Similar to the "Korean Princess on the Peanut" bruhaha.

Very civilized.

WIederling wrote:

Similar to the "Korean Princess on the Peanut" bruhaha.

Very civilized.

Whatever peanut you might call, that one did damage. They should know better and manage expectations since although un-merited, this kind of people can be really annoying and cause issues pretty easily.

Jomar777 wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Similar to the "Korean Princess on the Peanut" bruhaha.

Very civilized.

Whatever peanut you might call, that one did damage. They should know better and manage expectations since although un-merited, this kind of people can be really annoying and cause issues pretty easily.

I agree, definitely not worth the hassle! But I don't think the public would side with the passenger, I rather think that they would side with the crew.

this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nut_rage_incident

siding with crew? sure, in both cases.

Jomar777 wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Similar to the "Korean Princess on the Peanut" bruhaha.

Very civilized.

Whatever peanut you might call, that one did damage. They should know better and manage expectations since although un-merited, this kind of people can be really annoying and cause issues pretty easily.

How do you "manage expectations" when the passenger is being totally unreasonable ? Demanding an on board upgrade to an already occupied seat is not reasonable behaviour, the passenger was the daughter of a former deputy minister of justice, exceedingly unlikely to be poorly educated, and couldn't claim to be on her first flight as she was returning home to Argentina. Even worse her father indulged the "little princess" by twisting arms and getting the crew detained

Why would the family member of an Argentine Government Minister expect a free upgrade on a foreign airline to Argentina ? Did the "Princess" daughter have any status on AF ? If this was Aerolinias Argentinas one might expect such things to happen. If the flight had been from EZE to CDG the local AF staff at EZE has control and probably could have done it but this flight was from Paris to Buenos Aires.

The treatment of the Air France crew in Argentina stinks and paints Argentina in negative ways.

Why was my post removed ? and keeping members misinformed ?

I provided a link & the quotes stating this was due to the police doing their job after the passenger filed charges with Airport Police on grounds that a corpulent Frenchman in the middle seat had been sleeping into her space & then playing with himself ?
And thus AF's FAs not solving the problem satisfactorily ?

The facts are all over the Argentinian press, Clarin & La Nación are the country's two most professional newspapers.

Run them through Google translate for yourself :
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/tripulacion-vuelo-air-france-denuncia-vivido-calvario-buenos-aires_0_Bkj9eqvkM.html
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/justicia-argentina-niega-maltratado-tripulantes-air-france_0_Hkux1hv1G.html
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/2081943-tripulantes-de-air-france-denuncian-haber-vivido-un-calvario-en-buenos-aires

DWC wrote:

Why was my post removed ? and keeping members misinformed ?

I provided a link & the quotes stating this was due to the police doing their job after the passenger filed charges with Airport Police on grounds that a corpulent Frenchman in the middle seat had been sleeping into her space & then playing with himself ?
And thus AF's FAs not solving the problem satisfactorily ?

The facts are all over the Argentinian press, Clarin & La Nación are the country's two most professional newspapers.

Run them through Google translate for yourself :
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/tripulacion-vuelo-air-france-denuncia-vivido-calvario-buenos-aires_0_Bkj9eqvkM.html
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/justicia-argentina-niega-maltratado-tripulantes-air-france_0_Hkux1hv1G.html
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/2081943-tripulantes-de-air-france-denuncian-haber-vivido-un-calvario-en-buenos-aires

Please make sure that all posts are in English, as required by forum rules. Other languages may be used provided there is a correct translation provided into English.

✈️ atcsundevil

atcsundevil wrote:

Please make sure that all posts are in English, as required by forum rules. Other languages may be used provided there is a correct translation provided into English.✈️ atcsundevil

I could accept that in principle, but as admin to several professional forums myself, I deem you made a bad moderation decision :
1. Title is MISLEADING per INACURATE SOURCE so conversation got SKEWED
2. There was no english source available
3. I'm not paid by you guys to do elementary crosschecking, but I did & instead of providing just the link, I summed it up in GOOD ENGLISH & took the liberty to add the important lines in Spanish so non-spanish speakers could see it directly ( in an otherwise long article ) so they could run it on Translate if they so wished
4. By removing it you deleted precious information & kept the community MISINFORMED.
5. Had I not checked that, misinformation would have stayed, a censorship common with US media btw.

