LHR Breathtest. Update: Captain jailed

[Flying Lawyer]

I disagree with U_R about the sentences.

I won’t deny that, from a professional point of view, I was pleased with the result - especially in light of a six month sentence having been imposed on the Manchester pilot for a much less serious offence. I underlined ‘professional’ only because, my personal view is that a community punishment order (unpaid work for the community) would probably have been sufficient. I’d have to accept it was borderline because the alcohol level was so high but, if a prison sentence was unavoidable, then I don’t think six months achieves anything that a much shorter sentence wouldn’t.
I simply don’t believe any pilot would think it was worth taking a chance if the likely sentence was (for example) ‘only’ a month, but not take a chance if a longer sentence was at stake. For decent people who haven’t been through the criminal courts or previously served a sentence, being sent to prison at all is horrific - whether for one month or six.
NB: My view would be very different if (for example) a pilot rostered to fly in the evening drank heavily at lunchtime and deliberately took a chance he wouldn’t get caught.

I think sending the Manchester pilot to prison was far too harsh. IMHO, he should have been given a heavy fine by the magistrates. I assume he’ll appeal, and it will be interesting to see if his sentence is reduced. (For various reasons, the best he can hope for is a reduced sentence. It’s extremely unlikely his sentence will be quashed altogether – but that doesn’t necessarily mean he shouldn’t have been fined in the first place.)

One thing is clear from these two cases:

Whatever our personal views may be about appropriate sentences, the courts are likely to take a severe approach to these offences.


BJCC
It may not be the responsibility of BAA personnel to give advice, but I’d think well of someone who tried to resolve the issue by having a quiet word. You don’t need to be an expert to do that. Unless a pilot has nothing to fear because he’s had nothing at all to drink, I suspect Go through and I’ll have to report it, go home and I won’t would do the trick in the vast majority of cases.

I don’t think your comparison with a shop-lifter is entirely valid. People who steal do so intentionally; the 20 mg limit is so low a pilot could easily commit this offence unintentionally.

Cortilla
That’s not how ‘precedent’ works.
Point of Law:
A court isn’t bound to follow a previous decision by a court of equal level.
Sentence:
If appropriate sentences for an offence have previously been considered by the Court of Appeal, particularly in a ‘sentencing guidelines’ case, Crown Court judges are bound to take the guidance into account but, even then, it is only guidance. The judge must impose the sentence he/she thinks is appropriate in the particular case - taking into account the facts/circumstances of the offence, any previous convictions, and any guidance given by the Court of Appeal in similar cases.

The judge sentencing the Heathrow pilot wasn’t bound by the sentence imposed by the judge in Manchester. It would be ludicrous if he was. If it was wrong, everyone else would be wrongly sentenced until the first appeal was considered by the Court of Appeal.
Either the Isleworth judge was too lenient (as U_R thinks) or the Manchester judge was too harsh. I don’t know anything about the Manchester case beyond what I’ve read in the Press and on PPRuNe but, given the big difference in alcohol levels between the two pilots, they can’t both have deserved the same sentence.
At present, there are no Court of Appeal decisions to give guidance. We’re not appealing the sentence. If the Manchester pilot appeals, there will be some guidance.

Tudor Owen