Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
10 Years In Jail For Smoking On Board Qantas?  
User currently offlinetioloko100 From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 137 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 14957 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well, its illegal to smoke on most commercial airlines these days but is jailing someone for 10 years for smoking in the aircraft and unruly behaviour not extreme? or a sign of good measures?

http://flyingactive.com/content/94-m...-years-jail-over-flight-abuse.html

50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSCQ83 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 1166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 14953 times:

Not only for smoking:

"before punching and spitting on crew members"


User currently offlineHALFA From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1367 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 14855 times:

Quoting tioloko100 (Thread starter):

Well, its illegal to smoke on most commercial airlines these days but is jailing someone for 10 years for smoking in the aircraft and unruly behaviour not extreme?

Did you even read the article? Your topic heading is a bit rich. Had he just attempted a smoke aboard the aircraft, he would have faced a maximum 2 years in prison with fines. This passenger took things much further. He physically assaulted members of the flight crew, which led QF to divert the flight, costing QF thousands of dollars. This is why he is now facing 10 years in prison.
I say throw the book at him.



Don't mess with Texas....We just may do that!
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1892 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 14851 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

To the OP, kindly read the article! Smoking on an aircraft is a maximum of two years confinement. Assaulting/interfering with a flight crew is ten years.

He deserves to do some time given what he did.


User currently onlineairevents From Germany, joined Jan 2002, 895 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14646 times:

From my point of view the jail term for smoking on board just cannot be long enough. These people are, in a bad case, putting some 300, 400 lifes at risk. Doesn´t that merit a hefty fine?


www.airevents.com
User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1607 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14557 times:

Quoting airevents (Reply 5):
From my point of view the jail term for smoking on board just cannot be long enough. These people are, in a bad case, putting some 300, 400 lifes at risk. Doesn´t that merit a hefty fine?

As much as I agree with you about smoking, I am old enough to remember when smoking on aircraft was unrestricted, and in the main these were aircraft types which are still arounf 707,727,737,747 and A300, 310, and I am unaware it was a major flight risk.

I doubt more modern designs such as the 380, 777 are more vulnerable to fire damage than the earlier ones.

The biggest problem is that cabin air is heavily recirculated so everyone gets a dose of the carcinogens etc. plus the usual burn marks in seats and dumpers left anywhere and everywhere.

Cheers

Ruscoe


User currently offlinestrandedinbgm From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 349 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14544 times:

An eye for an eye, that's what I say.


It's 737s, 747s and 380s. Not 737's, 747's and 380's. Learn to use the apostrophe for crying out loud.
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16371 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14523 times:

Quoting tioloko100 (Thread starter):
is jailing someone for 10 years for smoking in the aircraft and unruly behaviour not extreme? or a sign of good measures?

10 years for assault is appropriate. The smoking angle reinforces that he is a rule-breaker and legitimizes the 10-year sentence as punishment for planned, rogue behaviour.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3398 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14441 times:

I say the punishment should fit the crime. To me this does not sound like the maximum degree of assault, so a maximum sentence would be inappropriate (except as an exemplary sentence).

User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1607 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 14414 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 8):
for planned, rogue behaviour.

How do you know this?

My point in my original post was to offer alternative explanations for this type of behaviour, whilst not attempting to justify the behaviour, but to understand it.

Do you know how you would react in an hypoxic state with alcohol on board?

I did some hypobaric runs in the "chamber". It is quite revealing. We were given a sheet of 50 or so simple arithmetic sums to do. The chamber was depressurised to 30,000 ft, the air filled with mist momentarily, and then we commenced the sums.
I thought I aced it, but once back at sea level, I could see that I got the first half dozen correct, but the rest was garbage.

IMO a lot of problems with passenger behaviour on aircraft, are a combination of low pressur, hypoxia, dehydration, and effects of alcohol.

This is something airlines should try to manage, rather than react to.

Ruscoe


User currently offlinenorthstardc4m From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 3077 posts, RR: 36
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 14195 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 10):
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 8):
for planned, rogue behaviour.

How do you know this?

Lit cigarettes do not just magically appear in your hand/mouth. You have to plan to smoke. This makes it a premeditated act. In Canada it makes the entire crime premeditated, I would assume Australian law would be the same as it has the same basis, but not sure on that...

If you are hypoxic to the point of loss of faculties on a commercial airlines something is seriously wrong.
8000' pressure is not enough to make you more than a little tired, and should not have noticeable effect on anyones mental abilities unless they are otherwise impaired.