I ask you not to delete this.

First of all, I didn't make the deletion, I merely explained it.

DWC wrote:

1. Title is MISLEADING per INACURATE SOURCE so conversation got SKEWED

I have only seen one source in a language I can read, which supports the current title. If and when something which contradicts the current title becomes available in a language the rest of us can read, then it will be changed. I am not going to change the title of a user's post simply because one user demands it. We need evidence. Changing it without evidence would make us irresponsible.

DWC wrote:

2. There was no english source available

From the forum rules:

As this is an international website, messages must be written in English, and must be easy to read.

If there's no English source available, then it should only be used if a translation is provided, not just a summary.

DWC wrote:

3. I'm not paid by you guys to do elementary crosschecking, but I did & instead of providing just the link, I summed it up in GOOD ENGLISH & took the liberty to add the important lines in Spanish so non-spanish speakers could see it directly ( in an otherwise long article ) so they could run it on Translate if they so wished

And we're not paid either, so that's a moot point. You're posting here on your own volition, which means that creating a researched post within the framework of our forum rules is indeed your job. 75% of your post was in Spanish, which does not meet that criteria.

DWC wrote:

4. By removing it you deleted precious information & kept the community MISINFORMED.

You are free to repost provided you comply with the rules. We aren't keeping anyone misinformed, but a post almost entirely in Spanish doesn't do the majority of the users here any favors.

DWC wrote:

5. Had I not checked that, misinformation would have stayed, a censorship common with US media btw.

Your post was removed by a moderator on the opposite side of the world from the US. I am from the US, and I haven't deleted either of your follow-up posts, so I'm not so sure this statement holds water. We don't censor anyone, but when you create an account, you agree to follow our rules.

✈️ atcsundevil

Please accept all my apologies if it is not you who took the decision.

But
1. I translated, summed-up, rephrased better & shorter ALL the relevant information in PLAIN GOOD ENGLISH
2. I only added the relevant 5 lines in Spanish necessary to support that, written in a very longish & convoluted style
( if deleted posts can be accessed by mods ask anyone to confirm all this )
3. I gave you one source, now you have 3, notmy fault if they are not in English.
4. I demanded nothing, only proved the fact & stated title should be changed
5. I do think I followed the rules, been reading a.net for some 6 years.
6. If I didn't choose to repost, the community would still be kept misinformed.

atcsundevil wrote:

From the forum rules:

As this is an international website, messages must be written in English, and must be easy to read.

If there's no English source available, then it should only be used if a translation is provided, not just a summary.

message (body) != link to sourced information.

Quite often links pointing to non-english content were posted here.
Oftentime "english" information comes up as mistranslation/misrepresentation.
Thus original source must be preferred.
With freely available translation tools that imho is no longer an issue anyway.

A completely different thing would be presented by poster making their commentary in a different language.
The English language world of news is just a keyhole view with filters added.

DWC wrote:

Why was my post removed ? and keeping members misinformed ?

I provided a link & the quotes stating this was due to the police doing their job after the passenger filed charges with Airport Police on grounds that a corpulent Frenchman in the middle seat had been sleeping into her space & then playing with himself ?
And thus AF's FAs not solving the problem satisfactorily ?

The facts are all over the Argentinian press, Clarin & La Nación are the country's two most professional newspapers.

Run them through Google translate for yourself :
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/tripulacion-vuelo-air-france-denuncia-vivido-calvario-buenos-aires_0_Bkj9eqvkM.html
https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/justicia-argentina-niega-maltratado-tripulantes-air-france_0_Hkux1hv1G.html
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/2081943-tripulantes-de-air-france-denuncian-haber-vivido-un-calvario-en-buenos-aires

now I can’t read spanish... but she asked to be moved to a new seat and was moved, why does the crew need to be detained for the actions of another passenger?

Web500sjc wrote:

why does the crew need to be detained for the actions of another passenger?

to be interrogated as witnesses & because AF's FAs did not solve the problem satisfactorily
Customer had filed charges with the police, standard procedure ( whether claim true or not )

luchtzak wrote:

Part of an Air France crew flying between Paris CDG and Buenos Aires was detained for six hours by the airport police upon arrival in Argentina as the daughter of a former Deputy Minister of Justice in Argentina was “very unhappy about her treatment on board“. French cabin crew union SNPNC explains on Facebook.

