parts of the appendicular skeleton - MywallpapersMobi

parts of the appendicular skeleton



NYTimes.com no longer supports Internet Explorer 9 or earlier. Please upgrade your browser.
LEARN MORE »




Skip to content
Skip to navigation
View mobile version

The New York Times

Archives |Drug Trafficker Convicted Of Blowing Up Jetliner




https://nyti.ms/298jgX6

Advertisement

Archives
|
1994

Drug Trafficker Convicted Of Blowing Up Jetliner

By ROBERT D. MCFADDEN


Continue reading the main story
Share This Page

Continue reading the main story

About the Archive

This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996.
To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.

Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems.
Please send reports of such problems to [email protected]

The article as it originally appeared.

View page in TimesMachine

December 20, 1994, Page 00003 The New York Times Archives

A Colombian said to be the most feared assassin of the Medellin drug cartel was convicted by a Federal jury in Brooklyn yesterday of blowing up an Avianca jetliner over Bogota in 1989. All 107 people aboard, including two United States citizens, were killed in one of the worst acts of drug-trade terrorism.

The 29-year-old defendant, Dandeny Munoz-Mosquera — who reputedly killed 50 police officers, judges and other officials in a ruthless career launched at age 12 — was also convicted of smuggling tons of cocaine into the United States over a decade, and of racketeering and conspiracy that included murders and other acts of terrorism to promote international drug trafficking.

Found guilty of all 13 counts by a jury that had heard stunning testimony of death and destruction and had deliberated over the weekend, Mr. Munoz-Mosquera faces up to life in prison without parole when sentenced on March 3 by Judge Sterling Johnson Jr., who presided at the two-month trial.

Prosecutors called it the nation’s first conviction under a 1956 Federal law that made it a crime to bomb a civilian aircraft, and the first under a 1986 terrorism statute that made it a crime to kill a United States citizen abroad. It was also a breakthrough for drug-enforcement officials frustrated for years by major drug traffickers operating with impunity from sanctuaries in Colombia.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Witnesses said Mr. Munoz-Mosquera had arranged to place a bomb aboard Avianca Flight 203 on Nov. 27, 1989, because he believed that two informers who were cooperating with Colombian authorities were on board. The aircraft exploded shortly after takeoff from Bogota on a domestic flight to Cali.

Continue reading the main story

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The unusual prosecution in this country of crimes committed in Colombia and other countries was made possible by the deaths of Americans in the Avianca bombing, and by the suspect’s 1991 arrest in Queens by Federal agents who learned that a notorious Medellin killer had come to New York just as President Bush and other world leaders were arriving to address the United Nations.

Since then, investigators said they had unmasked Mr. Munoz-Mosquera as the Medellin cartel’s top killer, a fugitive who planned the killing of a Colombian presidential candidate, destroyed the headquarters of Colombia’s intelligence service with a car bomb, mounted a rocket attack against the United States Embassy in Bogota and escaped from jail in Colombia twice.

“We are enormously gratified with the verdict,” the United States Attorney in Brooklyn, Zachary W. Carter, said after the jury’s midafternoon decision. “It sends an unequivocal message that murderous acts of narco-terrorism will not be tolerated.”

And Thomas A. Constantine, administrator of the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration, which had spearheaded a three-year investigation by American and Colombian authorities in the case, called it “a tremendous victory” against the Medellin cartel, one of the world’s most violent and powerful criminal organizations.

The conviction was also hailed by David S. Stempler, executive director of the Air Line Passengers Association, which monitors airline safety around the world and had cautioned its 110,000 members in 150 countries against flying to Colombia except on major airlines because of risks posed by drug terrorists.

The jury’s verdict, delivered to a crowded courtroom shortly after 3:30 P.M., ended a trial that began Oct. 17 in Federal Court in Brooklyn. The prosecution, led by Cheryl L. Pollak and Beth A. Wilkinson, presented a total of 35 witnesses, including many Colombian officials and criminal associates of the defendant.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Thank you for subscribing.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

View all New York Times newsletters.

  • See Sample
  • Manage Email Preferences
  • Not you?
  • Privacy Policy
  • Opt out or contact us anytime
  • Opt out or contact us anytime

In often-dramatic testimony, the witnesses portrayed Mr. Munoz-Mosquera as a paid assassin and drug smuggler of the cartel headed by Pablo Escobar, who was also indicted for the bombing of the Avianca jet but who was slain in a shootout with Colombian security forces last December.

“A number of Colombian police officers came to this country and testified at great risk to their own safety,” James McGivney, a spokesman for the Drug Enforcement Administration, said.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Mr. Munoz-Mosquera was said to have actually placed the bomb on board the plane. All 101 passengers and six crew members were killed, as well as three people on the ground.

Other witnesses said Mr. Munoz-Mosquera had been instrumental in smuggling “tons and tons” of cocaine into the United States between 1981 and 1991, and other testimony described patterns of racketeering and conspiracy that included scores of murders and other acts of terrorism to promote the drug trade.

Mr. Munoz-Mosquera did not take the stand, and the defense called only one witness, a Federal agent who signed an affidavit when the suspect was arrested in 1991.

