Brawl in the air on Scoot

[Dr Ralph]

Scoot staff did absolutely nothing as evidenced on Video, other than watch on in fear.

Weren't the staff shouting 'stop it'?

 

[Franky]

Weren't the staff shouting 'stop it'?

Anyone who believes a couple of young females were ever going to break up that fight is delusional....

 

[Dr Ralph]

Anyone who believes a couple of young females were ever going to break up that fight is delusional....

Trained flight attendants though

 

[Scott K]

Trained flight attendants though

They ain’t ninjas!

 

[BAM1748]

Suggestions that the pax in question was visibly intoxicated on boarding and should have been denied

Not that you're Suggesting this, but if behaving properly the appearance of being intoxicated should not deny boarding.

 

[RooFlyer]

Not necessarily.

Several plausible explanations:

1) Consensual
2) Provocation
3) Mental illness

As I said, clearly something not being said at this point.

Assuming, at some point, one of the aircrew said 'stop', or 'please don't do that', the 'charge' of failing to obey aircrew directives should suffice.

In any event, the things you list are 'defences' (in layman's terms), and not mitigation against charges being laid.

Sounds very much like Scoot couldn't be bothered pursuing, which if so, is disgraceful.

 

[Dr Ralph]

In any event, the things you list are 'defences' (in layman's terms), and not mitigation against charges being laid.

Correct. However, in my experience such a potential defence can lead to charges not being preferred, as it isn't worth the trouble to prosecute.

At least in my limited criminal law experiences as a lawyer, that approached worked many times for the clients I represented on minor criminal charges. There is a big difference in the role of the DPP and the police. In my experience the DPP are often smart enough to know when not to bother bringing charges if they know a defence will successfully be raised.

 

[Franky]

Trained flight attendants though

Trained in what? Even a couple of burly bouncers would have had problems intervening in that blue. Merely saying 'stop it' obviously isn't going to work.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Trained in what? Even a couple of burly bouncers would have had problems intervening in that blue. Merely saying 'stop it' obviously isn't going to work.

Squirrel grip?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

According to 7 News tonight they said after a mental health assessment no further action will be taken. So sounds perhaps like that might be the cause.

I did notice the crew - both male and female - were not getting directly involved. But at the same time I'm not sure there was room for them - they guy already had two or three people trying to subdue him.

I can't draw the same conclusion that this is Scoot - or any airline - giving carte blanche to behave in any way you want. The police were called and met the flight on arrival. I guess Scoot could try to revocer damages for the cost of the diversion, but then one passenger interviewed for the news said the guy was alreayd standing up and ignoring instructions to sit down while the aircraft was still taxi-ing. Dunno why the plane didn't turn back at that point.

 

[juddles]

Correct. However, in my experience such a potential defence can lead to charges not being preferred, as it isn't worth the trouble to prosecute.

At least in my limited criminal law experiences as a lawyer, that approached worked many times for the clients I represented on minor criminal charges. There is a big difference in the role of the DPP and the police. In my experience the DPP are often smart enough to know when not to bother bringing charges if they know a defence will successfully be raised.

Dr Ralph, I think you mistakenly chose the wrong words: "such a potential defence can lead to charges not being preferred, as it isn't worth the trouble to prosecute". I think a better or more accurate way would be clarify that a person should NOT be charged if there is insufficient evidence or the likelihood of conviction is minimal. It is not about being "worth the trouble"

Who knows what happened here, but if it is true no charges are to be laid, there must be a pretty good amount of info to suggest this is a mental health event. I think in general both the airlines and the law enforcement bodies have a pretty hard line against just drunken idiots.

 

[Melburnian1]

AFP not taking the matter further.

While as discussed by others, mental health of the alleged protaganist may be the deciding factor re this decision, isn't there also the question that if the alleged fracas occurred outside Australian airspace, that the laws of Singapore would apply given it's an aircraft registered to that nation?

 

[Melburnian1]

TR7D (B789 9V-OJD) took off from SYD at 1126 on Tuesday 22 January, arriving SIN at 1531 hours.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

While as discussed by others, mental health of the alleged protagist may be the deciding factor re this decision, isn't there also the question that if the alleged fracas occurred outside Australian airspace, that the laws of Singapore would apply given it's an aircraft registered to that nation?

I'm not sure if this would be of any use. I'm guessing if Singapore wanted to take this further in a criminal sense they would need to lay the charges, of sufficient gravity to warrant extradition, apply and be successful for extradition, paying all expsenses including fare to Singapore and accommodation until the matter came to trial (or in remand in gaol in Singapore), then the cost of prison accommodation for the sentence, and then deprot them back to AU. Not likely to happen.

 

[Quickstatus]

While as discussed by others, mental health of the alleged protagist may be the deciding factor re this decision, isn't there also the question that if the alleged fracas occurred outside Australian airspace, that the laws of Singapore would apply given it's an aircraft registered to that nation?

I don’t have an understanding of the legal status of a aircraft in flight. FWIW It was still within Australian airspace. In any case easier for them to subdue by proxy, divert, recruit law enforcement to detain, publicise, move on.

I don’t decry the Scoot cabin crew’s apparently hands off approach. Though some seem to be more hands on:
Flight attendant says overweight passenger forced her to wipe his butt — New York Post

 

[Melburnian1]

For those not on Twitter a website called coconuts.co has a three minute plus video that shows better than some others what occurred.

 

[dajop]

, but then one passenger interviewed for the news said the guy was alreayd standing up and ignoring instructions to sit down while the aircraft was still taxi-ing. Dunno why the plane didn't turn back at that point.

I guess as long as he was seated for takeoff, the crew might not necessarily take that behaviour as a warning, as based on where Scoot fly to and the low fares they offer (attracting inexperienced travellers). people standing up during taxi is probably not all that uncommon and may not be a warning in itself.

I’ve certainly witnessed this happening on a number of flights (on SQ and other carriers within or to/from India, China, Indonesia and Vietnam) where pax have stood up during taxi - before takeoff - and it has take some yelling and screaming from the crew to get them to sit down. Flights proceeded without incident.

 

[Quickstatus]

See it all the time on high brow airlines as well.

 

[Franky]

I guess as long as he was seated for takeoff, the crew might not necessarily take that behaviour as a warning, as based on where Scoot fly to and the low fares they offer (attracting inexperienced travellers). people standing up during taxi is probably not all that uncommon and may not be a warning in itself.

I’ve certainly witnessed this happening on a number of flights (on SQ and other carriers within or to/from India, China, Indonesia and Vietnam) where pax have stood up during taxi - before takeoff - and it has take some yelling and screaming from the crew to get them to sit down. Flights proceeded without incident.

Sure - but this didn’t happen Asia, and it appears that the protagonist was not Asian. Pre-emptive action would seem to have been required.

 

[Quickstatus]

Trained in what? Even a couple of burly bouncers would have had problems intervening in that blue. Merely saying 'stop it' obviously isn't going to work.

Trained in not becoming embroiled in whatever is going on. The hands off approach tends to work because increasingly passengers are doing the heavy lifting