Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:31 pm
#1672410
Cub wrote:..rather than testing the behaviour against terrorist legislation.
er, it wasn't "terrorist legislation"; it was "aerodrome safety legislation", terrorism being one but not the only such sort of safety risk. The CPS judged that the legislation was applicable, and the jury agreed.
I assume that if a terrorism motive could have been adduced and persuaded the judge, the sentences would have been harsher, but IANAL
I note that the Crown reportedly is not seeking to recover costs from the defendants. If it had, that might have been a greater deterrent than custody
(mere guide at) Jet Age Museum, Gloucestershire Airport
http://www.jetagemuseum.org/
TripAdvisor Excellence Award 2015
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction ... gland.html
http://www.jetagemuseum.org/
TripAdvisor Excellence Award 2015
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction ... gland.html