Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

CX Pilot arrested at Heathrow for possession of knives

Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

CX Pilot arrested at Heathrow for possession of knives

Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:31
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wow Etopsmonkey I bet you`re a joy to fly with, you are a pilot arn`t you??

As for the quotes, you obviously haven`t been to London in a long time, let alone Heathrow
paully is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:34
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As Flying Lawyer has said often enough, we need some more facts.

Re:
The Met Police arrested him, not sure why it's airport security getting slagged off here. Shouldn't all you whiners be complaining about the Met Police doing their job?
Could this end up similar to the police investigating election candidates for having sausage rolls or biscuits available to voters as potentially dangerous 'bribes'?
At court, the judge/jury will decide whether the law was broken, and decide on the appropriate punishment - if any.
And if this is proven to be the police vastly over-reacting with no law broken (which could easily be the case if he had bought a set of knives of some sort during his stop-over in London and was simply taking them home in his crew baggage), would there be any apology from the Met to the pilot involved and for the vast and unnecessary inconvenience to all of those passengers who could not fly that day?

Where I can see airport security being criticised is if it is an innocent case of him simply wanting to take something that he had (legally?) bought in London home with him, why did they not find a common sense way of resolving the situation, such as suggesting that the bag containing the knives needed to be 'checked in'? Sorry, I've just spotted the obvious flaw in that last sentence: use of the words 'common sense'!!
Trossie is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:35
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What precisely is a 'leatherman' ?

Ignorant Pommie
4Greens is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:42
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well said 'paully' and a Leatherman is an American Swiss Army Knife '4Greens'
Cavitasian is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:49
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know nothing of this incident other than what I have read here.

I have flown with the person at the centre of this a few times. I always enjoyed flying with him and I hope he is OK.

I hope this is just some sort of misunderstanding and seen as such and there are no serious repercussions.
Liam Gallagher is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 07:55
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ranger One

I stand by what I said in my previous post.
I don't wish to appear discourteous but posts such as yours confuse rather than clarify.

the offences for which it's suggested he was arrested are not specifically aviation-related
No-one has suggested that they are.

Re your link -
That strikes me as a good illustration of a point I made earlier in the thread: 'It is an unfortunate fact of life that some people use common sense when given power and some don't.'

etopsmonkey
Police has the authority and responsibility to uphold law
That does not mean that police officers have a duty or obligation to arrest (or even report) everyone they suspect has committed a criminal offence.
Nor does it preclude the exercise of common sense.
(I'm referring to the UK. The position may be different in other jurisdictions.)

.
Flying Lawyer is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 08:22
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 715
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Trossie

You are so right.

Airport security the world over is confusing, non-uniform and seems in my many years of observation to be as much an illusion as a reality. Made even more so by the fact that many who have access to the ramp seem to be subject to less scrutiny.

Penetrable by the experts and a huge hindrance to all who pass through her.

LHR is at the pinnacle. After you pass through you feel as though you have been mugged.

When the last line of defence is manned by staff who are poorly trained and poorly paid is it any wonder common sense is a concept as alien as particle physics?

Why HM's finest where called and did what they did will hopefully be revealed. Here's hoping there will be no unnecessary repurcussions.
VR-HFX is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 08:23
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That does not mean that police officers have a duty or obligation to arrest (or even report) everyone they suspect has committed a criminal offence.
Nor does it preclude the exercise of common sense.
After very publicly having turned a blind eye to a major jewellery burglary, I can imagine that one cannot expect the Met to use common sense for anything that risks public attention for quite some time.

So check very carefully before carrying any knives anywhere near London! (I would suggest that buying kitchen knives 'on line' might be the best way to go about such purchases, so that the delivery man is the one who risks 'being in possession' of those knives while they have to transit through 'public places'.)

Here's hoping there will be no unnecessary repurcussions.
... unless "Mr Plod's" actions are proven to have been inappropriate, then there have already been 'unnecessary repercussions': to all of those passengers who could not fly that day.
Trossie is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 09:24
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nr Aston Down, Cotswolds
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When the last line of defence is manned by staff who are poorly trained and poorly paid is it any wonder common sense is a concept as alien as particle physics?
I have worked at LHR as a LAE since 1970. I have passed through security every day of my working life and have seen the security evolve from holding up a fag packet, with a cheery wave, to the current process.

