Computers0 min ago
Why Hasn't This Rapist Hasn't Yet Been Sent Back To Somalia?
51 Answers
https:/ /www.da ilymail .co.uk/ news/ar ticle-6 818057/ Rapist- 30-depo rtation -flight -stoppe d-passe nger-mu tiny-UK .html
I hope that those ridiculous plane passenger mutineers are pleased with themselves.
I hope that those ridiculous plane passenger mutineers are pleased with themselves.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.“Arrested for what?”
A Public Order Act offence (which includes Affray as suggested). If Affray (Section 3 of the POA) is not deemed appropriate then Section 4 (Threatening behaviour – fear or provocation of violence) or Section 4A (Disorderly behaviour with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress); Possibly endangering the safety of an aircraft; most airports have a byelaw similar to this for Gatwick:
“3(19) Obstruction: No person shall intentionally obstruct or interfere with the proper use of the Airport or with any person acting in the execution of his duty in relation to the operation of the Airport.
There's any one of a number of things (many of which I probably haven't thought of). One thing's for sure - the authorities cannot tolerate the disruption of an aircraft flight by what is essentially passenger disruption. Going back to basics, the captain of a aircraft has the absolute authority to have removed from the aircraft any person whom he or she believes threatens the integrity or ssafety of the flight.
"...so in my book they did act correctly as clearly they thought that to be the case."
Well as this example clearly demonstrates they were wrong and that's why action based on such uninformed opinion can be permitted.
A Public Order Act offence (which includes Affray as suggested). If Affray (Section 3 of the POA) is not deemed appropriate then Section 4 (Threatening behaviour – fear or provocation of violence) or Section 4A (Disorderly behaviour with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress); Possibly endangering the safety of an aircraft; most airports have a byelaw similar to this for Gatwick:
“3(19) Obstruction: No person shall intentionally obstruct or interfere with the proper use of the Airport or with any person acting in the execution of his duty in relation to the operation of the Airport.
There's any one of a number of things (many of which I probably haven't thought of). One thing's for sure - the authorities cannot tolerate the disruption of an aircraft flight by what is essentially passenger disruption. Going back to basics, the captain of a aircraft has the absolute authority to have removed from the aircraft any person whom he or she believes threatens the integrity or ssafety of the flight.
"...so in my book they did act correctly as clearly they thought that to be the case."
Well as this example clearly demonstrates they were wrong and that's why action based on such uninformed opinion can be permitted.
The offences (refusing to comply with instructions given by crew and disruptive behaviour) are contained within the Air Navigation Order. I don't know why the Captain didn't just offload the perpetrators. I have a friend who was a Captain with Turkish at the time - he would have chucked off the pax and gladly taken the deportee to his destination.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.