Court TV Host: Chat with Court TV's Beth Karas and Courttv.com's Emanuella Grinberg about the guilty verdicts in the trial of two airline pilots convicted today of operating a plane while intoxicated. Welcome, Emanuella, thanks for being our guest today.

Emanuella Grinberg: My pleasure

Court TV Host: Welcome, Beth!

Beth Karas: Thanks for having me

Question from JT: HI Beth I think you are the best. What I don't understand is why they were prosecuted under driving laws as opposed to FAA laws.

Beth Karas: Thanks. They're not. This is a separate state statute that tells the court to look to federal regulations for guidance on what is careless and reckless. It is likely to be an appellate issue -- whether the analogy to drunk driving legal limits was appropriate at the trial.

Question from Alison: Were you surprised by the guilty verdicts?

Beth Karas: Nothing surprises me anymore. Quite frankly, an acquittal wouldn't have surprised me. What is more surprising--or I should say--sends a strong message is that these former pilots are in jail now. I'm sure pilots across America are sitting up and taking notice.

Emanuella Grinberg: I was a little surprised it took so long, but it goes to show that the jury took their job seriously.

Question from ANGRYWOLF: Why wasn't there a plea bargain?

Beth Karas: There were plea negotiations, but the judge rejected them. The deal was that the pilots were to plead to the felony and take 14 months in prison.

Question from grBerni: Did the jury know they offered to take a plea agreement? If yes, do you think that colored the jury judgment?

Emanuella Grinberg: No, they did not know of it.

Question from phroggygreen: Beth, you said this will go to appeals but do you think it will be over turned?

Beth Karas: That's a good question. Defense attorneys (not the ones who tried the case but some of our commentators) tell me that there are real appellate issues and are confident that it will be reversed. This is complicated stuff and I can't predict what the Florida appellate courts will do. There's a good chance that Cloyd and Hughes will sit in prison pending an appeal--though it's not a guarantee.

Question from tinkerbella: When is the penalty phase for the pilots? And what are they facing?

Emanuella Grinberg: No penalty phase but a sentencing July 20. They face up to five years in prison, or as little as probation.

Question from JT: Up to 5 years in prison isn't that a little harsh?

Beth Karas: This judge is likely to give them more than the 14 months, but don't be surprised if their sentences are not the same. The pre-sentence report will reveal some incidents in Cloyd's past though we know of none in Hughes's past.

Question from grBerni: Why didn't the judge let them have the plea agreement? That seems like overkill.

Emanuella Grinberg: It's the judge's prerogative to accept or reject the plea but he has said that he wanted to see the evidence, and now that he has, it will be up to him to determine an appropriate sentence.

Question from Alison: Have you ever had a judge throw out a plea offer prior to this?

Beth Karas: This is not unheard of--though the norm is for judges to try to clear their dockets by pleas. About 95% or so of cases are pled out. If not, our criminal justice system would crash. In my own practice in NY, I've had judges reject pleas--but it was unusual.

Question from phroggygreen: Do you think that the judge will give Cloyd a stiffer sentence because he is the first officer the main pilot and because he has a record?

Beth Karas: Actually, Hughes's title was First Officer, but I understand you mean the captain. It's a good question, and it's possible. That, coupled with Cloyd's past of a DUI, and 2 alcohol-related arrests in 1998 and 2000 are likely to influence the judge. By the way, today in court as Hughes was crying and saying goodbye to his wife, he could be heard saying: "I don't deserve this." It is true that if Cloyd hadn't caused a ruckus by refusing to throw away his coffee that the two would have taken off and landed in Phoenix.

Question from Judy: I want to know why they finger-printed the pilots in front of everyone.

Beth Karas: That's the standard procedure in Florida. It happens in all the cases that we've seen.

Question from redbird: Beth. 1st of all, thank you for your consistently unbiased reporting. Are these pilots still subject to federal prosecution, and if so, what would/could they be charged with?

Beth Karas: Thank you, redbird. I always try to just give you the facts. Technically, so long as the state goes first in a prosecution where there is concurrent jurisdiction, then there can be a subsequent federal prosecution. But the reality is that there will likely not be a federal case.

Question from JT: How soon could the appeals process start?

Beth Karas: It can't start until after the sentencing on July 20. That will trigger the process. A notice of appeal will be filed then the defense has to get a certified transcript of the trial and the brief filing begins.

Emanuella Grinberg: Some possible appellate issues: the judge refused to give jurors an instruction on attempting to operate an aircraft.... some definitions read to jury testimony related to the field sobriety test performed on the pilots which included an obtuse mathematical formula.

Question from grBerni: I would think that one of the largest appellate issues would be the validity of that bar tab!! To drink that much, in that amount of time, wouldn't their BAC be MUCH higher, and wouldn't they be almost constantly drinking, with out setting the mugs down???

Emanuella Grinberg: Well, I think the bar tab was used more to pinpoint the time they began to wrap up, in addition to quantifying the numbers of beers.... but in testimony we learned that the martini on the bar tab was drunk by flight attendant Denise Boger... and that they bought one of the 16 oz. pints for someone else.

Beth Karas: Also, I don't recall any objections at least in open court that challenged the bar tab. So, there may be no issue to appeal related to it. It may be a good issue to raise should there be a retrial.

Beth Karas: I have to prepare for my last newsbreak/liveshot of the trial. See you in a few minutes and then at another trial.

Question from phroggygreen: Emanuella: Do you think that after this there may be more arrests of pilots DUI in Florida now? Because before this I have never heard of pilots being arrested for DUI.

Emanuella Grinberg: This is not a first

Beth Karas: There have been prosecutions in other states--though they are rare. I think one involved Northwest pilots and the prosecution was federal (and there was prison time).

Emanuella Grinberg: As Hillah Katz was quick to say outside of court that this case exemplifies the seriousness with which Miami Dade approaches all of its DUI cases. DUI is pretty big around here. There is a department in the state attorney's office that deals exclusively with DUI, and they have a pretty solid track record. So in the state's view, they hope it sends a message that they will handle airplane DUIs just as seriously as they do driving DUIs.

Question from CB: Are any of the jurors giving interviews to let the public know what was going on during deliberations?

Emanuella Grinberg: They all ran out without offering comment except to say "they followed the law," but the length of deliberations should imply they took the time to consider all the issues. But assistant state attorney Deisy Rodriguez noted that the pilots' operation manual that went into evidence seemed thoroughly leafed through, so that may imply they paid close attention to pinpointing the moment in time when operation began.

Court TV Host: Thanks, Emanuella and Beth, for being our guests today.

Emanuella Grinberg: No prob! Check out courttv.com for more!

Beth Karas: Anytime... and tune in in 15 min. for more on Court TV.