VA flight squawks Hijack on the ground at DPS

[Deleted member 29185]

If you see the possible side effects of any medication the majority of people should lock themselves inside.

That's not what I'm implying though. I'm specifically speaking of those people on medication who do know they have adverse reactions which includes confusion and erratic behaviour.

 

[markis10]

Bit surprised VA flew him home, must have been an interesting flight!

 

[samas]

Bit surprised VA flew him home, must have been an interesting flight!

If someone is deported from a country doesn't the carrier that brought them there have to take them back?

 

[MarkD]

Once the flight crew have indicated that they have been hijacked, perspectives change......the situation becomes - primarily about the safety of the people on the ground!

Adding further complication to the event, was the flight deck continuing to use secondary measures to advise of hijack (once the disruptive passenger situation had been resolved by cabin crew), as it may lead those on the ground to believe primary communication had been compromised or crew were communicating under duress.

So, after that big bad red button was pressed on the flight deck, the real threat to the people on board, became being blown out of the sky by the Indonesian Air Force, over open water before the aircraft reached the population of Bali. (Seeing as I have needed to spell it out.)

What a strange point of view. Shut the gate After the horse has bolted. I'm happy for an airline to squawk hijack code before some nutcase breaks into the coughpit and takes control rather than waiting until they are actually in there

 

[markis10]

FEDERAL police have charged Aussie plane passenger Matt Lockley following his arrival back in Brisbane in the early hours of this morning.

Officers met the 27-year-old plumber at Brisbane International Airport and he was taken away for questioning.
He was later released, but will face court in June on one charge of interfering with a crew member under the civil aviation act.

http://www.news.com.au/national/vir...th-a-crew-member/story-fncynjr2-1226899231104

 

[markis10]

If someone is deported from a country doesn't the carrier that brought them there have to take them back?

In certain circumstances that can be the case where they did not have the correct visas etc, I am not sure how it might apply here.

 

[boomy]

FEDERAL police have charged Aussie plane passenger Matt Lockley following his arrival back in Brisbane in the early hours of this morning.

Officers met the 27-year-old plumber at Brisbane International Airport and he was taken away for questioning.
He was later released, but will face court in June on one charge of interfering with a crew member under the civil aviation act.

http://www.news.com.au/national/vir...th-a-crew-member/story-fncynjr2-1226899231104

Looks like a minor charge to me. So maybe the pilots were overreacting to the situation? I have a feeling that no one will be held accountable for what happened on that flight and there will be no real deterrence for pax to act like morons and create another hijack alert in the future.

 

[markis10]

Looks like a minor charge to me. So maybe the pilots were overreacting to the situation? I have a feeling that no one will be held accountable for what happened on that flight and there will be no real deterrence for pax to act like morons and create another hijack alert in the future.

Its actually considered a serious charge, with a 2 year Jail term the penalty.

CIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988 - SECT 24 Interference with crew or aircraft

 

[under the radar]

FEDERAL police have charged Aussie plane passenger Matt Lockley following his arrival back in Brisbane in the early hours of this morning.

Officers met the 27-year-old plumber at Brisbane International Airport and he was taken away for questioning.
He was later released, but will face court in June on one charge of interfering with a crew member under the civil aviation act.

Virgin hijack alert man Matt Lockley charged by Federal Police with interfering with a crew member | News.com.au

maybe a 2yr 'stay' in prison, being 'Bubbas b**ch' will 'calm him down' ...I can only hope at the very least, ALL OZ based airlines 'slap a ban' on him, whatever the outcome of his court appearance in June... just my opinion

happy flying everyone

 

[boomy]

Its actually considered a serious charge, with a 2 year Jail term the penalty.

CIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988 - SECT 24 Interference with crew or aircraft

Ok then, let's see if he gets the maximum, that will send a clear message. But knowing how the Aussie legal system works, I won't hold my breath for that to happen.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

maybe a 2yr 'stay' in prison, being 'Bubbas b**ch' will 'calm him down'

I can't help thinking that this is a young(ish) guy that was just on a high for the start of a (possibly) much anticipated super fun holiday with his mates, but let grog get the better of him in a totally inappropriate place.

I agree at the seriousness of his actions but I also feel, given the storyline, that two years as "bubbas b**ch" is too harsh. I remember as a younger guy doing a number of grog-fuelled escapades which I later regretted. I'm told not all the neuron pathways in a males brain join up until late 20's (late 50's my wife says) and I have the feeling the social stigma and perhaps airline blacklisting he will/may suffer will be punishment in itself. By all means punish him, but 2 years behind bars I think is inappropriate for one very stupid, but reasonably innocent action. BTW......what happened to VAs RSA obligations?

 

[N860CR]

I can't help thinking that this is a young(ish) guy that was just on a high for the start of a (possibly) much anticipated super fun holiday with his mates, but let grog get the better of him in a totally inappropriate place.

I agree at the seriousness of his actions but I also feel, given the storyline, that two years as "bubbas b**ch" is too harsh. I remember as a younger guy doing a number of grog-fuelled escapades which I later regretted. I'm told not all the neuron pathways in a males brain join up until late 20's (late 50's my wife says) and I have the feeling the social stigma and perhaps airline blacklisting he will/may suffer will be punishment in itself. By all means punish him, but 2 years behind bars I think is inappropriate for one very stupid, but reasonably innocent action. BTW......what happened to VAs RSA obligations?

That's a good point... However social norms seem to be moving away from that point of view now (I do actually agree with you). Look at NSW at the moment. The laws brought in by our corrupt former premier introduce massively tough penalties (including mandatory sentences) for crime of what in prior days would simply have been considered a few boys having a few too many drinks.