Nicotine addiction on the other hand... people do really screwy things when hit with withdrawal symptoms, but it's not an excuse.



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 902 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 14161 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 10):
IMO a lot of problems with passenger behaviour on aircraft, are a combination of low pressur, hypoxia, dehydration, and effects of alcohol.

I think the alcohol is more his problem than hypoxia or dehydration. According to other news reports on this, his court case had to be delayed till the afternoon because he turned up to the court drunk.

He was also drinking from a bottle of vodka he smuggled on to the plane, which was why he was so intoxicated.

[Edited 2012-12-18 16:04:58]

User currently offlineprebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6548 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 13929 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 6):
I am old enough to remember when smoking on aircraft was unrestricted, and in the main these were aircraft types which are still around 707,727,737,747 and A300, 310, and I am unaware it was a major flight risk.

Back in the 50'es and well into the 70'es SAS flew a couple of dozen Convair 440 airliners. Good planes, but as any other plane they had their snags which sometimes required unplanned maintenance.

One of the snags was fluctuating cabin pressure. When that happened, then they knew it was time to clean off tar and nicotine on the outflow pressure valve.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineQuokkas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 13806 times:

I doubt that the passenger will be sentenced to ten years, particularly if he has no previous convictions. You don't even get ten years for manslaughter so a punch and spitting, while completely unacceptable, would likely result in a lower penalty than the maximum.

I do believe it is appropriate, given the diversion cost QF $120,000 that an order for restitution should be made.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5016 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13440 times:

On 17 December a Qantas flight from Sydney to Tokyo diverted to Cairns to offload an unruly passenger for poor and threatening behaviour towards passengers and crew. Qantas crew did an excellent job managing this situation and bringing it under control. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) met the aircraft in Cairns to take the passenger into custody and the flight continued to Tokyo. This is an extreme and rare event but we have a zero tolerance approach for anti-social behaviour, and any actions that could compromise the safety of anyone on our aircraft. Following the incident, the AFP has warned that unruly passengers will now face charges. In 2011/12, the AFP responded to more than 1,000 alcohol-related incidents at major airports and charged 145 people with various offences.

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7983 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 13389 times:

I'm all for banning troublesome passengers from flights (that don't have a mental disability) but 10 years?! IIRC, sometimes rape won't even carry that charge! Intent has a huge part in all this... was he trying to blow up the plane? No? Then **** 10 years, ban him from the flight, maybe... (I know punching/spitting has something to do with it  


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineAirAfreak From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 750 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days ago) and read 12623 times:

I think the fair sentence would be 2 years in prison (as per Australian Law for smoking) and every individual on that plane whom he assaulted (punching and spitting) should reciprocate those behaviors towards him.

No one asked to be spit on or punched on that aircraft.

And please keep the anti-/pro- American comments to yourself. No need to use this for reference or comparison on an aviation forum.

Bon Voyage,

AirAfreak



Do you lead an Intercontinental life?
User currently offlineDogbreath From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 12636 times:

For those on here stating that this sentence of 10 years is a bit harsh, can I ask how many of you have been in an aircraft that has had an inflight smoke event (or inflight cabin fire)? I'd imagine with some of the comments on here - NONE.

In my 26 year flying career, I've had 2 inflight smoke events. None of them from smoking, but from electrical faults that led to immediate diversions whilst we carried out the relevant checklist/s, which included on one flight cracking the doors to evacuate the smoke. Those 2 events have been the most traumatic events of my flying career and something I never wish to have repeated. I take smoking onboard very seriously, and have the offender offloaded with the Police and follow it up with a civil charge.

Quoting airevents (Reply 5):
From my point of view the jail term for smoking on board just cannot be long enough. These people are, in a bad case, putting some 300, 400 lifes at risk. Doesn´t that merit a hefty fine?

Can't agree more.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 6):
As much as I agree with you about smoking, I am old enough to remember when smoking on aircraft was unrestricted, and in the main these were aircraft types which are still arounf 707,727,737,747 and A300, 310, and I am unaware it was a major flight risk.

Yes, but you have to remember that back in those days, smoking was accepted and there were plenty of ashtrays to place the cigarette ash and stub. There are usually no ashtrays today and with the blanket law on no smoking, the inflight smokers take their habit to the toilets, (in most cases), and dump the ash and stub into the waste bin, which surprisingly is full of waste paper. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to point out the danger in that scenario.