Nowadays the security staff are highly trained and regulated at their job. The application of "common sense" by the front line staff is beyond their remit! They have a rule book to follow!

ALL STAFF at LHR have to endure the search process! So we grit our teeth, keep stum, and quietly comply with the requests from the security staff, who are just doing they're job.

Most of the confrontations I have witnessed at LHR, have stemmed from the occasional Prima Donna (some of which are pilots), that believe the security process doesn't apply to them! The argument that because I'm a pilot and can bring down an aircraft at will, just doesn't stack up! Once airside anyone including pilots have access to any aircraft, including ones they're not flying.

I know the security process is infuriating! It's something we have to endure and yes some of them are Jobsworths but there is never anything to be gained from arguing with them! Remember, when you're arguing and telling the security guard you need special treatment, everyone watching just think you're an eejut!

SECURITY APPLIES TO EVERYONE

I have a mantra that I say to myself when getting stressed with security,

"If they were intelligent, they wouldn't be able to do their job".

I know it doesn't apply to all of them but it always makes me feel better when I say it! Just don't say it to their face
Epsomdog is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 09:57
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brexitland
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Well said Epsom! Switch off, don't argue, take off belts, jackets, watches and sometimes shoes. Empty pockets, walk through, collect your stuff and go and get dressed next to a lovely flight attendant. Keep calm and enjoy your day.
ON THE OTHER HAND
No - don't do that......
Arfur Dent is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 10:29
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,914
Received 125 Likes on 74 Posts
"A pilot, though to be in his sixties, is arrested an hour before he was due to fly hundreds of people thousands of miles."

And that is the level of English on Sky...
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 10:36
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 67
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are missing some facts here. They guy may we'll have had some knives; maybe he went knife shopping? How many and what kind? Were these knives packaged or were they ready to plunged into an unsuspecting person's body? And how long were the blades? COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 185/2010 makes it clear that blades no longer than 6cm are acceptable on flights and Duty-free in LSGG do a roaring trade in Swiss Army knives to departing passengers. As far as I am concerned, this is just another example of "Sh!tty Britain".
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 10:52
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nr Aston Down, Cotswolds
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Part of the problem is crews are coming through security with cabin and hold baggage. They don't have the option to put restricted items, such as a carving knife, into their hold baggage, prior to the security checks.

Maybe that's something that could be changed. Possibly a crew check in area?
Epsomdog is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 11:16
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Possibly a crew check in area?
The best suggestion here so far. The problem is that so many crews away from their home bases have to take their 'nightstop' bags with them through security. (And there is no consistency around the world with the way these are viewed by security.) Some facts would be interesting in this case, was this just a case of a nightstop bag not meeting the full security requirements? And if so, why were the Met brought in without another satisfactory solution being found? I suspect we'll never know because this case will probably never get to an open court but will just be 'quietly' dropped. Of course, without any apology from the authorities who drop the case to all those passengers who were inconvenienced.
Trossie is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 13:00
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Flying Lawyer

In response to my statement about inconsistency:

Is that unreasonable?
As a passenger, I readily understand why some airline pilots feel indignant about security procedures.

I would be entirely content with the pilots being treated differently from me - whether officially by different rules or by discretion being exercised.
Fair comment but I wasn't referring to the inconsistency between people but of people - what's acceptable to some one week isn't the next, depending on the topic. Would those who are denigrating the security staff and police have had the same reaction had the headline referred to a pilot from a different airline and perhaps of different ethnicity, I wonder?

Shep69 stated that he expected the TSA to turn a blind eye to the pilot who tried to go into a secure airport area using false credentials (inasmuch that they belonged to an ex-employer) is not only incredulous but, quite frankly, alarming. I'd be interested to hear your view on that particular incident and whether you think the TSA and FBI over-reacted?

