Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Dave W
#1658721
But it doesn't matter what the airlines think (or what ATCOs or GA pilots think), it matters what a court levying fines and costs i.a.w. the law, thinks.

Suggesting otherwise tends to draw an invalid comparison between inadvertent and deliberate acts and - relevant to these forums - has the potential to drive yet further wedges between attitudes of airlines, GA and ATC.
User avatar
By romille
#1658726
GonzoEGLL wrote:
romille wrote:
G-JWTP wrote:Yep!

Take away their smartphones.

It'll cause them to have a complete breakdown if they can't post something on social media or order an Uber to get home!

G-JWTP.

The airlines should sue them jointly & severally for their costs, that would make their eyes water!


That would open an interesting Pandora's Box for infringements!

I think the difference is that most infringements are the result of human error as against this which was clearly a deliberate and planned action.
User avatar
By GonzoEGLL
#1658728
Dave W wrote:.....Suggesting otherwise tends to draw an invalid comparison between inadvertent and deliberate acts and - relevant to these forums - has the potential to drive yet further wedges between attitudes of airlines, GA and ATC.


True, which was my (admitted ill-phrased) point. 'Be careful what you wish for' might have been a better way of putting it. By no means was I advocating for such action!

Yes, there is a difference between a deliberate and inadvertant act, but civil actions can still extract considerable sums from those who merely make mistakes.
User avatar
By kanga
#1658735
Civil actions presumably seek monetary damages against claim of monetary loss. If defendants without relevant insurance choose to resist the claim, and maybe defend themselves, as these protesters might if sued, a sympathetic jury might dismiss the claim, however irrational this might seem. Or offer £1 in compensation, which jury could then award, leaving plaintiffs to foot legal bills :roll:
#1658758
pullup wrote:
AshleyFlynn23 wrote:I hope they get some jail time. Kind of ironic that they behave that stupidly and then one of them is now worried about the prospect of giving birth in jail. Perhaps don't go breaking the law then.


This happened in March 2017. Am I to believe they haven’t been dealt with yet??


Correct, they haven't been dealt with yet. The link posted a few replies before mine related to the Victoria Derbyshire programme from December 17th 2018.
#1664929
With the usual caveats of knowing all then ins and outs of what was said in court etc.

While she would not wish to go through a nine-week trial again, she said her concerns about the way people are treated in the detention and deportation system remain.
"It was a long and traumatic case and a shock to us all to have been found guilty," she said


Don't want to court - don't do anything unlawful

There are other means and ways to protest against deportations.

Don't want a trial to last 9 weeks - plead guilty when you did trespass onto an aerodrome.

But although I think they were dealt with appropriately, I fail to see why anti-terrorism legislation is now used to bring a change of charge.
By pullup
#1664930
I wonder how much the other recent Airport disruptions has made the CPS suddenly change the charges...the difference appears to be a maximum 3 month jail sentence, to life imprisonment!
That will make their eyes water!
By G-JWTP
#1664984
I think you have to look at this a bit deeper.

Gatwick closed by drone: No one charged.
Heathrow partially closed by drone: No one charged.

Government announces that custodial sentances of less than 6 months will be abolished.

So the bigger picture is if you cause an airport to close and all the disruption/costs etc. Involved you don't go to prison, just community service or the such like.

Thus there is no 'meaningful' punishment.

Next any loon or crank will be at it because there is no deterrent value.

'Justice must be done and seen to be done'.

So I'm not really surprised by this at all!

G-JWTP
Joe Dell, SteveN liked this
#1664991
Does anyone here really think that sending 15 thirtysomething protesters from various walks of life to Jail will help either us, them, or anyone else? Is it a good use of the UKs overcrowded prison system? I dont particularly like what they did either, but I dislike "message sending" as appears to be happening here. The change of charges to use anti-terror law really smells to me because this is NOT what these laws were designed for and could actually see them get off completely, plus cost everyone alot more time and money in the process.

Regards, SD..
Flyin'Dutch', Stu B liked this
#1664992
Agreed. This was (in the main but not exclusively) a non violent "protest" against the government, albeit with criminal damage, significant repair bills & a lot inconvenience for some. But terrorism? Surely not. The more the government use the "golden egg" of the "T" word to punish miscreants the more immune & repressed we will become as a society.

There is also a strong whiff of abuse of power; many feel that the police & the courts don't really give a tuppenny hoot for what "normal" people dislike (robbery, burglary, petty crime etc etc etc), but when folk protest against government action there is all hell to pay. This can't be conducive to a Happy Society.
Flyin'Dutch', Stu B liked this