Hey, there! Log in / Register
Beth Israel doctor charged with openly masturbating while sitting next to a girl on a flight from Honolulu to Boston
By adamg on Thu, 08/10/2023 - 12:01pm
Update: Acquitted.
A primary-care physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center was arrested today on a charge of committing a lewd, indecent or obscene act on an airplane for what he allegedly did while seated next to a 14-year-old on a Hawaiian Airlines flight from Honolulu to Boston on May 27, 2022.
According to an affidavit by an FBI agent on the case, about halfway, or five hours, into the flight, Sudipta Mohanty of Cambridge had his penis out and masturbated to completion while seated between his partner, asleep on one side, and the girl, awake, on the other. The girl was flying to New England to spend the summer with her grandparents - seated in a different row - and other relatives.
After he finished, the affidavit continues:
The man then zipped his pants back up, got up and went to the restroom. When MOHANTY returned to his seat Minor A did not know what to do. Everyone around her was asleep. Minor A's grandparents were seated in the aisle and window seats to across the aisle from her, but diagonally one row ahead of her. She could see that her grandparents were asleep.
Minor A was desperate to get out of her seat and away from the man. She looked behind her and saw that a woman (the "Neighbor") was seated in the row behind Minor A with two empty seats next to her. Minor A got up and asked the Neighbor if she could sit next to her. The Neighbor agreed and Minor A took a seat. The Neighbor asked Minor A if she was okay. Minor A said she was alright because she did not want to "freak" anyone else out.
Sometime after she was sitting in her new seat, Minor A could see that her grandmother was looking around for her. Minor A got up and told her grandmother that she had moved. Once off the plane and in the airport in Boston, Minor A told her grandmother that the man sitting next to her had done something "inappropriate." Minor A next told her mother that something had happened when speaking to her over the phone later that day or the next.
If found guilty, Mohanty faces up to 90 days in jail.
At Mohanty's initial appearance in Boston federal court today, a magistrate judge released him on personal recognizance, with conditions that include staying away from people under 18 and any places where they might congregate, including "schools, parks, playgrounds, libraries, fast food restaurants, etc." He was also ordered not to attempt to contact any witnesses in the case, except for his partner - who was sitting on the other side of him during the flight.
Innocent, etc.
Topics:
Free tagging:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 Complete affidavit | 284.1 KB |
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Do airlines have cameras
Do airlines have cameras inside the passenger areas? I think that would greatly help the case if they could even have video footage of the girl getting up and moving and weird motions by the suspect.
I feel bad for the girl and
I feel bad for the girl and the doctor’s patients, they now have to seek another primary care MD. Universal hub is the only news outlet covering this story.
Look for it on other outlets soon
Got a copy of a press release from the US Attorney's office in my inbox at 2:52 p.m.
Adam for the scoop.
Adam for the scoop.
No
No there's no cameras inside planes and quite frankly I think that's a good thing. Outside of rare occasions like this they would be useless and just ripe for abuse. Also barring a camera pointed down every row you wouldn't see anything that would contribute anything useful to a case like this.
That's just gross
I mean.. what makes someone do that? Outside of doing it next to a child.. but on a plane in your seat?!?!
I get some people get off by getting 'caught' (it's a thing), but sheesh this ain't it buddy. Go to the lavatory if you wanna do that. Not in your seat.
Especially next to a child. gross sicko.
That poor child was mortified. Glad she had instinct to just get up and move.
And really? Only 90 days? (which you know will end up being time served and waived since he's not a violent threat, if convicted)
Wanky Mohanty
May have to register as a sex offender in Massachusetts. If he's convicted.
Such a person would have to register with the Sex Offender Registry Board, and that information would be provided to police, DYS, DCF, etc.
Does Beth Israel employ convicted sex offenders? How about those who offended against a minor? I think that might be legitimate grounds for termination.
The up to 90 days in jail won't be the most significant part of his consequences.
I refrained
I refrained from asking that because I wasn't 100% sure if this was the case.
Cuz I know that.. If I go to a pickle park and expose my pickle. No matter if there's a minor there or not, I will be added to the sex offender registry.
