Head of Ambler Air pleads guilty in alcohol importation case
Published Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!The head of a local air carrier pleaded guilty Wednesday to attempting to bring alcohol to a dry village.
Both David L. Rue, 63, of Fairbanks, as well as his company, Ambler Air Service Inc., pleaded guilty to one count each of importing alcohol to a local option area, a class A misdemeanor.
In March a joint investigation between Fairbanks International Airport Police and Alaska State Troopers revealed more than 25 bottles of liquor and a case of beer in Rue’s plane as he prepared to depart from the airport, though investigators believe only one bottle and the beer actually belonged to Rue.
Airport police received two anonymous tips that on March 21 a passenger on an Ambler Air flight would be smuggling alcohol or drugs into Ambler or Shungnak, two small villages in rural western Alaska. Neither village allows the importation of alcohol.
“I don’t think I’m a completely bad person,” Rue said at his change of plea and sentencing hearing. “I did a bad thing, and I’m sorry for that.”
Rue noted that in his more than 20 years as the president and sole pilot for Ambler Air, he has helped in many search and rescue missions and has often given families free flights to villages in the case of emergencies.
As part of a plea agreement with prosecutors, Ambler was fined $85,000, with $65,000 suspended. He also had to pay $35,000 for the return of his plane, which troopers seized. His attorney delivered checks for both the fine and the plane to the state following the hearing.
“We know for a fact he can afford this fine,” said prosecutor Shannon Eddy. “It’s not going to bankrupt him.”
In addition, Rue was sentenced to 180 days in jail with 160 suspended. He will have to report to state custody by Oct. 3, though he might be able to serve the 20 days under electronic supervision. Rue will remain on probation for four years, during which time authorities will be able to search his plane and passengers for alcohol without a warrant.
Law enforcement agencies received multiple tips about Rue’s alleged bootlegging activities over an eight- to 10-year period, Eddy said. Two anonymous tips lead to charges being brought against Rue for the March incident. Troopers previously had trouble contacting Rue or his passengers because of "counter-surveillance” techniques he employed, according to court documents.
District Court Judge Winston Burbank, who also flies planes in rural Alaska, chided Rue for attempting to bring alcohol to a dry village. Alcohol contributes to numerous social and criminal problems in Bush communities, though it can be profitable for bootleggers. A $10 bottle of liquor bought legally in Fairbanks can fetch as much as $150 in a dry village.
“Alcohol in villages is a terrible problem,” Burbank said. “There’s a reason village elders are concerned about it, and it’s not as if you were totally ignorant of what the law requires for Ambler.”
Rue previously pleaded no contest to liquor importation in May 2000 after a village protection officer in Ambler spotted him with a case of beer as he was leaving the village's airfield. He claimed the beer was for his personal use.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
may you rue the day
Nasty break dude, thats why I will not live in a dry village!!
someone who employs counter surveliance measures isnt a person that simply made a mistake
With a $3400 profit on 2 cases of booze, its an easy "mistake" to make. Basic principle of supply and demand. Reducing the demand by abolishing prohibition will result in less motive for importation. That would be assuming importation is the problem. In my opinion consumption is the problem. Perhaps that should be our battle? IMO we should introduce mass amounts of weed into the bush communities. That would satisfy the buzz demand while reducing the demand for alcohol importation. Not to mention it would greatly increase the importation of snack foods into the villages. Win-win situation if you ask me.
The Fifth Amendment protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves. To "plead the Fifth" is a refusal to answer a question because the response could form self-incriminating evidence.
Historically, the legal protection against self-incrimination is directly related to the question of torture for extracting information and confessions.[2][3] The legal shift from widespread use of torture and forced confession dates to turmoil of the late 16th and early 17th centuries in England. Anyone refusing to take the oath ex-officio (confessions or swearing of innocence, usually before hearing any charges) was taken for guilty. Suspected Puritans were pressed to take the oath and then reveal names of other Puritans. Coercion and torture were commonly employed to compel "cooperation." Puritans, who were at the time fleeing to the New World, began a practice of refusing to cooperate with interrogations. In the most famous case, John Lilburne refused, in 1637, to take the oath. His case and his call for "freeborn rights" were rallying points for reforms against forced oaths, forced self-incrimination, and other kinds of coercion. Oliver Cromwell's revolution overturned the practice and incorporated protections, in response to a popular group of English citizens known as the Levellers. The Levellers presented The Humble Petition of Many Thousands to Parliament in 1647 with thirteen demands, of which, the right against self-incrimination (in criminal cases only), was listed at number three. These protections were brought to the American shores by Puritans, and were later incorporated into the United States Constitution through its Bill of Rights.
This amendment is also similar to Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.