A British Airways flight from Cancún to Gatwick diverted and made a landing in Orlando when a passenger became abusive and violent towards crew and passengers.

According to his arrest report, Sean Jude Kelly had consumed "half a bottle of vodka and became disruptive shortly after take off, then fought with police officers and threatened to kill one of them as they removed him from the aircraft when it was on the ground".

A representative for the airline said British Airways reserves the right to seek compensation from the passenger for the extra costs incurred by the landing in Orlando and subsequent delay. 265 passengers aboard were delayed for more than an hour by the unscheduled landing.

Although bail was set at $5,300, Kelly is being held on an "immigration hold" which means that he will remain in custody until he appears in court.

The newspaper report mentions possible sentences of 15 years for aggravated assault and five years for resisting arrest with violence. Is he likely to receive that much or will a hefty fine and deportation follow?

That BA may seek to obtain compensation is welcome. There are too may people who think that they can disrupt the comfort, safety and enjoyment of a flight simply because "I had a bit much to drink". If he does spend some time in jail, perhaps he will reconsider his love of daiquiris.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...british-man-assault-florida-flight

[Edited 2013-04-09 22:26:03]

I am sure he's gonna have a pleasant stay in the US..   

In all seriousness, this kind of behaviour though not always so extreme, is happening too frequently and is a real stress factor for all the crew members and passengers.

This person should be punished as he deserves.

I hope he gets the book thrown at him. Fifteen years in a high security prison would serve as a good message to those who misbehave on flights.

However, I wonder how he got so drunk so early in the flight; was he drunk when he boarded and should he actually have been allowed on board?

No excuse for him, anyway; let justice, American style, be done.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2): No excuse for him, anyway; let justice, American style, be done.

So...electric chair or lethal injection then? Maybe hogtie him and chuck him in with the gators? Sure, it is Florida, but still I think you may have watched a few too many movies.


"Kelly was being combative, both verbally and physically, over the entire route," said Corporal Russell Emerson, the arresting officer of the Orlando police department, in his report. He said Kelly told Officer Cleopatra Margaritis: "I'm going to kill you," then tried to kick her, sustaining a "small laceration above his left eye" after falling to ground when he lost his balance. Kelly's booking photograph, meanwhile, shows his face with a bruised and bloodied fully closed left eye.

Yeah suuurrre, he "fell".

[Edited 2013-04-09 22:49:21]

[Edited 2013-04-09 22:49:57]

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2): No excuse for him, anyway; let justice, American style, be done.

Justice American style? In this case that would probably be a plea deal for some community service from an overworked DA since there's no beds in jails anyway.

The punk deserves some kind of punishment but 15 years? That's the time one has to do here for murder..

These jail sentences are excessive and in no relation to the "crime". Landing and kicking the guy off the flight, sobering him up and put him on the next flight home and let the UK aiuthorities deal with him will do it. Plus, making him responsible and pay for the costs is punishment enough.

The incident did not happen on US territory, the person is not a US citizen, neither the US nor Florida should have any interest to jail him.

What's the chances that the pilot considered that if the passenger was arrested at LGW at the end of the flight he would likely end up with just a police caution, or if taken to court a 50 pound fine. Then decided to divert to MCO ?

As details come out, we'll probably learn that he complained about the movie too. -ir

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 5): The punk deserves some kind of punishment but 15 years? That's the time one has to do here for murder.. These jail sentences are excessive and in no relation to the "crime". Landing and kicking the guy off the flight, sobering him up and put him on the next flight home and let the UK aiuthorities deal with him will do it. Plus, making him responsible and pay for the costs is punishment enough. The incident did not happen on US territory, the person is not a US citizen, neither the US nor Florida should have any interest to jail him.

I completely agree 100%. Why should US taxpayers foot the bill for this.

Is there any precedence for this where the plane landed in a diversion country and was trialed and jailed there?

If this is the case than the plane should have diverted to British Bermuda.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 5): The incident did not happen on US territory

I don't know what the actual route followed by BA on this service is but the Great Circle route would take the flight through US airspace and indeed over the State of Florida.

Both the UK and the US are contracting parties to the Tokyo Convention On Offences And Certain Other Acts Committed On Board Aircraft. This convention imposed a requirement on the country of disembarkation to detain the offending person according to its laws, to try him, to extradite him or to release him without delay.

Quoting AA7295 (Reply 8): If this is the case than the plane should have diverted to British Bermuda.

This may have meant carrying a violent and disruptive passenger a greater distance than necessary. In the interests of the safety of the aircraft, crew and passengers it is best to off-load violent drunks as expeditiously as possible. It may also be in the best interests of the trouble causer. Who knows what can happen? On minute a drunken aggressive, next having a fit and carking it.

