Do you think she may have risked that, or is it really too risky? If the US Marshals saw, for example, that she had taken a flight to the Bahamas, or to London, they could just call ahead and have her arrested when her flight landed…..
Very good point; this is a bright woman. She woke up morning of May 14 and had choices:
1) she could fly a regional airline with a connection in Houston-Hobby, then to New York, and then, if she chose, connect again or
2) she could fly internationally direct from AUS to London, to Frankfurt, Amsterdam, etc. Plenty of options. Even more options had she been willing to drive the Jeep to IAH (Bush) in Houston, which is just a few hours away and is a major United hub.
It’s always been a little weird that she chose 1, right? There are other airlines with direct flights from AUS-JFK, so if the goal was to get to NYC there were much easier and price-competitive ways than an onerous connection at Houston-Hobby. Also, she flew Southwest, which isn’t a huge rewards airline. Why I mention this: I fly a lot, a lot lot. I will do almost anything to fly United because they spoil me and reward me and discount my tix, etc. Southwest isn’t like that.
So I ask myself, why did she choose that?
I think she chose that to test whether she could get on a plane and if she was going to be arrested if she tried.
It’s much harder to prove “she was trying to abscond” if she’s got a regional connection on her way to NYC, where surely she has friends. A quality attorney could argue she was just going to see friends. I think she picked this route to test the waters.
Had she booked like London-Heathrow with BA from Austin, I think she was worried she’d get arrested on boarding or worse deported back into custody from British customs.
I think this very bright woman set up a test. In her white jeans.