Mid-air scare: bid to open plane door | Australian Frequent Flyer
Australian Frequent Flyer

Welcome to Australia's leading independent Frequent Flyer and Travel Resource since 1998!
Our site contains tons of information that will improve your travel experience.

Joining AFF is fast, simple & absolutely free - register now and take immediate advantage of these great BENEFITS.

Once registered, this box will disappear. And you will see fewer advertisements :)

Mid-air scare: bid to open plane door

Status
Not open for further replies.

oz_mark

AFF Supporter
Joined
Jun 30, 2002
Messages
17,777
Flights
My Map
From the SMH

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/midair-scare-bid-to-open-plane-door/2006/03/09/1141701615916.html

A woman who tried to open a cabin door on a Virgin Blue flight has been arrested in Sydney.

The 33-year-old woman from Gatton, west of Brisbane, was arrested after trying to open the cabin door during the Brisbane to Sydney flight last night, the Australian Federal Police said.

The woman was taken into custody after arriving in Sydney and charged with endangering the safety of an aircraft under the Crimes (Aviation) Act.

She has been bailed and will appear before the Downing Centre Court in Sydney on April 4.
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
oz_mark said:
The woman was taken into custody after arriving in Sydney and charged with endangering the safety of an aircraft under the Crimes (Aviation) Act.
Wouldn't a decent solicitor be able to argue that due to the pressure differential , that the door could not be opened and so there was no danger to the aircraft and so not guilty of the alleged crime

Dave
 

serfty

Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
40,696
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Platinum
Flights
My Map
Dave Noble said:
oz_mark said:
The woman was taken into custody after arriving in Sydney and charged with endangering the safety of an aircraft under the Crimes (Aviation) Act.
Wouldn't a decent solicitor be able to argue that due to the pressure differential , that the door could not be opened and so there was no danger to the aircraft and so not guilty of the alleged crime

Dave
I suspect that a large %'ge of DJ PAX would not be aware of that fact; it would certainly cause a stir!
 

oz_mark

AFF Supporter
Joined
Jun 30, 2002
Messages
17,777
Flights
My Map
serfty said:
Dave Noble said:
oz_mark said:
The woman was taken into custody after arriving in Sydney and charged with endangering the safety of an aircraft under the Crimes (Aviation) Act.
Wouldn't a decent solicitor be able to argue that due to the pressure differential , that the door could not be opened and so there was no danger to the aircraft and so not guilty of the alleged crime

Dave
I suspect that a large %'ge of DJ PAX would not be aware of that fact; it would certainly cause a stir!
While this is true, it generally is a matter of what you can convince a judge of. I remember a court case years ago where a judge basically said that because the crime involved a toy gun, there ws no real threat.
 

NM

Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
15,810
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
Flights
My Map
Dave Noble said:
oz_mark said:
The woman was taken into custody after arriving in Sydney and charged with endangering the safety of an aircraft under the Crimes (Aviation) Act.
Wouldn't a decent solicitor be able to argue that due to the pressure differential , that the door could not be opened and so there was no danger to the aircraft and so not guilty of the alleged crime

Dave
That was my thought exactly. She may have wanted to endanger the aircraft, but I really don't think there was ever any real danger to the aircraft.

Perhaps she could be charged with tampering with the aircraft, or intending to endanger the safety of the aircraft. Unfortunately I do not think that stupidy is a crime - otherwise our prisons would be even more full than they are today.
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
oz_mark said:
While this is true, it generally is a matter of what you can convince a judge of. I remember a court case years ago where a judge basically said that because the crime involved a toy gun, there ws no real threat.
Wouldn't this be a trial by jury ?

if an expert can show to a jury that there was no conceivable risk due to force required to open a door, would seem to be a simple matter of fact that there was no endangerment to the aeroplane

Dave
 

thadocta

Active Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Messages
757
Dave Noble said:
oz_mark said:
While this is true, it generally is a matter of what you can convince a judge of. I remember a court case years ago where a judge basically said that because the crime involved a toy gun, there ws no real threat.
Wouldn't this be a trial by jury ?

if an expert can show to a jury that there was no conceivable risk due to force required to open a door, would seem to be a simple matter of fact that there was no endangerment to the aeroplane
The DPP *could* argue that seeing someone attempt to open the door whilst at altitude *could* panic the rest of the passengers, and that that panic (caused by the defendant) *could* have resulted in a dangerous situation on board.

