QF21 Diverted to Tahiti due to Unruly Passenger

[dajop]

Several comments ~ wild assumptions by people who were not on the aircraft or have not seen a blood test results (in any).

Was thinking the same.

But I also reflected that it is 2026. The collective view of social media is often the final authority on a subject in a whole range of subjects , expertise, facts and being there are often irrelevant. Usually based on a short video excerpt without much context. It’s the world we live in unfortunately

 

[Mwenenzi]

Hope the Polynesian police can deal with him harshly

What French law has he broken?

 

[markis10]

What French law has he broken?

Find out when he fronts court no doubt.

 

[transpactraveller]

Doesnt change criminal status though, as others have observed he could just be a jerk or violent sob sober or not.

From the reporting it's seems he was suffering some sort of mental incapacity, whether drug induced or otherwise. He was so spatially disoriented that he didn't seem to believe or understand someone telling him they're on a plane and he can't go outside for a cigarette.

So I do think there's likely more to the story than him just being a violent jerk.

 

[Quickstatus]

The flight attendant who was bitten would be stupid not to file criminal assault charges.

That complaint of battery to the AFP would be easiest in AU as the crew member likely departed with the aircraft to resume QF21.
Did that crew member make a formal complaint to the FP police given that the ground time in PPT was under an hour?
So if the complaint is filed in AU and until it is filed in AU, I cant see any impediment for the passenger to return to AU

Find out when he fronts court no doubt.

Is there any indication that he is still arrested in FP?

.......

I wonder though if QF still has an obligation to get @2bobwatch back to the journey origin notwithstanding the ban?
For example (and not conflating the two), Airlines are obligated to return passengers who are denied entry into a country

 

[Aeryn]

I wonder though if QF still has an obligation to get @2bobwatch back to the journey origin notwithstanding the ban?

Why the hell would they have any obligation? The unruly passenger failed to comply with crew member instructions which is a condition of carriage and this was a commercial flight not a government charter.

This isnt a case of QF failing to provide an advertised service, but a case of a pax deciding to endanger crew and other pax, violating the terms of carriage and thus forfeiting any future travel.

QF fulfilled its obligation to the law abiding passengers on the flight who were inconveinienced by this cough.

They would imo be negligent to other pax if they allowed this cough to reboard/board another flight.

 

[Quickstatus]

Why the hell would they have any obligation

I dont know, just asking the question.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Why the hell would they have any obligation? The unruly passenger failed to comply with crew member instructions which is a condition of carriage and this was a commercial flight not a government charter.

This isnt a case of QF failing to provide an advertised service, but a case of a pax deciding to endanger crew and other pax, violating the terms of carriage and thus forfeiting any future travel.

QF fulfilled its obligation to the law abiding passengers on the flight who were inconveinienced by this cough.

They would imo be negligent to other pax if they allowed this cough to reboard/board another flight.

If the episode was unforeseen, no negligence allowing the passenger to board another flight providing the passenger avoids the trigger.

 

[Franky]

Yes, born after decimalisation

So you would understand ' a couple of bob short of a quid then'?

 

[Warragul]

Why the hell would they have any obligation? The unruly passenger failed to comply with crew member instructions which is a condition of carriage and this was a commercial flight not a government charter.

This isnt a case of QF failing to provide an advertised service, but a case of a pax deciding to endanger crew and other pax, violating the terms of carriage and thus forfeiting any future travel.

QF fulfilled its obligation to the law abiding passengers on the flight who were inconveinienced by this cough.

They would imo be negligent to other pax if they allowed this cough to reboard/board another flight.

If a person is denied immigration clearance in most countries, the carrier on which they arrived is reponsible to uplift them (or arrange for) out. Usually to their country of departure. This can be a couple of days later.

Whether immigration clearance was granted in this instance, we don't know.