Claxon said:
Why don't you sue him then? Pretty much have sued everyone else. What's' one more?
Thanks to USAPA, both Sully and Skiles were in court since only months after the "miracle on the Hudson" might translate into a miracle in court. The judge and the jury agreed their celebrity status had no place in the courtroom. That very jury found USAPA guilty of the DFR. They saw right through your sham motives.
Sidebar conversation during Skiles' testimony which the jury could not hear was very telling:
Sidebar
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Seham, on this issue of
Mr. Skiles' celebrity status I want to give you the chance to
explain why that is relevant to this case.
MR. SEHAM: Okay. It's not about his celebrity
status. He's an individual who directly benefitted from
USAPA's array of service. Their contention is that this union
is a one trick pony, that it was only ever about one issue. If
that is no longer a contention of the plaintiffs, then we'd
have no interest in pursuing this kind of testimony. But, in
fact, USAPA is about providing a better service, and that
provision of the better service is in the interests of the
entire bargaining unit, which is directly relevant to the
concept of a DFR, that this union was needed to provide service
to this bargaining unit that it could not, was not, would never
get from ALPA.
THE COURT: All right. I've given you the chance to
make your record. You've given me no reason why the reference
to the events of the crash in the Hudson River is relevant to
this case, and I will make my record that it is irrelevant, it
is highly distracting, it is an indirect attempt to appeal to
emotion, and I exclude it for those reasons under 403 in a very
clear way.