Patiently waits for the YouTube video of this incident. There will be a few of this event with everyone and their phones and cameras. Can't wait for this one to pop up.  

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 9): This convention imposed a requirement on the country of disembarkation to detain the offending person according to its laws, to try him, to extradite him or to release him without delay

On the way from Mexico to the UK the US of A is difficult to avoid. By the meaning of the convention the US of A should have no interest to try the perpetrator. Extradition on the next flight to the UK should be obviously the best way to handle this.

Also in the interest of BA, since the guy will not be able to pay a cent should he be working in the licence plate business for the next 15 years.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 11): the US of A should have no interest to try the perpetrator.

While I might agree that being drunk on an aircraft may not be of much interest to the unfortunate taxpayers in the US, there is the little matter of "aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence", which would be of interest to the US authorities. Had the reported assaults of US officials not occurred he might have been simply booked on the next flight after having time to sober up.

I agree that BA may find it difficult to obtain restitution of the costs of the diversion if he is convicted and jailed, but we do not know what his assets are. He describes himself as a "money broker", perhaps he means that he is broke and has no money.  

My own view is that a stiff fine be imposed followed by a "persona non grata" being prominently stamped in his passport, but of course that's up to the courts to decide.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 3): "He said Kelly told Officer Cleopatra Margaritis: "I'm going to kill you," then tried to kick her,

Sistah Girl ain't got time for that.

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 12): He describes himself as a "money broker", perhaps he means that he is broke and has no money.

I like that.  

The threads he made was while he was intoxicated, totally filled up. In other words, he did not know what he was talking and what he was doing. In my neck of the woods you usually walk free after spending a night sobering up. As long as no one was seriously hurt. The term is, I believe, temporary insanity.

Kicking him out of the country is OK, a fine, well, they would have to collect the fine in the UK, don't know if that is possible. In Germany the State of Florida would need to go the the local courts and that would not be worth what they would be getting. The lawyers fees would be higher.

Moneybroker - pay day loans enforcer
Entertainments officer - nightclub bouncer

 

A quick read of his twitter feed provides a good character reference (not)

We know one thing for sure, he won't be holidaying in the USA in future. They will have him marked down as a   

BA will never manage to get any financial restitution from him, as he will undoubtedly have no assets. What they have done is send out a strong message that they are willing to spend money in order to make the point that such behaviour is unacceptable.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 15): Moneybroker - pay day loans enforcer

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 15): BA will never manage to get any financial restitution from him, as he will undoubtedly have no assets

Perhaps he could get a payday loan to cover the bill?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 5): The incident did not happen on US territory,

Really? Not according to the repoirt. It says:

"Sean Jude Kelly, 31, was charged with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence after the captain of the British Airways flight from Cancún to Gatwick made an emergency landing in Orlando on Sunday night."

Here note in particular the words "after . . . an emergency landing in Orlando".

The report does not say anything about the US authorities taking any action over anything that happened before the aircraft landed on US territory and was boarded by US law enforcement officers.

He did take Alcohol and Valium on the outbound flight to get through the take-off.

Maybe he was doing the same going back.
"listening to 'Daiquiris' and popping Valiums, only way to get through take off."

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4): In this case that would probably be a plea deal for some community service from an overworked DA since there's no beds in jails anyway.

Plenty of room in federal courts and prisons, though.

Quoting AA7295 (Reply 8): I completely agree 100%. Why should US taxpayers foot the bill for this.

What expenses would the US government have incurred on a flight from Mexico to the UK?

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17): he report does not say anything about the US authorities taking any action over anything that happened before the

while he was intoxicated and most likely temporarily insane. Still does not justify 20 years. The cops are doing their job and that includes violence. They know how to handle that.

What puzzles me also is that not only in the US but obviously also in the UK, people who have not yet been sentenced by a court are being pilloried, with full name and place of domicile and even their Twit accounts are made public.

Browsing through the tabloids this morning, there was an incident on a flight from MUC to TXL some time ago where 2 so called sitcom "stars" got into a fight with a deadheading LH captain who told them to switch off their mobiles on finals.

One guy was fined € 5000, the other € 3000,00

Just as comparison.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 14): they would have to collect the fine in the UK

Maybe, maybe not. The court may have the power to impose a fine to be paid within so many days or spend some time in prison. This may give the person time to arrange payment before being released from the "immigration hold" that has been emplaced.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 21): Still does not justify 20 years.