I don't agree with those laws, but we're stick with them. Unfortunately, it needs to be across the board. The days of "boys will be boys" seem to be over.

 

[desiredusername]

Breaking News: The Judge sentenced him to serve 2 years flying on Tiger!! :idea:

 

[boomy]

I can't help thinking that this is a young(ish) guy that was just on a high for the start of a (possibly) much anticipated super fun holiday with his mates, but let grog get the better of him in a totally inappropriate place.

There is a difference between acting silly after having one drink too many at a bar or nightclub and doing it on a plane where in this case it created a very serious hijack alert.
Btw, he said he was not drunk but depressed or on medications or whatever bu***it story he made up.
Bottom line, serious punishment is needed to deter future morons from doing stupid things on a plane.

 

[anat0l]

I agree at the seriousness of his actions but I also feel, given the storyline, that two years as "bubbas b**ch" is too harsh. I remember as a younger guy doing a number of grog-fuelled escapades which I later regretted. I'm told not all the neuron pathways in a males brain join up until late 20's (late 50's my wife says) and I have the feeling the social stigma and perhaps airline blacklisting he will/may suffer will be punishment in itself. By all means punish him, but 2 years behind bars I think is inappropriate for one very stupid, but reasonably innocent action. BTW......what happened to VAs RSA obligations?

I think an example has to be made to start to deter people from doing stupid things.

To be fair, this is not the worst example of it. There have been several, more serious (and much more culpable, self-imposed / voluntarily brought-upon) cases before it which have been gravely, inadequately punished, or not at all. There is a serious case to be had when a crime which is committed on the ground (which may or may not be regarded as fairly 'innocuous') occurs in the confines of an aircraft. Unfortunately, the track record of judicial proceedings to date all over the world appears to show that the serious regard for these cases is severely lacking, certainly not commensurate with the significant upsurge in commercial aviation market growth.

As I said, the only real crime on an aircraft that you can seem to commit and actually be slammed down hard for by almost any jurisdiction around the world is terrorism (or attempted terrorism).

RSA is not applicable here, unless the man is making up the story about how he was disoriented (i.e. was it really the drugs or was it really alcohol). I suppose someone in the defence will raise the possibility of negligence or duty of care lacking (e.g. how did this man get to the front to the point where his actions became so disturbing it instigated a hijack call on the part of the pilots; why didn't the FAs ensure he did not get too close, or pull him away quickly, or restrain him etc.). I am not in support at all of any form of voluntary intoxication being acceptable as a form of defence or mitigating circumstances (I can't wait until voluntary intoxication is removed as a valid defence); if the issue really was alcohol, whilst there may then be a VA RSA issue, the inherent culpability for intoxication and the consequences thereof should be solely that of the perpetrator.

People are responsible for the consequences of their actions. Whilst "excessive" punishment could mean "the end of one's life as they may know it", at the very worst, it is them who has written their future as such. Without any punishment (or inadequate), however, there is no compunction for the perpetrator to be truly responsible or contrite for their actions, leaving behind people and/or organisations who are left impacted, hurt or shaken.

In reality, will this man get two years? Hell, no! Apart from that it is up to two years, I think he would be unlucky to get any time in the slammer. I'd be surprised if they record a conviction; I doubt it, especially if someone argues on his defence that he was out of character and it was an unintended side-effect of the drugs.

 

[JohnK]

That's not what I'm implying though. I'm specifically speaking of those people on medication who do know they have adverse reactions which includes confusion and erratic behaviour.

Perhaps they are not aware they have issues.

Prozac was an interesting drug.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

He was not going on a typical holiday to Indonesia, it was reported he was going looking for his Indonesian wife who had disappeared 2 weeks earlier

 

[Deleted member 29185]

I think an example has to be made to start to deter people from doing stupid things.

I'm not entirely sure where we start but Australian society has been running downhill for many years and regardless of whether we like it or not, young people do not have the same respect (fear?) of authority. Is that their fault, or is the fault of all those do-gooders from my parents generation that decided it should be illegal to smack a kid or, heaven forbid, cane them in school?

I don't really believe the prescription medication or nervousness or depression or whatever the latest excuse for his actions is, but I'm sure the Indonesian Authorities would have taken blood tests and would know how much he had drunk/popped/smoked/snorted etc and I'm sure it will come out in the end.

If we wish to start making examples of people, we should be starting in Kindy and being consistent all the way through to the grave. It is unfair to let people get away with poor behaviour for ever and a day, but then send them off to prison with nothing but a tube of lubricant after they have a bender that they've been practicing as normal behaviour for years, even though no one was hurt and the guy/rogue was obviously not a regular flyer. I don't think anyone thinks he intended to cause alarm or hijack an aircraft......and perhaps what he has said happened may just be the truth....read JohnKs post above!

 

[boomy]

I feel sorry for airline crews who have to deal with these kind of people on regular basis and then watch them get away unpunished.

 

[JohnK]

I feel sorry for airline crews who have to deal with these kind of people on regular basis and then watch them get away unpunished.

Society does not do punishment very well.

I witnessed fraud and lies when I worked for Social Security for ~12 months many years ago.

One particular couple were claiming pension, sickness benefit, and she was also claiming supporting parents benefit for her and the kids for around 3-4 years. They had no money before. In that time they purchased an ~$100,000 home which would be worth close to $1million today if not more. They were caught and were made to pay the debt back at $5/week. They would be 100+ year of age before the debt is paid back. That is a joke. Not sure if it has changed today.