But the defendant’s lawyers, Richard M. Jasper and Kenneth Ranseur, sharply cross-examined many of the prosecution witnesses, some of whom, they said, had testified in hopes of obtaining lighter sentences for themselves. They also contended that their client was being tried as a scapegoat for Mr. Escobar.

Traveling on a false passport and a wallet stuffed with counterfeit $100 bills, Mr. Munoz-Mosquera, a short, muscular man with the unlikely nickname of La Quica — “fat girl” in Colombian slang — was arrested at a pay phone in Queens by Federal agents who had been tipped off to his whereabouts.

The report of an assassin in town — his trail had led through Miami and Los Angeles — had unnerved security agents concerned about President Bush and other arriving world leaders. Though identified as a killer, he could be charged only with lying to a Federal officer about his name. He was eventually convicted of that and is still serving a six-year term.

Indicted in 1992 on the charges for which he was convicted yesterday, Mr. Munoz-Mosquera was first brought to trial last April, but the case ended in a hung jury in July, leading to a second trial in the fall.

Continue reading the main story

What’s Next

Loading…

Go to Home Page »

Site Index

The New York Times

Skip to content


  • Quick links

    • Unanswered topics
    • Active topics
    • Search
    • The team
  • Forum
  • FAQ


  • Quick links

    • Unanswered topics
    • Active topics
    • Search
    • The team
  • Forum
  • FAQ
  • Login


    • Civil Aviation
    • Travel, Polls & Preferences
    • Technical/Operations
    • Aviation Hobby
    • Aviation Photography
    • Photography Feedback
    • Trip Reports
    • Military Aviation & Space Flight
    • Non-Aviation
    • Site Related
  1. Airliners.net
  2. Aviation Forums
  3. Civil Aviation

Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

Post Reply

  • Print view

 

egph

Topic Author
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:54 am

Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #1

Sun Nov 29, 2015 12:38 pm

Hi guys,

After watching the Netflix series Narcos, I learned of the bombing of Avianca 203, a scheduled flight from Bogota to Cali. This was a Boeing 727 flight on which Colombian Presidential candidate Cesar Gaviria was meant to be traveling therefore it was targeted by the Medellin Cartel led by Pablo Escobar. Gaviria elected at the last minute not to catch that flight on receiving intel that there was a plan to destroy the plane. Some sources suggest the CIA was the source of the intel, others that the Colombian intelligence services came up with it themselves.

My question therefore is, if there was intelligence suggesting a credible threat to the safety of the flight, why was only Cesar Gaviria taken off the flight? Why was the flight not cancelled or at least special security measures implemented?

Top

 

namffo

Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #2

Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:28 am

It is very likely that Avianca 203 was not destroyed by a bomb but rather by a fuel system explosion of the type that destroyed at least five other Boeing aircraft, and which led to numerous Airworthiness Directives by the FAA, culminating with the mandatory installation of nitrogen inerting systems in the fuel tanks of 727 and 737 aircraft.

A great deal of false information has been propagated about Avianca 203. The Colombian newspaper El Espectador has recently published an eight part report reviewing the known facts of the disaster and questioning whether there is any competent evidence that a bomb was involved. The articles can be found at www.elespectador.com/files/especiales/a … index.html . The articles are written in Spanish. The El Espectador articles raise several main points. 1. There was never a competent and complete accident investigation of Avianca 203. Although the plane fell on land, near the city, much of the debris was never recovered or examined, and left in the field or carried off by thieves. No bomb parts or pieces were recovered, at the crash site, or in subsequent studies of recovered parts. 2. The only "evidence" of a bomb was the opinion of an FBI agent, whose opinion was subsequently officially discredited in the FBI "Labgate" scandal which emerged in 1996. The opinion of the FBI agent was based on his physical observation, which lacked any scientific basis, and certain lab results which were obtained in the FBI laboratory which could not, however, rule out the possibility of contamination of the examined samples. 3. It is impossible to say how many people were aboard the flight or who they were. 4. There was a history of mechanical problems with the 727 aircraft which exploded. A circuit breaker serving the right wing boost fuel pump had ripped ten times in the two months before the accident, and been reset by Avianca maintenance personel without the discovery of any cause of the breaker trip. In the other Boeing aircraft fuel system explosions, the fuel pumps and the wiring serving the fuel pumps were found to be the likely causes of the explosions. All eight of the fuel tank boost pumps were removed from the crash scene by unknown persons, and therefore could not be examined. Therefore, it is very difficult to rule out a similar fuel system cause for the explosion of Avianca 203 based on the available remaining evidence.

Over the years, a number of different "confessors" have come forward and claimed to have inside knowledge that a bomb was planted on the flight. These individuals are mostly mafia and ex-mafia members who have offered "information" to aid their own criminal cases. As these stories have emerged over the years, the "explanation" of Avianca 203 has evolved, changed, and taken on many bizarre features, including the "Gaviria" story to which you refer, and several other scenarios, including the alleged use of a tape recorder, etc. None of these stories is supported by independent evidence. For example, Gaviria himself has pointed out that in 1989, when he was a presidential candidate, he did not travel on regular commercial flights and never planned to travel on Avianca 203 or any other Avianca flight.