As always the media like to stress the maximum penalty possible for the most serious offence. The courts may decide on a lot lower penalty, but 20 years does sound so much more impressive than writing one hundred times, "I must not be a naughty boy." Or does writing lines constitute psychological torture, these days?  

Quoting fca767 (Reply 18): He did take Alcohol and Valium on the outbound flight to get through the take-off.

I must say if he needs to be intoxicated to get on a plane, he probably should take heed of what his senses are telling him and indeed, not get on the damn plane. It's not our fault he has an irrational phobia.

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 22): Maybe, maybe not. The court may have the power to impose a fine to be paid within so many days or spend some time in prison. This may give the person time to arrange payment before being released from the "immigration hold" that has been emplaced.

The only reason to pay a fine in a foreign country is the possible intention to go back to that country. They may however keep you hostage with that pay or jail clause.

Of course this is a maximum fine, still, even 2 years is in no relation to the "crime".

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 12): He describes himself as a "money broker", perhaps he means that he is broke and has no money.

Money brokers....people who make other´s people money go down the drain....

My view is that in the safety card, on the ticket or the safety announcement they should say "tampering, removing or disabling the smoke detector in the lavatories is a federal offence and causing a diversion or problems with the crew due to violence or misconduct is punishable with fines up to 25 000 USD and jail" ....

TRB

I would like to see BA go after him for costs,he has the same chance as I have of winning the lottery next week.  
Also a lifetime ban with the airline, and while we are on the subject, wouldn't it be a good idea if all EU carriers shared there own "blacklist" with each other? or are we treading on someones human rights.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 23): I must say if he needs to be intoxicated to get on a plane, he probably should take heed of what his senses are telling him and indeed, not get on the damn plane. It's not our fault he has an irrational phobia.

I was wondering if the Valium makes you go crazy.

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 26): ? or are we treading on someones human rights.

data protection. May not be an issue in some countries, in others it is taken seriously.Not always in the interest of the general public but that is what we have to live with.

having someone who is not even convicted exposed to the pp public is a punishment in itself.

[Edited 2013-04-10 06:36:36]

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 26): are we treading on someones human rights.

Freedom of travel is a fundamental right !

Being a pissed up D*** head is tragic .

Bankrupt him and he will becomes the tabloids favourite character that of the benefits scrounger !
That said BA should pursue the individual for costs but that a civil matter.

BA and others will certainly share the details and this individual better start looking at much closer travel opportunities for their next holiday - Blackpool can be charming !

As for US enforcement officer assaults well it goes with the job and removing an inebriated and paralytic drunk from a confined space using force you are likely going to get thumped and/or kicked !

Pan Am I think I understand and agree that the UK tabloid reporting methods are unacceptable and have indeed been known to purger a fair trial.

The event should be reported in the public interest however until charged they should NOT be allowed to name anyone.

Further they should not be allowed to print or dig anything about the individuals past until AFTER sentencing.

[Edited 2013-04-10 06:01:24]

[Edited 2013-04-10 06:02:52]

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 29): Freedom of travel is a fundamental right

Maybe it is but it is not a fundamental obligation on any carrier to either accept a booking for travel or to carry you if you have made a booking and are in breach of the conditions of carriage. Here is an excerpt from BA's General Conditions of Carriage:

7a) We may decide to refuse to carry you or your baggage if one or more of the following has happened or we reasonably believe may happen...
7a8) If you have used threatening, abusive or insulting words towards our ground staff or another passenger or a member of the crew of the aircraft.

7a9) If you have behaved in a threatening, abusive, insulting or disorderly way towards a member of our ground staff or a member of the crew of the aircraft.

7a38) If you have behaved in a way mentioned above on or in connection with a previous flight and we believe you may repeat this behaviour.

7b) Our right to refuse to carry you when we have banned you from our route network

7b1) We will be entitled to refuse to carry you or your baggage if we have given you a banning notice and you have bought your ticket while the ban applies.

7b2) By a banning notice we mean a written notice we have given to you informing you that you are banned from being carried on our route network. (This means you are banned from travelling on all flights we operate.) This notice will give the date when the ban comes into force and the period for which it applies. A banning notice will also ask you not to buy a ticket or ask or allow anyone to do so for you.

7b3) If you try to travel while a banning notice is in force, we will refuse to carry you and you will be entitled to an involuntary fare refund.

But apart from the rights of airlines to refuse to carry someone a person does not have an unqualified right to travel outside their normal country of nationality or domicile. Many countries impose entry conditions that include barring people who have convictions for various offences. While it generally upholds the principal of freedom to leave ones country at will, the UK Government, in certain circumstances, can withdraw a person's passport and a court may order it to be surrendered.