Or at least that was the rumor eons ago. Not sure if it was true still.
"Go to the lavatory if you wanna do that"
Ah, the old solo mile-high club.
Poor girl!
What a horrible, scary situation! That would be seriously traumatic for a kid - bad enough for an adult.
On my last long flight, the safety instructions from flight crew actually included telling a flight attendant if someone acted inappropriately. I was glad they'd added that - sad this girl didn't know she could do that.
Wonder if the Mass Medical Society
or the Board of Registration will sanction him? He's a primary care physician who works in the Shapiro Center at BI. Ew.
Yep….
I am sure that is in the works, along with termination/suspension from BI.
Thats what you get for playing with the pee pee in front of people- especially a minor!!!!
Jesus Fucking Christ. The
Jesus Fucking Christ. The fuck is wrong with some people?
Remember, innocent until
Remember, innocent until proven guilty. And an FBI affidavit, well . . .
kinda
But considering he got up to use the lavatory after he was done, presuming to clean himself up of his spunk.. its obvious he did it in front of the child INTENTIONALLY.
It doesn't take a masters degree in psych to figure that out.
How do you know?
How do you know that he got up to use the lavatory? You weren't there. The FBI agent wasn't there either.
Sure sounds like likely guilty, based on what we're seeing here, but we have trials so that a judge or jury can actually look at the totality of the evidence
Uhhhh
Did you read the above?
Literally the first line. "After he finished.."
Yeah I read the article
I can’t tell if you are making the argument that witnesses are always 100% reliable or that cops never get the facts wrong. Yeah, there’s an affidavit, which was written by someone who wasn’t there, based in park on interviews with witnesses conducted some time after the events in question.
Yuck
If this happened. Yuck if it didn't. A working mind runs through the possibilities of each-- neither funny and deadly serious--yuck. I think it probably occurred as reported...but why the fuck do think that eh?
Why do you think what you think when you don't have evidence? Anyone ever ask that question?
Anyone ever wonder 'how else might it be?'
If you don't have to perform that cognition please tell us: what's your SECRET?
Because the great majority of
Because the great majority of reported sexual offenses did in fact happen. False reports are rare (as are false reports of crimes like theft and simple assault). However, a lot of police departments, DA's offices, and victims' family, friends, and neighbors will pressure them to withdraw the accusations, which they don't do if someone says their car was stolen, or a man says he was mugged by someone who took his wallet.
If I know that a statement has a 92-98% chance of being true, it doesn't take a lot of time and effort to accept it, barring a specific reason not to. "I wish men didn't behave that way" isn't a reason to reject the statement.
That's BS
There is no accurate percentage of how many are false and there can't be. It's impossible to tell for several reasons. People acquitted can in fact be guilty and by the same token,people convicted can in fact be innocent. And have been proved to be innocent later on.
Spend some time in the Boston criminal courts, you will see some obviously- and apparently-false accusations. These are cases which are dismissed after contradictory evidence is found (eg hard alibi) or are quick not-guilty jury verdicts due to inconsistent and false statements of the complainant coupled with motives to lie.
Please don't cite any bogus study by an advocacy group with "estimated" numbers. Worthless.
The probable cause threshold is pretty low, and got lower over the last 30 years. It's basically someone going to the police and saying "He raped me" or "He groped me." Now you can go to the police days or even years after the alleged events. If the jury believes the complainant, guilty.
Despite the theme that police and prosecutors don't proceed with these cases, in fact they do proceed with cases which have obvious problems - old allegations, no corroborating physical evidence, inconsistent statements of the complainant, psychiatric issues of the complainant including delusions or BPD, indications of attention-seeking behavior, obvious motives to lie for revenge or profit.
These things have recently played out in the Kevin Spacey and Depp-Heard cases. We had a multi-year drama in Massachusetts with Fells Acres.
Well, no, not exactly
Queer people are falsely accused of sexual offenses all the time.
You and I in agreement
There was a guy, his MO was to go into gay bars in Boston and start a scuffle in the bathroom saying he was assaulted. He would lift their wallets. Would drop the wallet if restrained. Got away with it often, don't know how he ended up.