It took less than 13 minutes for the Swissair flight near Halifax to lose control and crash after the discovery of smoke onboard caused by an IFE fault. A frightening scenario!



Truth, Honour, Loyalty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 11570 times:

Quoting AirAfreak (Reply 24):
I think the fair sentence would be 2 years in prison

Why 2 years?

Quoting AirAfreak (Reply 24):
And please keep the anti-/pro- American comments to yourself. No need to use this for reference or comparison on an aviation forum.

Why the call for suppressing references?

Quoting Dogbreath (Reply 25):
For those on here stating that this sentence of 10 years is a bit harsh, can I ask how many of you have been in an aircraft that has had an inflight smoke event (or inflight cabin fire)? I'd imagine with some of the comments on here - NONE.

I have fortunately not been in that situation. I have been in buildings filled with smoke due to fire. Once in an underground facility where the emergency exit we tried to use was locked. I also spent 2 years installing fire detection systems. Not that it matters.

Two questions for you: Why is 10 years not too harsh? What does such a sentence accomplish?

I don't think 10 years is more of a deterrent than a shorter sentence to others.

I don't think 10 years is more effective than a shorter sentence at preventing him from repeating next time he is on a plane.

The monetary cost to society for keeping him prisoned 10 years is very high.

Depending on the specifics of each case societies costs due to him not being able to support his family may be even higher.

Depending on his job there may be significant costs to his employer.

I'm not saying this is acceptable or that there shouldn't be consequences. What I am saying is that a 10 year sentence provide nothing more than a significantly shorter sentence but costs a lot more to everyone else.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4867 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 11476 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 10):
The chamber was depressurised to 30,000 ft, the air filled with mist momentarily, and then we commenced the sums.

30,000ft air pressure is a LOT different to the 6-8000ft pressure in an aircraft.

I say throw the book at this guy... He should get 2 years for smoking (and not apologizing etc), another 2 years for threatening the safety of the aircraft/people on board, another 4 years for aggravated assault, and 2 years for resisting arrest (captains and their subordinates ie crew, have the power of arrest on aircraft). There's your 10 years to be served consecutively. He would of course be entitled to bail after something like 5 years for good behaviour.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlinefiscal From Australia, joined Oct 2009, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 11109 times:

If he is in for too long, how will he pay for the costs of the diversion? I am sure Qantas would prefer the cash, and ban him from their aircraft.

User currently offlinetribird1011 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 10710 times:

Quoting Dogbreath (Reply 25):
There are usually no ashtrays today and with the blanket law on no smoking, the inflight smokers take their habit to the toilets

Yes there are, usually on the exterior of the lavatory doors (these are mandatory), and most airlines will also place them on the interior of lavatory doors (these are optional). The reasoning behind it is that although you are not allowed to smoke inflight, you must have a safe place to extinguish a cigarette in the event someone does light up.

Looking at an A330 MEL with 6 lavatories installed, you are allowed to be missing 1 ashtray from the exterior lav door. If you are missing 2, the aircraft cannot be dispatched!!


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3398 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 10091 times:

This cannot the first time that an inebriated passenger has assaulted cabin crew in an aircraft where Australia has jurisdiction. Does anyone know what penalties were applied by Australian courts after similar incidents?

User currently offlineFarzan From Sweden, joined Jul 2007, 180 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 10061 times:

Quoting tribird1011 (Reply 29):

Now, this I enjoy. Somebody actually knowing what they are talking about contrary to Dogbreath who for 26 years of "flying career" does not.


User currently offlineSkyguy From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 10022 times:

On the subject of smoking on aircraft, which airline first banned smoking in aircraft and when? And is there any airline that still allows smoking on board today? (I know JL allowed smoking on board till well into the 1990's, Saudi Arabian I heard was a holdout but not sure if they've banned smoking now)