Now I am not suggesting that this gentleman should have his passport confiscated but I would see no harm in BA deciding that they would prefer him to opt to travel with another carrier in future.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 29): Freedom of travel is a fundamental right !

No it is not. Airlines have no obligation to carry you and countries have no obligation to let you in.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 29): Further they should not be allowed to print or dig anything about the individuals past until AFTER sentencing.

If you want privacy don't go naming your twitter profile after your full name, and make it public for anyone to see. At that point you are kind of waiving your right to privacy in that regard. I'm sure all the editors did was google search his name, which is something plenty of readers would have done even if the newspaper didn't include his twitter.

Notwithstanding any charges involved with assautling the police officer(s) once on the ground in the US....would there be any criminal charges associated with the passenger's actions WHILE IN FLIGHT that precipitated the diversion? And since the flight originated in Mexico, was bound for the UK, on a UK carrier, and took place (presumably) in international airspace, exactly whose jurisdiction would those charges fall under?

For instance if the flight had landed in MCO and the passenger had been cooperative with police, would it then be merely a case of allowing him to sober up, putting him on the next flight to LGW, and then the airline seeking compensation from the passenger for the expenses incurred? Would he face any criminal charges back in the UK, or just be responsible for compensting the airline?

Quoting Polot (Reply 31): No it is not. Airlines have no obligation to carry you and countries have no obligation to let you in.

Yes it is. There are other means of travel than by air. You can also stay within your own country. An airline or any other common carrier is in the business to carry people. As long as you can pay for the trip and have enough money you will be accepted in any country and some countries even let you in when you have nothing of the above, Just ask for asylum.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 5): The incident did not happen on US territory,

This part happened in the US:

Quoting Quokkas (Thread starter): then fought with police officers and threatened to kill one of them as they removed him from the aircraft when it was on the ground".

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 33): Yes it is. There are other means of travel than by air. You can also stay within your own country. An airline or any other common carrier is in the business to carry people. As long as you can pay for the trip and have enough money you will be accepted in any country and some countries even let you in when you have nothing of the above, Just ask for asylum.

None of that proves that international travel is a fundamental right. Yes, countries will generally accept you if have enough money, but that is because they choose to allow you in, not because you have the right to go to the country. You can have all the money in the world but if you have been convicted of a drug violation then the US will not let you enter for example.

And yes, you have the right to ask for asylum. Again that doesn't prove that freedom of travel is a fundamental right...because the country also has the right to deny your asylum claim and kick you out of the country.

Most countries have no problem letting foreigners in, but that doesn't mean I can just pick up and go anywhere I want and do anything I want because "freedom of travel is a fundamental right".

Quoting Polot (Reply 35): None of that proves that international travel is a fundamental right.

I grew up in a country that was divided and the other part (I was lucky, I lived in the free part) did not let their subjects travel. No one under 65 had a chance to even think about leavng and going at random to other places. It could cost your life if you took your right into your own hands.

What kind of mindset has established itself in the land of the free if opinions like yours are stated?

Freedom of travel IS a fundamental right. Period. You do not have to ask for permission to leave the US or whatever your home country is. If your hgome country restricts your travel , it is not a free country. Simple as that..

We live in a world where fundamental rights are not honored in all countries, unfortunately.

So far I thought that the US does not belong to this group.

.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36):

You have the right to stay out of any country that you clearly don't like. I invite you to exercise that right.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36): Freedom of travel IS a fundamental right. Period. You do not have to ask for permission to leave the US or whatever your home country is. If your hgome country restricts your travel , it is not a free country. Simple as that.. We live in a world where fundamental rights are not honored in all countries, unfortunately. So far I thought that the US does not belong to this group.

We live in a world where many countries do not restrict your ability to leave. We live in a world where NO country allows anyone to freely enter their borders. Every country is restricting travel, it is just how and the extent that changes.

Quoting fca767 (Reply 27): I was wondering if the Valium makes you go crazy.

In combination with medium sized doses of alcohol, it can make you a violent, raving nut. This idiot must have known that.

Now, somebody please tell me how BA does not share part of the responsibility here? How did no cabin crew notice the guy was swilling licquor? Half a bottle of Vodka and nobody notices? Come on. I´ve seen this mentality from the cabin crew on holiday flights where they turn a blind eye on passengers who do that. Last I heard, consuming alcohol on board not served by the airline is not permitted.

And I´m not saying the guy is not to blame or making excuses for him. But BA did not do their job properly here either.

Quoting Polot (Reply 38): We live in a world where many countries do not restrict your ability to leave. We live in a world where NO country allows anyone to freely enter their borders. Every country is restricting travel, it is just how and the extent that changes.

wrong again. We have erased borders in Europe. Everyone can travel free within the Schengen zone, there is no border control.