Also false accusations part of the routine of thugs beating gay men.
Did AJ get an MD?
I thought he was working for Whoop or something.
GAAAH!
Currently pouring over my medical record at BI to make sure I have never seen him before.
Wicked. Icky!
But
if called for the jury on this, would you self-report that you have already decided the man's guilt, or would you be kinda like....a 'sleeper' jury member waiting to exact your version of justice?
Would the evidence matter at that point?
I mean we are thinking that Vicki's 98% idea is a bias aren't we?
And yes, obviously these are questions I am asking myself as well. And I know they are good questions to ask of others here.
The entire point of a jury
The entire point of a jury trial is you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. As bad as this case is I've sat on juries for cases where people were kidnapped and attacked and they still managed to make a jury work. Very famous people can manage to get a jury, I think worrying about that at this time doesn't make sense.
I was in the room for a selection for a guy that made my blood boil and skin crawl. He had already admitted to raping and attacking children, violently. I forget what the trial was for , I think it was for specifuc charges. When they asked who was already biased I've never felt my arm jolt up so fast. The room was packed and all hands were up. So we spent a long time talking to the judge one by one. I don't know what happened after that because I was released with a group of other 20 something's by the defense. I presume this guy managed to get a trial... So I think this guy will get his trial too.
If the judge feels you aren't being genuine they have the ability to do something about it. I wouldn't advise trying to get onto a jury to dispense "your own version of justice." Doing that could jeopardize the whole race and could even lead to a mistrial. If you have a bias you should be honest about it but it's best for the system if you try to push past that and listen to the facts and testimony. That's why they don't allow media consumption about the cases during the trial.
Neither?
I'd be willing and able to do a proper job of this as a juror. The only time I would intentionally violate the instructions, or lie during the jury selection proceedings, would be in a jury nullification case -- a situation where the law in question was egregiously wrong. But that's not the case here.
However, it sounds pretty bad from the reporting, so I'm guessing this will end up as a plea bargain right before the scheduled trial.
The parents didn't report this until 5 weeks after it happened,
and they didn't report it to authorities, they reported it to the Hawaiian Airlines customer service 800 number? Then proceeded to dramatically change their story when they sent an email to the airline a week later?
Obviously only the girl and Mohanty know the truth, but the FBI agent's affidavit is useless, including his insightful observation that when he knocked on Mohanty's door and accused him, "MOHANTY now appeared visibly nervous in that his hands and voice trembled." No jury in the world would convict the guy based on the narrative he presents.
A word about affidavits
Affidavits are used to convince a judge to issue an arrest warrant - which has a much lower threshold of evidence than a trial. Obviously, the man will get his day in court, but you shouldn't think the affidavit is the totality of the evidence that may be brought against him.
these days
The last couple years an accusation is all it takes and "the guy" is automatically assumed to be guilty. If it did happen he should burn in hell. If it didn't, it doesn't seem to make any difference. His career/ life is over, even if he's innocent.
This seems wrong to me. And in case anyone cares, I'm a female.
And back in the "old days", a
And back in the "old days", a guy could be well-known as a serial sexual offender and it wouldn't affect his career in the least. I know which situation I prefer.
Masturbatory emissions ...
Against zipper teeth? Who da fuq does that, much less on a plane, in the company of a minor?
Another lesson - do not talk to the police or FBI
In the affidavit, you can see how they take or exaggerate natural reactions "he was visibly nervous in that his hands and voice trembled" or cherry-pick the awkward subjunctive circumlocution by a possibly non-native speaker of English out of a more extensive conversation "Well then I would have to say that my response would be to deny that." All to frame the guy as a perv and a liar. Maybe he is, but still sleazy tactic.
Other than that, testimony of the "companion" and defense background investigation of complainant and her family will be key to the case.
Was the companion interviewed by the FBI? It's not in the affidavit. On the one hand, if she said she slept it would help the case. On the other, if she said she was awake and saw nothing of the sort happen it would weaken the case. It would seem to be required before putting this guy's name out there.
One has to be a special kind
One has to be a special kind of willfully clueless to show up here and worry first about a false accusation.