Anyway, that was my point.
Steve the Pirate is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 13:27
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: MNL BHX ACC
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The Law of the Country

i really laugh at the nonsense you guys write.
At the end of the day the question is did the suspect break the law of the country.
Time will tell.
I guess the PR guys in CX or Swire or HSBC are really worried!
luganao is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 14:27
  #77 (permalink)  
jvr
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: europe
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
quote:
We are missing some facts here. They guy may we'll have had some knives; maybe he went knife shopping? How many and what kind? Were these knives packaged or were they ready to plunged into an unsuspecting person's body? And how long were the blades? COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 185/2010 makes it clear that blades no longer than 6cm are acceptable on flights and Duty-free in LSGG do a roaring trade in Swiss Army knives to departing passengers. As far as I am concerned, this is just another example of "Sh!tty Britain".

PM

Not quit.
The eu regulation states that all knives over 6 cm blade are out of bounds and smaller ones as long as they have an sharp point or sharp edge.

"objects with a sharp point or sharp edge — objects with a sharp point or sharp edge capable of being used to cause serious injury, including:
— items designed for chopping, such as axes, hatchets and cleavers,

— ice axes and ice picks,

— razor blades,

— box cutters,

— knives with blades of more than 6 cm,

— scissors with blades of more than 6 cm as measured from the fulcrum,

— martial arts equipment with a sharp point or sharp edge,

— swords and sabres;

"

obviously in Switserland the swiss army knife is not considered sharp and pointy
jvr is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 16:13
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Location Location
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My understanding is it concerns old-fashioned straight razors and it was a packing oversight. He was allowed on through to the a/c and subsequently some nervous Nelly hit the panic button and had the cops called.

A pathetic mess.

I hope he gets through this okay and with his career intact.
Shutterbug is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 18:43
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STP--If you'd find stuff like that alarming or incredulous I personally hope you aren't either a pilot or a pirate; to me it shows a lack of SA and facing the reality of the situation (which is important to pirates and pilots alike). Apparently the guy had done it for months.

Not much of a threat; the airplanes got to where they were going just fine. Just a guy who (illegally) wanted to get through the hoops unencumbered (showing a lack of SA on HIS part as well). The only threat he seems to have presented so far is in suing companies for stuff they might have done wrong. Not saying one should do illegal things, but most of us found our way through high school with good looking fake ID's which worked well in much the same manner. Just a limit of the system which we don't make better by pretending it doesn't exist like mindless drones. If one can't exercise judgment and see the big picture, one should not be in the business of security, policing, OR piloting (or even pirating for that matter).

Meanwhile Aunt Betty and Uncle Fred from Iowa get strip searched while Al-Unsafe seems to get through with ease.

The point is losing the big picture on security by putting in place silly feel good measures (which only punish rank amateurs and the good guys) hurts everyone. Including apparently the crew and pax (as well as the company picking up the tab) on THIS particular flight.
Shep69 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2015, 23:07
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shep69, sorry, this question was aimed at Flying Lawyer as I thought you'd made your final comment on my original question by stating:

STP

Yup.

That is all.
Thread drift here and I apologise to everyone in advance. You say he'd been doing it for months - does that make it OK? Does someone who habitually speeds through a suburban street (not yours) 'for months' break a law and pose a threat or not, or is it simply the fact that he hasn't been caught? If that same driver were driving through your street, even if you knew who he was as a fellow member of your club, would your point of view change?

Regarding the time when this individual was caught, who was at fault, him or the TSA officer? In a statement that I read that was linked in an earlier thread on the topic, his lawyer made the following statement:

his Honolulu defense attorney in the criminal case, attributed a possible head injury from that crash as a reason for his actions at the airport. [The pilot], now a student at Tulane University, said in court he can't explain what he did.
If this was his defence, how can you state that his actions were "Not much of a threat"? The planes might have got where they were meant to on previous occasions but who can state categorically, given his defence lawyers claim, that he was of sound mind? Clearly I'm not in a position to as I'm not a medical professional but the lawyer's statement did make me question his (the pilot's) mental state. (As an aside, I asked myself if indeed that was really his defence).

To reiterate, I raise this question not about him per se but rather to fully understand your point of view on airport security and threats affecting our industry. Oh, and I assume from your Aunt Betty/Uncle Fred/Al-Unsafe example you're of the opinion that those who pose a threat to our industry are only of one particular panethnic group?
Steve the Pirate is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.