With a US or EU passport most countries accept you without any problems. And it is not "ability" to leave but "freedom to leave".

Quoting Polot (Reply 38): Every country is restricting travel, it is just how and the extent that changes.

Mine doesn't. I don't have to ask for permission to leave. My passport says "for all countries", I do not need a Visa for most of the countries and I never have been denied a Visa in those countries that still have this requirement.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39): In combination with medium sized doses of alcohol, it can make you a violent, raving nut. This idiot must have known that

Obviously not. Or he did not adjust the amount of valium to the amount of Alcohol to offset the balance.

.  

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39):

I'll tell you....he could've bought the bottle after security, hid the bottle from the crew, and chugged it in the loo. How difficult is that? Surely he's not the first to do that.  

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39):

I've been on flights with different carriers where the cabin crew haven't noticed that passengers were drinking their own alcohol. Other passengers had to tell the crew about it when the drinker's behaviour became unacceptable. If the drinker is fairly discreet to begin with vodka could be mistaken for water unless it was being drunk directly from the bottle.
That was certainly what happened on a flight from LGW to CHQ I was on - in this case the drunken passenger only became obvious about 30 minutes from destination, and was removed vigorously by the Greek police on arrival.
He'd decanted his vodka into an empty water bottle in the toilet and was drinking from this. The empty vodka bottle was under his seat and rolled into the aisle during some turbulence.

[Edited 2013-04-10 08:25:04]

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 40): Obviously not. Or he did not adjust the amount of valium to the amount of Alcohol to offset the balance.

You really can´t know. The efect is completely unpredictable, between individuals and within the same individual.

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 41): I'll tell you....he could've bought the bottle after security, hid the bottle from the crew, and chugged it in the loo. How difficult is that? Surely he's not the first to do that.

I know you can buy after security. How long does it take one to chug half a bottle of Vodka in the loo? And do tell, are you going to come out of the loo as balanced as you went it? What about the smell?  

Quoting Polot (Reply 31): No it is not. Airlines have no obligation to carry you and countries have no obligation to let you in.

You are confusing the fundamental democratic and civil right with commercial companies obligations to sell you services.

Quokkas spells out the terms of carriage.

I have no objection to business terms and conditions and it may yet be evident this person is somewhat obnoxious after a few !

The question as to whether he poses a greater and long term risk to the public remains to be seen.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39): How did no cabin crew notice the guy was swilling licquor? Half a bottle of Vodka and nobody notices?

Quoting AR385 (Reply 43): And do tell, are you going to come out of the loo as balanced as you went it? What about the smell?

In my language a "half bottle" is rectangular shaped, about 170 x 120 x 30mm, very easy to conceal. If you can stomach a large quantity of 40% alcohol liquid in one hit it would be easy to drink it, and the instant effect would be zero. 30 minutes later though would be very different. As to the smell, vodka is a neutral spirit, very hard to detect.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36): I grew up in a country that was divided and the other part (I was lucky, I lived in the free part) did not let their subjects travel. No one under 65 had a chance to even think about leavng and going at random to other places. It could cost your life if you took your right into your own hands. What kind of mindset has established itself in the land of the free if opinions like yours are stated? Freedom of travel IS a fundamental right. Period. You do not have to ask for permission to leave the US or whatever your home country is. If your hgome country restricts your travel , it is not a free country. Simple as that.. We live in a world where fundamental rights are not honored in all countries, unfortunately. So far I thought that the US does not belong to this group.

up to a point... In many countries there is a right to leave your country (what was lacking in the DDR), and to re-enter... but there is no "right" to enter another sovereign state (apart from the EU). Each state can chose to admit or not. And until you are admitted, you have no rights within that state.

But that is of course an entirely different thing from the "right" to travel by plane, and/or on a particular airlne...

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 29): Freedom of travel is a fundamental right !

Any "freedom" that one has, ends where someone else's begins. Sure, it's a cliche, but it is true.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39): Now, somebody please tell me how BA does not share part of the responsibility here? How did no cabin crew notice the guy was swilling licquor?

Read the report. They did. It says:

". . . Kelly, of Chingford, Essex, drank half a bottle of vodka and became disruptive shortly after takeoff."

How it could be reported that Kelly had drunk half a bottle of vodka AFTER take off if none of the cabin crew had noticed that he had drunk half a bottle of vodka after take off? Clearly the report is very specific about what he had drunk, how much he had drunk and when he had drunk it. It does not simply say he was intoxicated and became disruptive.

Any idea just how much BA could charge him for a 2 hour delay and landing fees?