The long arm of the law was in motion at Buenos Aires: Air France crew detained after passenger complains “not receiving her upgrade”

This incident took place in international airspace, on a French aircraft, that then landed in Argentina.

Whose jurisdiction?
What if the incident was so serious that the aircraft turned around mid-flight and headed back to CDG?

Either way, I look forward to the French Courts seeking the young madamoiselle's extradiction to face justice in a country where her father cannot influence the outcome.

Any possibility of that? What is the legal position?

jfk777 wrote:

...
The treatment of the Air France crew in Argentina stinks and paints Argentina in negative ways.

How is it different from AF employees treating other passengers badly inflight and at CDG? French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel. They are forced to sleep on carpet.

dtw2hyd wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

...
The treatment of the Air France crew in Argentina stinks and paints Argentina in negative ways.

How is it different from AF employees treating other passengers badly inflight and at CDG? French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel. They are forced to sleep on carpet.

Because in the translation I had provided the charges were that the Frenchman had been masturbating & AF's FA failed to comply with solving the lady's woes. So she went to the police airport to press charges & police did their job. Take that to the USA & you'll get a Robocop SWAT response that would scare anyone from scratching his crotch inbound to the USA.
You will not even get onboard to the USA without a transit visa, be thankful France has some decent international airsides.

Anyway, sorry to everyone to have made a little fuss, but I know of too many women who get slandered because either the police do not listen or the facts get distorted, as seems to be the case.

Wow...from What I read it seems that AF crew did not deserve to be treated the way they got treated. I hate so much the fact that "rich" entitled people ask for upgrades just because. If you have that much money then BUY your 1st class seat. I once had a passenger that demanded me to put her in 1st class and I said "if you want to the difference is $478.00 CASH OR CREDIT"? she then laughed and said, that is too expensive.....

Going back to the news....the passenger 1st demanded an upgrade and it seems 1st class was full (to which the crew is not obligated) later the passenger complained about the guy seating next to her, they offered her a new seat and she refused to change seats. Once the airplane landed she went to the police stating that the man seating next to her was masturbating (which she did not tell the crew) part of the crew was detained for 6hrs at the airport and the next day the entire crew was called to court to verify the accusation and the lead flight attendant was locked up for hours without any information or a valid reason and interrogated by the father of the entitled woman... (aka the Minister of Justice) he was released. (BTW the guy "masturbating" was caught and released later without being interrogated)

If I were to be AF.. I would sew them!! and this passenger and her entire family BANNED from ever flying AF.

dtw2hyd wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

...
The treatment of the Air France crew in Argentina stinks and paints Argentina in negative ways.

How is it different from AF employees treating other passengers badly inflight and at CDG? French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel. They are forced to sleep on carpet.

Because even if the masturbating part is true, then you haul that person to the police station, not the crew of the plane. You may invite the crew to clarify some questions that you may have (like whether the complain was made during the flight) but you certainly do not place crew members in isolation cell without any further information.

Otherwise, for having gradually moved from flying BA to Air France (mostly in J) I cannot but disagree with you, crew (again at least in J) is way more pleasant that what I have encountered on most airlines (BA and Lufthansa included, I am not even speaking of US airlines).

dtw2hyd wrote:

How is it different from AF employees treating other passengers badly inflight and at CDG? French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel. They are forced to sleep on carpet.

The visa is given by immigration officials, not AF employees. Are you that ignorant that you are not aware of who issues transit visas or are you just finding a reason to blame AF employees for French immigration policies?

sekant wrote:

Because even if the masturbating part is true, then you haul that person to the police station, not the crew of the plane. You may invite the crew to clarify some questions that you may have (like whether the complain was made during the flight) but you certainly do not place crew members in isolation cell without any further information.

Maybe bad karma by ignoring a complaint from a DYKWIA. How a local authority conducts the investigation is up to them, the crew probably got the book thrown at them because of the DYKWIA factor.

yashk wrote:

The visa is given by immigration officials, not AF employees. Are you that ignorant that you are not aware of who issues transit visas or are you just finding a reason to blame AF employees for French immigration policies?

