humour would be welcome at the table.
Well I'm not exactly turning water into wine, but I live like I'm leaving
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ecoman1949

El Hijo de Manolo

It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous!
Dec 10, 2021
5,594
3,727
113
Dominican Republic
Couple of observations on the Netflix French drug smuggling foray. France and the French are no longer of the old guard. The only interesting aspect of their saga that remains could possibly be whether Brigite Macron is truly a man. The evidence of their historical collapse can be seen in the failed attempt to jail Marine le Pen, which as we know was thrwarted by outside influences. There's simply no drama or intrigue in a couple older, grey haired French airline pilots smuggling cocaine, sipping on a 2010 Bordeaux reminiscing on the yesteryears of Francios Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac. Far more interesting and fun was Tom Cruise's American Made (Barry Seal/Pablo Escobar).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,733
7,302
113
The investigation by Christine Saunier-Ruellan focused on why three flights were flown with the same pilots and the same passenger. On the March 2013 flight that resulted in the pilots’ arrest, the manager and stewardess were told that the client did not need her services—

Through intercepting the pilots’ devices, she found what she thought were suspicious messages sent by the pilots, from “nature of cargo confirmed” and “we did what we had to do.” Saunier-Ruellan also discovered Internet searches on Fauret’s personal computer that were about the drug trafficking situation in Ecuador and the penalties.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me three times, and nobody is going to believe you.
And all circumstancial evidence, resulting in ultimate acquittal for the pilots. Law is not about belief in developed nations. It is about proof.
 

keepcoming

Moderator - Living & General Stuff
May 25, 2011
6,556
4,421
113
And nobody has answered the question I asked about if the bags are already on the plane and have been through X-Ray machines, why would the pilots have the right to open them.
Luggage on private flights is supposed to be screened but screening is not always an x-ray machine. It can also be a manual screening; it all depends on the facility/FBO. And the screening/check can be done by the pilot but mostly it is done by security officers. I worked several private flights out of Teterboro once I stopped working for a commercial airline. Facilites/FBO's handle screening differently, just depends on where you are. And yes, a pilot can request to check the contents of a passenger's luggage if he/she feels the need to.
 

CristoRey

Welcome To Wonderland
Apr 1, 2014
13,844
10,005
113
And that connection to the pilots was never proven to the satisfaction of French courts since their conviction was overturned and the pilots acquitted.
Free to roam around France at will. Different approaches apply in the DR, of course, to such cases.

You made assumptions that were never proven.
Windy defending French drugs traffickers?
Noted.