Dave
 

Groundfeeder

Active Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
651
Dave

if an expert can show to a jury that there was no conceivable risk due to force required to open a door, would seem to be a simple matter of fact that there was no endangerment to the aeroplane
If an expert can show a jury that there was no conceivable risk in low-lifes waving an unloaded 12 gauge in ones face during robberies/bastardry etc...

Can't quite believe this argument! The critical element is INTENT and at FL 280 or whatever generally all pax FEAR the consequences - some like us FF's KNOW the likelihood of success.

Remember the episode of a French chic who wanted to step outside for a fag recently and the scrum that eventuated by the pax to prevent her?

Pretty soon it will be mandatory for all pax to remain seated/belted unless they give a note to the FA's to access the head, walk back to talk to accompanying flyers etc. Do we want that here in Straya?

JEEEZ
 

bigjobs

Active Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
795
if i had been on that flight it might be me trying to defend myself. you play with a door on a flight that i am on and i might take responsibility for my own safety by making an effort to stop you from playing with that door.
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
Groundfeeder said:
Can't quite believe this argument! The critical element is INTENT and at FL 280 or whatever generally all pax FEAR the consequences - some like us FF's KNOW the likelihood of success.
Intent is 1 element of a crime, however there are sometimes other crimes which relate to intent. e.g. if someone attempts to commit murder but fails, they cannot be charged with that offence since it never took place; in this case there is a crime of Attempted Murder for which the person can be charged

a charge of "Endangering an aicraft" seems to be specific to actually endangering an aircraft and not to "attempt to endanger an aircraft" nor an offence of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace or similar

Dave
 

Groundfeeder

Active Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
651
Dave
a charge of "Endangering an aicraft" seems to be specific to actually endangering an aircraft and not to "attempt to endanger an aircraft" nor an offence of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace or sim
Don't want to promote pedantics but when does an aircraft feel it's being endangered, or even fiddled with?

The stupidity of the statutes doesn't refer to the repercussions of subsequent compacting/squashing of pax thru this action "endangering human life" etc.

As an aside, where were the sky marshalls we're all paying for ... I know DJ didn't want part of this scheme but maybe they'll reconsider??
 

BlacKnox

Active Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
732
bigjobs said:
...if you play with a door on a flight that i am on and i might take responsibility for my own safety by making an effort to stop you from playing with that door.
I'd lend you a hand too :arrow:
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
Groundfeeder said:
Dave
a charge of "Endangering an aicraft" seems to be specific to actually endangering an aircraft and not to "attempt to endanger an aircraft" nor an offence of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace or sim
Don't want to promote pedantics but when does an aircraft feel it's being endangered, or even fiddled with?

The stupidity of the statutes doesn't refer to the repercussions of subsequent compacting/squashing of pax thru this action "endangering human life" etc.

As an aside, where were the sky marshalls we're all paying for ... I know DJ didn't want part of this scheme but maybe they'll reconsider??

When it comes to laws pedentry is relevent. Can't convict someone of a crime just because it sounds similar to what they did. If the charge was "attempt to interfere with aircraft" or similar I could see not issue, but I still fail to see how the aircraft was actually endangered

Why would this be a reason to reconsider marshalls? the aircraft wasnt endangered

Dave
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

AFF on Air Podcast

  • Choosing a Rewards Program – AIR017
    Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:32:24 AEST
      If you’re new to the world of frequent flyer points – or moving to a new country – it can be difficult to know where to start. In this episode, Matt discusses the con ...
  • Travel Insurance – AIR016
    Sat, 27 Jul 2019 07:34:12 AEST
      They say that if you can’t afford travel insurance, you can’t afford to travel! In this episode, Matt chats to James Green about the importance of travel insurance, and ...
  • The Qantas Oneworld Award – AIR015
    Sat, 13 Jul 2019 02:07:50 AEST
      Learn how to fly around the world using your Qantas Frequent Flyer points as Matt chats to James Green, an award travel consultant at Frequent Flyer Solutions. This episode ...
  • Qantas Frequent Flyer Changes – AIR014
    Sat, 29 Jun 2019 00:40:35 AEST
      Last week, Qantas announced a major shake-up to its Qantas Frequent Flyer program. In this episode, former Head of Loyalty at Malaysia Airlines, Mark Ross-Smith, joins Matt ...
  • jb747’s Stellar Career with Qantas – AIR013
    Sat, 15 Jun 2019 03:00:41 AEST
      In this special edition of the podcast, Matt chats to John Bartels (a.k.a. jb747) about his flying career with Qantas, the A380, the QF30 incident, flight training, retirem ...

Community Statistics

Threads
82,425
Messages
1,908,750
Members
50,214
Latest member
samzike
Top