Just like an innocent Argentine passenger has no control over how Argentine authority conducted this investigation and interrogation. If you cannot accept that, one could argue immigration authorities trying to save money for the airline by rejecting visas. You cannot have it both ways.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Maybe bad karma by ignoring a complaint from a DYKWIA. How a local authority conducts the investigation is up to them, the crew probably got the book thrown at them because of the DYKWIA factor.

Precisely, no one should be dragged to be police station because of customer insatisfaction, thanks for confirming that the way the Argentinian authorities have behaved are not acceptable.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Just like an innocent Argentine passenger has no control over how Argentine authority conducted this investigation and interrogation. If you cannot accept that, one could argue immigration authorities trying to save money for the airline by rejecting visas. You cannot have it both ways.

Methink that you have no clue what you are talking about, to access French territory you need a Schengen visa, the way Schengen visa are and can be issued are regulated very closely by Schengen States, having missed your plane is not a valid reason for issuing a Schengen visa and that applies to all Schengen countries airports.
Btw, you have a hotel airside in the Air France terminal so if you are ready to pay for one on French territory as you sugget, no need to sleep on the carpet.

sekant wrote:

Because even if the masturbating part is true, then you haul that person to the police station, not the crew of the plane. You may invite the crew to clarify some questions that you may have (like whether the complain was made during the flight) but you certainly do not place crew members in isolation cell without any further information.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Just like an innocent Argentine passenger has no control over how Argentine authority conducted this investigation and interrogation.

Innocent Argentine passenger?
Who's father is the same Minister of Justice that subsequently interrogated the AF crew?
And who only "remembered" to mention the masturbation aspect after she had taken legal advice.... from her father.
Ok, so I invented that last bit; but hands up if you think that could be correct.

Why didn't she mention this significant fact on the plane?
Why didn't she take an option to move seats?
Why didn't she just get up and move seats anyway?
Too shy? Too quiet? Too innocent?
Is this the same woman who asked for an upgrade? IMO that takes balls for starters. Or maybe a divine sense of entitlement.

For chrissake, in similar circumstances the average English rose simply asks for a pitcher of iced water.... and throws it over the man sitting next to her.

Something isn't right here, that's for sure.

sekant wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Maybe bad karma by ignoring a complaint from a DYKWIA. How a local authority conducts the investigation is up to them, the crew probably got the book thrown at them because of the DYKWIA factor.

Precisely, no one should be dragged to be police station because of customer insatisfaction, thanks for confirming that the way the Argentinian authorities have behaved are not acceptable.

Maybe you should re-read my statement, Next time a female passenger complains about someone doing a Harvey, don't ignore or say "Ooh la la". Consequences may be severe.

sekant wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Just like an innocent Argentine passenger has no control over how Argentine authority conducted this investigation and interrogation. If you cannot accept that, one could argue immigration authorities trying to save money for the airline by rejecting visas. You cannot have it both ways.

Methink that you have no clue what you are talking about, to access French territory you need a Schengen visa, the way Schengen visa are and can be issued are regulated very closely by Schengen States, having missed your plane is not a valid reason for issuing a Schengen visa and that applies to all Schengen countries airports.
Btw, you have a hotel airside in the Air France terminal so if you are ready to pay for one on French territory as you sugget, no need to sleep on the carpet.

You missed the IRROPS part and went on a tangent, it is the airline's responsibility to provide accommodation within or outside the airport.

dtw2hyd wrote:

sekant wrote:

........

Maybe you should re-read my statement, Next time a female passenger complains about someone doing a Harvey, don't ignore or say "Ooh la la". Consequences may be severe.

sekant wrote:

...............

You missed the IRROPS part and went on a tangent, it is the airline's responsibility to provide accommodation within or outside the airport.

Maybe in both cases narrative and reality do not jibe acceptably?

That "Argentine Princess" story sounds very much like she made up the selfmiliking disturbance.

Air France should

1. Ban her for life
2. Suspend flights to Argentina
3. France should ban all Argentinian aircraft from French airspace.


It's possible #1 could happen....but the other two...I know...a pipe dream

dtw2hyd wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

The treatment of the Air France crew in Argentina stinks and paints Argentina in negative ways.

How is it different from AF employees treating other passengers badly inflight and at CDG? French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel. They are forced to sleep on carpet.