The known sequence of events in Avianca 203 was extraordinarily similar to the sequence of events established in TWA 800, a similarity which is noted in the accident report of TWA 800. TWA 800 was officially attributed to a fuel system explosion, after a great deal of careful scientific investigation. The other four known Boeing fuel system explosions (all of which happened in aircraft which were parked on the tarmac at the time of explosion) all demonstrated features similar to Avianca 203, that is, a smaller initial explosion, followed by a short period of fire, followed by a second much larger explosion which destroyed the aircraft. In every one of those cases, the probable cause of the accident was found to be, after careful investigation, a fuel system explosion initiated by electrical malfunctions.

If you are interested in Avianca 203 I suggest that you find and read the El ESpectador series, which contains a great deal more information than can be presented in this format.

Top

 

namffo

Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #3

Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:35 am

The link given in the previous note did not transcribe correctly. It is, www.elespectador.com/files/especiales/a … index.html

Top

 

namffo

Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #4

Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:36 am

The link, where it says "a…", should read "avianca-203"

Top

 

User avatar
larshjort

Posts: 1441
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:54 pm

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #5

Fri Dec 23, 2016 2:12 am

The links works fine namffo, it is the forum software that makes long links shorter to prevent them from messing with the layout.
139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4,

Top

 

b747400erf

Posts: 3032
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #6

Fri Dec 23, 2016 10:12 am

Digging up an old topic, but for the first time I thank you! An interesting read.

A possibility thought is if they received intelligence, they may have not cancelled the flight because that can burn your source. And if the President missed the flight, there could have been a chance the bombers would stop the attempt.

Top

 

namffo

Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: Avianca 203 – Why Was It Not Stopped?

  • Quote
  • #7

Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:46 pm

There have been at least six known catastrophic fuel system explosions in Boeing transport aircraft. They are:
1. Southern Air, 1967, Taiwan, Boeing 727, exploded while parked
2. Avianca 203, 11-29-89, Bogota Colombia, Boeing 727-200, exploded in flight
3. Philippine Air, Flight 143, 5-11-90, Boeing 737, exploded while parked
4. TWA 800m 7-17-96, Boeing 747, exploded in flight
5. Thai Airways Flight 114, 3-3-01, Boeing 737, exploded while parked
6. Transmile Airlines, 5-5-06, Bangalore India, Boeing 727, exploded while parked.

Of these incidents, only three, TWA 800, Transmile Airlines, and Thai Airways, are well documented, meaning, that comprehensive accident reports, with NTSB participation, exist and are available. Less is known about Southern Air, Philippine Air, and Avianca 203. In the case of Avianca 203, an official Report of the Colombian Aeronautica Civil exists, and an unofficial memorandum of Walter Korsgaard of the FAA is also available. However, both reports are extremely preliminary, and raise more questions than answers. It is very clear that no serious effort was ever made to investigate the cause of Avianca 203. For example,the crash debris was never comprehensively searched or recovered. That debris which was recovered was actually discarded as scrap less than two weeks after the crash. It was never determined what part first separated from the aircraft when the accident sequence began. An accurate passenger list was never assembled. It was never determined who removed the fuel pumps from the crash site. No note was taken of the electrical control settings in the cockpit. No effort was made to locate witnesses on the ground and record their observations. No effort was made to comprehensively search for bomb parts or remnants. No effort was made to examine the fuel system wiring, despite the evidence of the history of the boost pump circuit breaker. No effort was made to rule out a tire burst or explosion as the initiating event. In spite of all of this, the Colombian government and the FBI announced about a week after the accident that it was absolutely caused by a bomb.

Top

Post Reply

  • Print view

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ABEguy , abirda , acjbbj , Adipocere , aemoreira1981 , agusaidu , AMERICAN757 , AS512 , askme , Baidu [Spider], boilerla , btbx11 , Cmac787 , czpdx , Deltran757 , diatraveler , dmorbust , fry530 , gcskye , grbauc , GSOtoIND , ish2dachoppa , Justapax , Kikko19 , LTCM , lutz1140 , many321 , Mex87 , midexjet , MrHMSH , n471wn , PIEAvantiP180 , Qantas737 , Runway28L , RyanairGuru , Sayan777 , sciing , scotron11 , Siddar , Sightseer , SumChristianus , tcaeyx , tinpusher007 , tullamarine , TYSflyer , Utah744 , WolfPDX and 1 guest

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:
 
24 Hours
 • 
48 Hours
 • 
7 Days
 • 
30 Days
 • 
180 Days
 • 
365 Days
 • 
All Time

Military Aircraft


Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners


Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks


Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins


Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft


Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft


Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters


Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships


Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos


Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents


Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air


Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes


Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews


Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets


Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos

    • Civil Aviation
    • Travel, Polls & Preferences
    • Technical/Operations
    • Aviation Hobby
    • Aviation Photography
    • Photography Feedback
    • Trip Reports
    • Military Aviation & Space Flight
    • Non-Aviation
    • Site Related
  1. Airliners.net
  2. Aviation Forums
  3. Civil Aviation