"Those who talk, do not know, and those who know, do not talk."
25 26point2 : @skyguy The first I remember was VA on the NATL routes. They allowed smoking on the Asia routes for a few more years I believe. Not sure if VA was the
26 Post contains images Birdwatching : Wasn't there an aircraft (I think DC9) in Canada some decades ago that landed with a burning cigarette in the lav trash bin, and as soon as they popp
27 PanHAM : IIRC that was an AC flight which landed at CVG, burning. Aircraft DC9 Interesting to follow that countries with AngloSaxon law have more severe punish
28 brilondon : In 1977, Aurigny was the first airline in the world to ban smoking.
29 Post contains links falstaff : Pilots used to smoke in the cockpit, I have an old Eastern Airlines promotional film showing it. Smoking on aircraft was banned for air quality reaso
30 Post contains links Viscount724 : Not everyone died. There were 23 survivors of the 46 aboard. And all 5 crew all survived. And the cause of the fire was never determined to be a ciga
31 SmittyOne : I don't necessarily agree with this sentiment. If the POTENTIAL consequences of a given inappropriate behavior are serious enough it eventually makes
32 PanHAM : Well, it is not what you or I agree on. An attempted murder is punished less than a murder and you cannot punish someone who smoked on board of an ai
33 ZKOKQ : I hope QF goes after the diversion costs. In cases like this, it should be written into the ticket condition's you pay. Medical and emergency diversio
34 SmittyOne : And that we must agree on LOL Which logically never made much sense to me. If a person has a genuine intent to kill, tries in earnest but fails in th
35 fiscal : I remember once flying QF in J on a 747 upstairs. The left hand side was smoking, and the right hand side was non smoking. It was a horror flight. An
36 tribird1011 : Although this is true, one benefit is that it provided maintenance technicians with a visual means of tracking pressurization (ie. leaks) problems...
37 Quokkas : The sentences quoted are not mandatory but maximums. In Australia there are few offences for which mandatory prison sentences are imposed and they te
38 lightsaber : Moderators: Please change the title to possible 10 years in jail for assault on Aircraft. Assault on an aircraft is extremely serious. If he just smok
39 PanHAM : Yup That's how it works Probably enables the guy to pay QF for the diversion costs, at least partially.
40 art : Depends on the law in the country concerned. IIRC in English law, for example, if you intend injuring someone (but have no intention of killing them)
41 ordwaw : If the brawl on the BA plane flying SYD-SIN segment starts and ends while the plane is flying over Indonesia and is diverted to Malaysia, what is the
42 art : I have no idea re: 'the country concerned' but I'm sure there will be someone on a.net who will be able to offer an answer.
43 PanHAM : The country that is interested. Malaysia would most likely not be interested and send the person home. Now it depends where home is and which citizens
44 Post contains images a36001 : This type of increasing behaviour make me really mad! And, well I just hope that Qantas goes this scumbag for the cost of diverting the flight! Then b
45 EIDL : Diversionary airport's country handles the offence as far as I know. Limerick Court deals with many drunk and disorderly passengers from diverted T/A
46 CPDC10-30 : I'm glad to see this crime is being punished appropriately. The response from cabin crew on my Air Asia X flight to pax smoking twice in the lav was a
47 MD11Engineer : Actually you gave it the wrong way around. The ashtrays INSIDE the lavatory are mandatory, and the ones OUTSIDE are optional. The outside one is a pr
48 DTWPurserBoy : This is a delicate situation. frequently it is a cultural issue or a language problem. And sometimes it is just plain deliberate. In some Asian cultu
49 Viscount724 : Also many to Canada on transatlantic flights. AA has had at least 2 unruly passenger diversions to Gander (YQX) within the past year or so, and I rec
50 Post contains links Quokkas : It looks like the passenger will not be flying anywhere soon. According to a report in the West Australian he has been banned from flying on Qantas fo
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
WN Celebrates 10 Years In ALB! posted Tue May 11 2010 13:32:41 by USAirALB
Qatari Diplomat In Custody After Smoking On Plane posted Wed Apr 7 2010 18:21:01 by brandonfs88
Man Gets 30 Days In Jail For Disrupting Flt posted Sat Jan 2 2010 08:32:11 by Voar
TAM Marks 10 Years In CDG posted Thu Jun 11 2009 02:13:50 by Hardiwv
Big Day In TPA For Spotters On 09Nov08 posted Sat Nov 8 2008 19:08:20 by Bagpipes
737 Next Generation - 10 Years In Flight posted Thu Feb 8 2007 22:28:12 by WestWing
10 Abreast In Economy For Emirates' New 777s? posted Tue Nov 22 2005 14:18:38 by BrightCedars
Any A.nutters See In Person Or Were On Board 292? posted Thu Sep 22 2005 03:46:50 by TedTAce
Charging For Toilets On Board? posted Tue Aug 30 2005 10:02:31 by Noelg
Asking For Medication On Board;why Not Possible? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 12:18:46 by RootsAir