French immigration never gives Indian Passport holders transit visa during IRROPS to stay at a hotel

If that is true, then you have a clear case for discrimination.
Why are they only treating Indian Passport holders this way?
This is DISGRACEFUL !
I shall contact my MEP immediately and get this sorted for you.
Can you provide some additional background? Maybe examples of AF employees treating passengers badly inflight as you claim?

dtw2hyd wrote:

sekant wrote:

Maybe you should re-read my statement, Next time a female passenger complains about someone doing a Harvey, don't ignore or say "Ooh la la". Consequences may be severe.

Maybe you need to go back and look at the facts, this woman never complained to the crew about a man doing that, she only said that later after they were on the ground. Also the crew did offer to give her a different seat however they would not upgrade her. If she wanted a seat in First she should have booked that seat like everyone else. This entitled brat shouldn't be allowed to throw her power around and have a crew detained because she didn't like the fact that they wouldn't give her a free upgrade. If her family is so rich and important she should be able to pay for the first class seat. I hope that the crew is able to sue her personally along with the government.

Having read the links, it is not clear at what point a complaint was made about the conduct of the other passenger. Unless the crew were told and did not act, it is hard to see how the crew could be accused, (they are potential witnesses).

The involvement of the plaintiffs father sounds grossly improper.

How ironic that airline crew don't appreciate someone being able to call the authorities simply because they didn't acquiesce to that person's request (however reasonable or unreasonable it may have been).

Brickell305 wrote:

How ironic that airline crew don't appreciate someone being able to call the authorities simply because they didn't acquiesce to that person's request (however reasonable or unreasonable it may have been).

Seriously?
You think someone should be able to call the authorities simply because they didn't give her an upgrade to first class?
Maybe you are right; there should be nothing stopping anyone from calling the authorities. It should be up to the authorities to then deal with the complaint in the proper way, BY LOCKING UP THE COMPLAINANT FOR WASTING POLICE TIME.
Except that doesn't seem to have happened.

727LOVER wrote:

Air France should

1. Ban her for life
2. Suspend flights to Argentina
3. France should ban all Argentinian aircraft from French airspace.


It's possible #1 could happen....but the other two...I know...a pipe dream

Option 1: For sure, since she is a blatant liar & should never be allowed to board an Air France flight ever again.

Option 2: Unlikely

Option 3: Would make Argentina crap their pants & force them to take action, but unlikely nonetheless. Should the Argentinian authorities not give a satisfactory explanation to the French Gov & Air France, then they should turn away one their flights before entering Euro airspace.

(Nothing against Argentina, but this behaviour should never be accepted. Especially as they turn the chapter from the Kirchner days)

This whole thing is really insane

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

If that is true, then you have a clear case for discrimination.
Why are they only treating Indian Passport holders this way?
This is DISGRACEFUL !
I shall contact my MEP immediately and get this sorted for you.
Can you provide some additional background? Maybe examples of AF employees treating passengers badly inflight as you claim?

There are recorded incidents, Google is your friend. Not an issue for me, though I would love to see DL/KL kick them out of SkyTeam.
Weren't AF employees at one point manhandled their own executive forcing him to scale a fence?

ual747den wrote:

Maybe you need to go back and look at the facts, this woman never complained to the crew about a man doing that, she only said that later after they were on the ground.

There are no facts, just several versions of the story. A.net collectively missed "Identifying facts and opinions" class and treats majority opinion as facts.

Without reading (deleted) post by DWC, I would have concurred with click-bait title and majority opinion, which may or may not be the true story.

Did France beat Argentina at a soccer (football) game?!?! ^_^

The father was a minister over 17 years ago. No influence from him whatsoever. The passenger next to the lady was first invading her space and then started to masturbate. At that point she told the crew and then to the purser and in a typically French way was given a laptop, told to return to her seat and write a complaint. She refused and was move to a Jupseat where she remained for 8 hours. She never asked for an upgrade. Air France confirmed on an official statement most of the facts the passenger reported on the ground. And the crazy passenger that chose to masturbate was also hauled to declare before a judge.

Prior to landing she was told to move back to her seat, Naturally she refused and was then threatened by the same purser with arrest upon landing in EZE for failure to comply with a crewmember´s instruction. But of course the narrative changes when it is the "Syndicat National du Personnel Navigant Commercial" who writes a statement, victimizing the passenger and engaging in character assasination. and protecting above all, the crew. Sorry but AF dropped the ball on this one and the worst aspects of its cabin crew were in full display.

