# Drunk 18 yr guy pees on 11 yr old girl while on a JetBlue flight. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 12, 2011, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458 "2011-08-12T15:01:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Bosstrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Bosstrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstrain)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2011, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/102 "2011-08-15T20:23:52Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Is it illegal to be on a plane if you’re drunk? if you’re underage it is, I know that for sure (in fact, I don’t think there’s anyplace you can be drunk and underage). ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2011, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/103 "2011-08-15T20:26:22Z")
> [@Bosstrain](#): > > if you’re underage it is, I know that for sure (in fact, I don’t think there’s anyplace you can be drunk and underage). Oh yeah, forgot he was 18. But would the flight attendants have known he was underage? They may have assumed he was of age. ---
**Author:** ![lisacurl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/41988e/32.png) [@lisacurl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lisacurl)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2011, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/104 "2011-08-15T20:29:29Z")
Being drunk might be the reason he peed inappropriately, but it is NEVER an excuse for the behavior. ---
**Author:** ![OneMissedPost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OneMissedPost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OneMissedPost)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2011, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/105 "2011-08-15T20:50:22Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Of course, drunkenness is no excuse if you commit a crime. However, in most (but not all) situations, without the intent to commit a crime there is no crime. This is why there exist specific crimes related to drunkenness (where the intent to get drunk is the one that matters), and other specific crimes related to to negligence or recklessness, where intent need not be shown, but it must be shown that a reasonable person would be aware that what happened was criminal. > > If you’re going to continue to claim I don’t know what I’m talking about, explain where I’m wrong. It would probably be more useful for you to research what “crime” actually is, though. Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, I will continue to claim you have no idea what you are talking about because you in fact have no knowledge on the subject. Just because a person is drunk, doesn’t mean there’s no intent. You are saying that if a person commits a crime while drunk and doesn’t know that he or she is committing a crime, he or she cannot be found guilty. WRONG. Ignorance of the law doesn’t make someone innocent. Even if a person is drunk, there is still intent, which is something you don’t seem to understand. ---
**Author:** ![kittenblue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ba8739/32.png) [@kittenblue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kittenblue)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/106 "2011-08-16T02:47:49Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > You don’t seem to able to get the idea that he wouldn’t care about future consequences of his actions. That is kind of what losing your inhibitions means. He isn’t hallucinating that the closet is a bathroom. He just doesn’t care that he is pissing on his own clothes. I disagree. I really think (in my ex’s case) he was, if not exactly hallucinating, convinced he was in the bathroom, not the closet, and not in the baby’s room. This is also how incredibly drunk people end up in other people’s homes, or, in a famous case in my area, taking off their clothes and laying down to go to bed in the driveway of a barbershop. Wish I could remember the name of the local politician and google it… ---
**Author:** ![kittenblue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ba8739/32.png) [@kittenblue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kittenblue)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/107 "2011-08-16T02:57:10Z")
Ah, [found it.](http://www.realpolice.net/forums/archive/t-16907.html) And before you argue, this particular home has a tiny two-seat barbershop in its front yard. As you can read, he blacked out, and when awakened thought he was at home, in bed, with his car parked downstairs. it’s not that he didn’t care where he laid down to go to sleep…he truly believed he was at home, in bed. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/108 "2011-08-16T12:19:13Z")
> [@kittenblue](#): > > Ah, [found it.](http://www.realpolice.net/forums/archive/t-16907.html) And before you argue, this particular home has a tiny two-seat barbershop in its front yard. As you can read, he blacked out, and when awakened thought he was at home, in bed, with his car parked downstairs. it’s not that he didn’t care where he laid down to go to sleep…he truly believed he was at home, in bed. Why wouldn’t he assume he is at home when he wakes up. I do that and I’m not a drunk and will eventually remember where I went to bed. If they don’t remember where they went to bed, then it must take longer, especially if they are still drunk. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/109 "2011-08-16T12:40:34Z")
I’m guessing the guy was asleep immediately prior to the incident. When I’ve seen people do this in the past, it was more alcohol-induced sleepwalking than just pure drunkenness. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/110 "2011-08-16T13:42:11Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Whether he knew what he was doing or not is completely irrelevant. If you choose to get wasted, then you are responsible for any and all of your actions while you are wasted. Are you announcing what you believe the law to be, or are you explaining what you believe the law should be? Or are you just announcing a rule of moral responsibility? ETA: never mind – you clarified in a subsequent post. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It doesn’t work this way at all, actually. At least not in the US. Criminal intent is irrelevant if the person volunteered to get wasted. That first decision assumes all liability for the consequences. You can’t get out of a murder charge by saying you were drunk. This is not a true statement. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense as to general intent crimes, it’s true, but it can be a defense against specific-intent crimes. It’s therefore not correct to say that criminal intent is irrelevant if the person volunteered to get wasted. For Model Penal Code states, see MPC § 2.08. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/111 "2011-08-16T13:57:49Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It doesn’t work this way at all, actually. At least not in the US. Criminal intent is irrelevant if the person volunteered to get wasted. That first decision assumes all liability for the consequences. You can’t get out of a murder charge by saying you were drunk. From my home state: > [@Wright v. Com.](#): > > However, when a person voluntarily becomes so intoxicated that he is incapable of deliberation or premeditation, he cannot commit a class of murder that requires proof of a deliberate and premeditated killing. Fitzgerald Commonwealth, 223 Va. 615, 631, 292 S.E.2d 798, 807 (1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1228 (1983); Giarratano Commonwealth, 220 Va. 1064, 1073, 266 S.E.2d 94, 99 (1980); Johnson Commonwealth, 135 Va. 524, 530-31, 115 S.E. 673, 675-76 (1923). Notice that the accused does not completely dodge consequences. He can certainly be found guilty of second-degree murder, a general-intent crime. But in Virginia, when a person has voluntarily become so intoxicated that he cannot form the specific intent necessary to commit first-degree murder, then he cannot be convicted of a crime greater than second-degree murder. So, contrary to your statement, intent is actually critical. Intent distinguishes first-degree murder from second-degree murder. Even though the accused voluntarily got drunk, that drunkeness can erase his capacity to form specific intent and thus negate a necessary element of first-degree murder. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/112 "2011-08-16T14:05:56Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It doesn’t work this way at all, actually. At least not in the US. Criminal intent is irrelevant if the person volunteered to get wasted. That first decision assumes all liability for the consequences. You can’t get out of a murder charge by saying you were drunk. From your home state: > [@State v. Altimus](#): > > The general rule in Minnesota is that voluntary intoxication is a defense to a criminal charge other than drunkenness only if a specific intent or purpose is an essential element of the crime charged and the trier of fact concluded that the defendant’s intoxication deprived him of the specific intent or purpose requisite to the alleged offense. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/113 "2011-08-16T14:40:43Z")
> [@OneMissedPost](#): > > Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, I will continue to claim you have no idea what you are talking about because you in fact have no knowledge on the subject. > > Just because a person is drunk, doesn’t mean there’s no intent. You are saying that if a person commits a crime while drunk and doesn’t know that he or she is committing a crime, he or she cannot be found guilty. WRONG. > > Ignorance of the law doesn’t make someone innocent. Even if a person is drunk, there is still intent, which is something you don’t seem to understand. Read **Bricker** ’s posts, then apologise to me. You are the one who doesn’t know what they are talking about, and who is deliberately spreading ignorance despite the fact that you have been shown to be wrong. I’m not talking about anyone getting away with any crime. I’m stating, factually, that there is no crime without intent (with a few specific exceptions), and that someone cannot be factually guilty of a “crime” that did not, in fact, occur. The important thing, of course, is to charge him (or anyone) with the crime that was _actually_ committed, not the crime that ignorant people think he should be charged with when they ignore half the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/114 "2011-08-16T15:06:26Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > I’m not talking about anyone getting away with any crime. I’m stating, factually, that there is no crime without intent (with a few specific exceptions), and that someone cannot be factually guilty of a “crime” that did not, in fact, occur. This is a true statement, but I think you’re applying it a bit too broadly here. There is no crime without intent, generally speaking. But intent can be specific or general. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense against general-intent crimes. It can be a defense against specific-intent crimes. As in my example to **Diogenes** above, the accused could be convicted of the general intent crime of second degree murder, but not the specific intent crime of first degree murder. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/115 "2011-08-16T15:16:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > As in my example to **Diogenes** above, the accused could be convicted of the general intent crime of second degree murder, but not the specific intent crime of first degree murder. Actually, even my statement here misses the nuance involved, but as a general guide to the principle, I’ll let it stand. I just wanted to forestall anyone else’s desire to (correctly) nitpick this example as not the best one to show the distinction between specific and general intent. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/116 "2011-08-16T15:41:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This is a true statement, but I think you’re applying it a bit too broadly here. > > There is no crime without intent, generally speaking. But intent can be specific or general. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense against general-intent crimes. It can be a defense against specific-intent crimes. As in my example to **Diogenes** above, the accused could be convicted of the general intent crime of second degree murder, but not the specific intent crime of first degree murder. One of the links I cited in an earlier post made a similar distinction, although between first-degree murder and negligent homicide. If I’m being to broad, it’s because I was aiming to correct patently false statements, and not to explain the details. From [this wiki page:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication_defence) [QUOTE] If a “specific intent” in either sense is required and there is clear evidence that the accused was too intoxicated to form the element subjectively, this fact is recognised as a defense unless the loss of control was part of the plan. But this is of little value to defendants since there are almost always offenses of basic intent that can be charged and/or the basic intent offenses are usually lesser included offenses and an alternative verdict can be delivered by judge or jury without the need for a separate charge. [QUOTE] It seems I was wrong about needed to charge someone with a different crime, but there are some crimes for which intoxication is a defence. It also seems that UK law differs in some significant ways on this issue, but that’s irrelevant to this thread. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/117 "2011-08-16T21:35:49Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > An anecdote that had nothing to do with you. Who pissed in your cornflakes this morning? Robert “Sandy” Vietze? Maybe he was drunk and thought the cereal bowl was a toilet … ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/118 "2011-08-16T23:22:07Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > So what is your point? Most people don’t get shitfaced on an airplane. But what if it’s a college campus that just so happens to be located on an airplane? ---
**Author:** ![teela\_brown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d9b06d/32.png) [@teela\_brown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teela_brown)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/119 "2011-08-17T17:15:00Z")
Now Gerard Depardieu is getting into the act. [At least he didn’t whiz on a person](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/08/17/international/i060919D53.DTL). Sometimes I, too, have to pee during the taxi and takeoff sequence but so far I’ve managed to hold it. ---
**Author:** ![DaveEn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@DaveEn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaveEn)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2011, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/120 "2011-08-18T09:51:28Z")
visit [http://www.pornsmacker.com](http://www.pornsmacker.com), it has a worthy library of free xxx videos… ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2011, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458/121 "2011-09-09T20:54:34Z")
**Drinkers remain aware of mistakes but care less about them, study suggests** [http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-02/health/ct-talk-alcohol-study-0902-20110902\_1\_drinkers-bad-idea-mistakes](http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-02/health/ct-talk-alcohol-study-0902-20110902_1_drinkers-bad-idea-mistakes) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drunk-18-yr-guy-pees-on-11-yr-old-girl-while-on-a-jetblue-flight/592458.md?page=5)