# Is there any law under which the White House dinner party crashers could be prosecuted? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 27, 2009, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105 "2009-11-27T06:29:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2009, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/61 "2009-12-01T22:51:42Z")
Personally, I think that if they made it to the party, good on them. After that, I’m sick of hearing about it. You’d think that there would be other real news happening in the world that could have been reported this morning instead of more about these vapid gate crashers. ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/62 "2009-12-02T17:45:40Z")
> [@UncleRojelio](#): > > Personally, I think that if they made it to the party, good on them. After that, I’m sick of hearing about it. You’d think that there would be other real news happening in the world that could have been reported this morning instead of more about these vapid gate crashers. Well it’s newsworthy because someone was able to get access to the POTUS in the White House under Secert Service watch. This is serious stuff and to act like its no big deal just because you (or others) may not like Obama is what’s outragous. These people could have caused an international incident with India had it been thier intent or physically threated the POTUS. This is much more newsworthy than say the Tiger Woods crap that wasting our time . . . ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/63 "2009-12-02T17:47:40Z")
It seems they may well have believed they were in good shape. They were exchanging e-mails with a presidential appointee (Michele Jones, “Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense White House Liason”) who was promising on working with them to get tickets to the state dinner, had asked them to supply social security/DOB/etc for a security check, and had promised them access to the arrival ceremony. On the morning of the event, this official sent them an e-mail which read: > [@](#): > > Good morning Tareq, > > The arrival ceremony (was scheduled to be outdoors) was cancelled (sic) due to inclement weather. They are having a very small one inside the WH very limited space. I am still working on tickets for tonight’s dinner. > > I will call or rmail as soon as I get word one way or another. She apparently did call and left a message saying she could not get them tickets. After returning home that night, after the dinner (1:03 AM Wednesday), Tareq sent the following e-mail: > [@](#): > > Hi Michele, > > You are an Angel! > > My cell phone battery died early this evening while we were in DC from our country home, so I just got your message now after driving back out. But obviously it worked out in the end… We ended up going to the gate to check in at 6:30pm to just check, in case it got approved since we didn’t know, and our name was indeed on the list! 🙂 We are very grateful, and God Bless you. > We just got home, and we had a very wonderful evening as you can imagine! Jones replies at 1:38 PM Wednesday: > [@](#): > > Tareq, > > You are most welcome! I here (sic) the smile in your email and am delighted that you and Michaele had a wonderful time! 🙂 > > Have an extraordinary Thanksgiving and many blessings to you both! > > Much love, > > Michele In my view, it will be almost impossible to prosecute them, assuming these e-mails are genuine. ---
**Author:** ![whorfin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/6f9a4e/32.png) [@whorfin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whorfin)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/64 "2009-12-02T17:58:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It seems they may well have believed they were in good shape. > > They were exchanging e-mails with a presidential appointee (Michele Jones, “Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense White House Liason”) who was promising on working with them to get tickets to the state dinner, had asked them to supply social security/DOB/etc for a security check, and had promised them access to the arrival ceremony. On the morning of the event, this official sent them an e-mail which read: > > She apparently did call and left a message saying she could not get them tickets. > > After returning home that night, after the dinner (1:03 AM Wednesday), Tareq sent the following e-mail: > > Jones replies at 1:38 PM Wednesday: > > In my view, it will be almost impossible to prosecute them, assuming these e-mails are genuine. I’m not sure I buy that position. They were told people were trying to get tickets, but that they didn’t have them. Now, I don’t know much about presidential events at the white house, but I think it’s reasonable to think that someone will tell you if you get a ticket–it doesn’t seem to be the kind of thing tickets are, in effect, held on the door for. The reports I’ve see say that guests to such events submit details well in advance, after they get their invitation. Even if you are invited, you don’t just show up–there are some preliminaries which, presumably, everyone in those circles of DC society will know about. In short, I just don’t see it as reasonable to believe (if that is the standard–probably, it’s the most generous they could get–since, objectively, they weren’t invited) that a “I can’t get you tickets” to a state dinner justifies belief that they were invited–especially absent any follow-up call, and without the advance notice and submission of info for security that is standard practice at such events. There is also good circumstantial evidence that these two knew they weren’t invited–Most reports I’ve seen noted that they didn’t stay for dinner–because, presumably, they knew there wasn’t a place setting for them, and so they’d be busted at that point. Now, if they genuinely thought they were invited, to a state DINNER, why would they leave before the main event? Why wouldn’t they ask one of the staff “We can’t find our place for dinner–can you tell us where we’re seated?” It’s hard to square their (1) not staying for dinner, and (2) as far as I can tell, not even acting as if they expected to stay for dinner with the concept that they thought they were invited to a state dinner. ---
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/65 "2009-12-02T18:03:14Z")