AR385 wrote:

The father was a minister over 17 years ago. No influence from him whatsoever. The passenger next to the lady was first invading her space and then started to masturbate. At that point she told the crew and then to the purser and in a typically French way was given a laptop, told to return to her seat and write a complaint. She refused and was move to a Jupseat where she remained for 8 hours. She never asked for an upgrade. Air France confirmed on an official statement most of the facts the passenger reported on the ground. And the crazy passenger that chose to masturbate was also hauled to declare before a judge.

Prior to landing she was told to move back to her seat, Naturally she refused and was then threatened by the same purser with arrest upon landing in EZE for failure to comply with a crewmember´s instruction. But of course the narrative changes when it is the "Syndicat National du Personnel Navigant Commercial" who writes a statement, victimizing the passenger and engaging in character assasination. and protecting above all, the crew. Sorry but AF dropped the ball on this one and the worst aspects of its cabin crew were in full display.

Thanks for that.
This is also what I read from Argentinian & French newspapers.
So very different from OP title & that sensationalist source article, isn't it ?
And if true & were no other Y seat available, the purser should have gone for a "commercial act" & upgraded her : truly the least she could do.

( On a sidenote : "international forums" may be wholy different, I belong to several international forums where posts are in any of 15 major languages, excellent to cross-check information, makes for true cultural diversity & international dialogue between the many Deutschsprachigen, Hispanohablantes, Brazilians, Japanese, Pусскоязычные, Francophones, Arabs & Turkics who usually avoid solely English-speaking sites. It is up to monoglots & oligoglots to run automatic translate, most of us internationalists read & write in half a dozen languages while getting better at others )

AR385 wrote:

The father was a minister over 17 years ago. No influence from him whatsoever. The passenger next to the lady was first invading her space and then started to masturbate. At that point she told the crew and then to the purser and in a typically French way was given a laptop, told to return to her seat and write a complaint. She refused and was move to a Jupseat where she remained for 8 hours. She never asked for an upgrade. Air France confirmed on an official statement most of the facts the passenger reported on the ground. And the crazy passenger that chose to masturbate was also hauled to declare before a judge.

Prior to landing she was told to move back to her seat, Naturally she refused and was then threatened by the same purser with arrest upon landing in EZE for failure to comply with a crewmember´s instruction. But of course the narrative changes when it is the "Syndicat National du Personnel Navigant Commercial" who writes a statement, victimizing the passenger and engaging in character assasination. and protecting above all, the crew. Sorry but AF dropped the ball on this one and the worst aspects of its cabin crew were in full display.

This is good solid detail and I would love to see your sources of reference.
Even if they are written in Spanish, please give a link.

Here you go: http://www.clarin.com/sociedad/escandal ... zoukf.html

Its too bad AR doesn't fly to Paris anymore, it would have been interesting to see in the French would have done a similar thing to an Argentine crew at CDG.

AR385 wrote:

Here you go: http://www.clarin.com/sociedad/escandal ... zoukf.html

According to that:
- Part of the time they were held was waiting for an interpreter, and because the judge wanted declaration of every member of the crew (don't know how many, this seems to be a 777 flight, the picture of the article is misleading).
- The cabin manager was held/called for not informing the captain about the situation.
- The whole flight was full, not just 1st.

Agree that this should have been escalated (and likely quickly solve) in the captain's hands.

DWC wrote:

This is also what I read from Argentinian & French newspapers.
So very different from OP title & that sensationalist source article, isn't it ?
And if true & were no other Y seat available, the purser should have gone for a "commercial act" & upgraded her : truly the least she could do.

Now, I read French and that claim I struggle with. Having read the major French newspapers, there have been little coverage of this in general in the major French newspapers and the little that i read did not publish that angle of the story. Instead the French newspapers, as shown below where Le Figaro a well known and respected newspaper in Frances, reports the story but has a different angle on the issue seemingly a more neutral one that instead focus on specific actions taken against the crew which is deemed to be outside legal practice. According to them it escalated to the CEO who got the French foreign department involved.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france ... entine.php

I do agree though, your original post was well supported by local sources, just like it should be.

My speculation, and all we outsiders can do is speculate, based on reading more than one version of events believe that this lady was seated next to a fat man who continuously took part of her space which is incredibly annoying. But I dont believe for a second that the fat man masturbated. Should there have been any evidence of this, there would have been a lot of people in that cabin being extremely upset and any airline crew who has a masturbating passenger onboard would deal with him with the utmost disdain.
The fact that the French newspaper reports that the father of the accuser was allowed to interrogate the crew is also, to put it mildly, not exactly standard practice in any judiciary system pointing to this being a man who used influence to bypass laws and normal proceedings. Its after all not like the Argentine police wouldn't be able to establish basic facts by themselves nor should there be a lack of legal representation for foreign nationals detained, something that several french media sources have reported.

My guess is that when this is all done and dusted, miss ex minister daughter will have issues remembering the masturbation accident, the Argentine government silently having a word with Mr ex minister about the limits of power and jurisdiction and the respected daughter will be on an AF/KL blacklist.

AR385 wrote:

The father was a minister over 17 years ago. No influence from him whatsoever. The passenger next to the lady was first invading her space and then started to masturbate. At that point she told the crew and then to the purser and in a typically French way was given a laptop, told to return to her seat and write a complaint. She refused and was move to a Jupseat where she remained for 8 hours. She never asked for an upgrade. Air France confirmed on an official statement most of the facts the passenger reported on the ground. And the crazy passenger that chose to masturbate was also hauled to declare before a judge.

Prior to landing she was told to move back to her seat, Naturally she refused and was then threatened by the same purser with arrest upon landing in EZE for failure to comply with a crewmember´s instruction. But of course the narrative changes when it is the "Syndicat National du Personnel Navigant Commercial" who writes a statement, victimizing the passenger and engaging in character assasination. and protecting above all, the crew. Sorry but AF dropped the ball on this one and the worst aspects of its cabin crew were in full display.

Great summary to end the free bashing for part of some people here against that woman and all the speculation about their relatives (political influence or whatever) and what happened on the flight.

MillwallSean wrote:

Now, I read French and that claim I struggle with. Having read the major French newspapers, there have been little coverage of this in general in the major French newspapers and the little that i read did not publish that angle of the story. Instead the French newspapers, as shown below where Le Figaro a well known and respected newspaper in Frances, reports the story but has a different angle on the issue seemingly a more neutral one that instead focus on specific actions taken against the crew which is deemed to be outside legal practice. According to them it escalated to the CEO who got the French foreign department involved.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france ... entine.php

Le Figaro is indeed a major newspaper ( conservative ) but also well known to tell only a part of the story : the French make a lot of fun of "Le Fig" & "Figmag", "Le Figaro ment" (lies) to such an extent that a well known satyrical media goes by the name "Le Gorafi" - Google it.
I for one never quote it.
As the matter is quite unprecedented & probably out of proportions for any cabin crew, it has indeed reached the Quai d'Orsay. I expect the truth to be somewhere in between, our Argentinian friends here are resolutely behind their compatriot. The matter does not interest me otherwise, I only reacted when I saw the discrepancy between the OP & what I had just seen in my newsfeeds, but I suggest to wait until tomorrow to read what truly respected newspaper say : Le Monde (paywall), Les Echos, Le Huffington Post, Libé & perhaps the weekly mags like Le Point or L'Express in a few days.

I am currently attempting to read the three links given by DWC in post #8, and one from AR385 in post #44

Unfortunately my computer doesn't like any of the "clarin" links, and refuses to allow me to translate them.

The other link (La Nacion) comes up with some further detail. Firstly it reports the incident as detailed by the French Union SNPNC. Later it details "La versión de la Justicia argentina". On the surface this looks like an attempt to show both sides of the story.

La Nacion wrote:

(subject to possible translation errors...)
The victim was a 29 year old Doctor, with a window seat in economy class.
She complained during the flight of her seat neighbor's behavior, without mentioning to the crew the episode of masturbation.
The crew twice woke the French passenger, tall and corpulent, sitting in the middle of a row of three seats, because it was covering the space reserved for the passenger next door, said the source.

I already sense something wrong here.
Supposing our victim was in seat 23A, it now appears that the tall and corpulent Frenchman was sitting in 23B, and fell asleep leaning into 23C.
Either that, or the translation is leading us astray.
He was also clearly asleep. Perhaps he was masturbating in his sleep?