> [@Si\_Amigo](#): > > Well it’s newsworthy because someone was able to get access to the POTUS in the White House under Secert Service watch. This is serious stuff and to act like its no big deal just because you (or others) may not like Obama is what’s outragous. These people could have caused an international incident with India had it been thier intent or physically threated the POTUS. This is much more newsworthy than say the Tiger Woods crap that wasting our time . . . Yeah, but they didn’t and the Secret Service has been notified so that should be the end of the story. Same thing for Tiger Woods. He crashed his truck, the FHP sent him a ticket, end of story. Oh, and FTR, I’m in the Obama camp. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/66 "2009-12-02T18:18:53Z")
> [@whorfin](#): > > In short, I just don’t see it as reasonable to believe (if that is the standard–probably, it’s the most generous they could get–since, objectively, they weren’t invited) that a “I can’t get you tickets” to a state dinner justifies belief that they were invited–especially absent any follow-up call, and without the advance notice and submission of info for security that is standard practice at such events. As I hinted: > [@Bricker](#): > > They were exchanging e-mails with a presidential appointee (Michele Jones, “Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense White House Liason”) who was promising on working with them to get tickets to the state dinner, **had asked them to supply social security/DOB/etc for a security check** … Here are the excerpts from the e-mails relating to that: > [@Released e-mails](#): > > I need the following information from Taleq and Michalele immediately so she can submit their information before 5:00 PM today: > > Need from tareq and Michaele Salahi: > > Full Name > > Social Security Number > > Date of Birth > > Citizenship > > This information is very important to be admitted to the White House for anyone. Please get back to me ASAP. Michele is waiting for a response now. Tareq responded to that e-mail with the requested information. So from his point of view, he HAD been asked for and provided the required security information. > [@](#): > > There is also good circumstantial evidence that these two knew they weren’t invited–Most reports I’ve seen noted that they didn’t stay for dinner–because, presumably, they knew there wasn’t a place setting for them, and so they’d be busted at that point. > > Now, if they genuinely thought they were invited, to a state DINNER, why would they leave before the main event? Why wouldn’t they ask one of the staff “We can’t find our place for dinner–can you tell us where we’re seated?” > > It’s hard to square their (1) not staying for dinner, and (2) as far as I can tell, not even acting as if they expected to stay for dinner with the concept that they thought they were invited to a state dinner. They can argue that they realized once inside that there was no place for them for dinner, and then figured out that they weren’t supposed to be there. Notice that I’m not saying they were in fact mistaken… just that the existence of these mails will make a successful prosecution almost impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/67 "2009-12-02T18:47:35Z")
Bricker, I would liken provideing the required information to the White House staffer as akin to filling out a loan application. It is not reasonable to assume you will get the loan just because you filled out the application. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/68 "2009-12-02T19:13:35Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Bricker, I would liken provideing the required information to the White House staffer as akin to filling out a loan application. It is not reasonable to assume you will get the loan just because you filled out the application. Of course. But here’s what he said immediately after the event: > [@](#): > > But obviously it worked out in the end… We ended up going to the gate to check in at 6:30pm to just check, in case it got approved since we didn’t know, and our name was indeed on the list! This statement is made before there’s any public outcry or suggestion that he’s done something wrong. A prior statement like this is not hearsay if it’s consistent with his courtroom testimony and offered to rebut a charge against the witness of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive. Now, if the prosecution has a guard that says, “No, I told them their name wasn’t on the list…” and it turns out they slipped in behind him while his back was turned, then I agree they can be successfully prosecuted. But if they showed up and told a guard, “Yes, we’ve provided all our information to the Secretary of Defense’s White House Liason,” and he lets them in… there’s almost no way they get convicted. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105/69 "2009-12-02T19:35:14Z")
IANAL, but I think **Bricker** is correct, as it appears that they didn’t intend to enter under false pretenses. On the bright side, I think that they will be social pariahs from now on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-law-under-which-the-white-house-dinner-party-crashers-could-be-prosecuted/519105.md?page=3)