La Nacion wrote:

The Frenchman, about 30 years old, was arrested and placed in isolation for 24 hours by the judge's decision, without having access to a lawyer or consular assistance. He was released the next day, without being questioned by the judge

Without being questioned......? WTF?
Again, very strange behaviour towards someone at the core of the incident. If indeed there was an incident.

La Nacion wrote:

Before the plane took off, a flight attendant proposed the Argentine change of seat, but it did not want, according to the source close to the investigation

Two more nuggets there.
1) The problems started even before take off?
2) She was offered a change of seat even then, but declined.
La Nacion then goes on to confirm the initial 6 hour detention of either all 14 or possibly just half of the AF crew (possible discrepancy here due to translation errors?), followed by a court summons for the following morning.
The head cabin chief was further detained in a small cell etc etc,

La Nacion wrote:

Later he {the head cabin chief} was "interrogated by a judge and by the ex-Vice Minister of Justice, father of the plaintiff", who interrogated him "directly and several times", before being released "without any explanation".

This doesn't quite agree with the poster who stated that the father was out of office for 17 years and had no influence.
Then again, this is only an Argentine news source reporting claims from the French Union

I'm now going to work through the alternative version; La versión de la Justicia argentina
I will share my findings in the next post from me. Talk amongst yourselves for the next 20 minutes....

Dominion301 wrote:

So much for the captain and purser being in charge of the 'bus'. Sounds like another rich crybaby type.

With the limited sketchy information that is out and the well KNOW fact that Reporters get stories like these are often poorly reported with all the facts. That so many people feel they can judge so clearly what has happened because a stereotype fits, is amazing to me. The fast pace information Highway is amazing but also should be taken with a grain of salt. How many times do we need to get egg on our face so that were not so quick to judge.

Part II; La versión de la Justicia argentina

La Nacion wrote:

the federal judge decided that, in order not to prevent the crew from returning to their country, he chose to take the testimonial statements to the Air France cabin crew on the {following} day

Allowing for possible translation error, let's say the judge expedited the process in order not to detain the crew too long. Not necessarily the same as not detaining them at all. Or were they already on a 48 hour layover? Maybe he just interrupted their beauty sleep.

La Nacion wrote:

the commander of the ship was kept separate, given that the victim had accused him of having coerced her (according to his complaint, he would have told her that if he did not sit in his place again, next to the passenger who had been masturbating, he would have her put in jail once they touched land).

Yes, it took me several attempts to get that poorly translated section straight in my head.
I guess we are dealing with the issue that the Senior F/A demanded that she return to her original seat just before landing. And reminded her that failure to comply was an offence. If the flight was genuinely full, and temporarily she had been occupying a jump seat, then I am guessing he had no option. Of course at that time he had no knowledge of the "masturbation" claim, so what was he to do?
With hindsight, the better solution would have been to ask another male passenger on board to swap seats with her. But the F/A couldn't possibly know that at the time.
Back with "La Nacion"; after two more paragraphs of waffle, that appears to be it.
Absolutely no mention of the masturbating Frenchman, or the fact he was detained and then released without questioning.


Summary
The woman's complaint is that just before landing, she was forced to return to her original seat, next to a man (who isn't even mentioned in this report) allegedly guilty of masturbation either in-flight, or possibly even before they left the gate at CDG.
It appears that the Senior F/A is guilty of not allowing her to remain in her temporary seat, which may or may not have been a jumpseat - this detail is also omitted.

It's not much to go on, but that's all I can find from La Nacion, who claim to have presented both sides of the story.

Can anybody provide a better summary from clarin (dot) com?

AR385 wrote:

The father was a minister over 17 years ago. No influence from him whatsoever.

And you know this for a fact because you were present? Otherwise I fail to see how you are in a position to say whether or not he was an influence.

AR385 wrote:

The passenger next to the lady was first invading her space and then started to masturbate.

I have yet to see a definitive version of events. All we have are somewhat inconsistent accounts of what was claimed by the passenger.

AR385 wrote:

Air France confirmed on an official statement most of the facts the passenger reported on the ground.

I have not seen any official statement stating what you claim. Can you provide a link to this official statement?


There are extremely few facts publically available in this case, certainly not enough for anyone to pass any judgement on either of the two passengers, the crew, or the authorities. For you to give your opinion on what happened as fact amounts to nothing more than (as you yourself put it) character assassination.