Uni Lecturer Gets Off after Punching Jetstar Crew.

[Sunfish]

Uni Lecturer Gets Off after Punching Jetstar Crew.

From the Age:

"Uni lecturer free over airport assault

November 27, 2007 - 3:14PM


A Sydney university lecturer who swore at a Jetstar employee and punched him in the face because she was late for her flight has escaped conviction.

Patricia McManus, 42, of Carlingford, on Tuesday pleaded guilty to two counts of assault and swearing in a public place after an incident at Sydney's domestic airport last month.

McManus tried to check in 12 minutes before her Jetstar flight to Hervey Bay, Queensland, was scheduled to leave and started swearing at staff when told she was too late, according to a statement of facts.

McManus later punched the customer service manager twice in the face after he refused to let her back into the terminal.

Magistrate Lee Gilmour said she accepted McManus had acted out of character and was deeply stressed at the time of the offence.

"I understand how you got so angry ... (but) once you got over the initial shock of being denied access to the plane, you calmed down and police said you were extremely contrite," she said.

Ms Gilmour, who recently has come under media scrutiny over the leniency of the penalties she hands down, ordered McManus to pay $70 in court costs.

"At the risk of offending The Daily Telegraph and John Laws' talkback show, I do not need to record a conviction," she said.

"Just be careful, airports are very stressful places for a lot of people."

I guess it goes with the territory these days......

[lowerlobe]

I wonder if the Magistrate would have been so lenient if it was her that was punched.....

[Keg]

At least the staff know that if they now belt a passenger that they won't get a criminal record from it.......it's a stressful place after all.

Fair dinkum but how do fruit loops like this get onto the bench?!?! :eek:

[B A Lert]

Newspapers don't spoil good stories with the facts. Before passing judgment on the magistrate's, maybe it would be wise to read a full transcript of the proceedings and review the evidence before you comment on what the press has published.

[Howard Hughes]

It's OK Mr Bin Liner, I won't be recording a conviction for your terrorist activities, I mean you were at the airport and we all know they can be such stressful places...:rolleyes:

Where does the madness stop?

[sinala1]

Well at the very least I hope she has been blackbanned from any future JQ or QF flights, and that information has also been shared with other Australian airlines... :ugh: :yuk: := :*

[WannaBeBiggles]

Wonder what the sentence would have been if it were a stay at home mother...

If the lady punched the guy OUTSIDE the terminal that means she was hostile enough to have been evicted from the terminal.

Wonder what would have happend if one of the professors students punched her in the face during uni exams... they are stressful after all! :ugh:

[Metro man]

Courts are very stressfull places too, if I don't like a magistrates decision is it alright to punch him ? :E

[Wod]

Calm down guys!

"Calmed down; expressed contrition to the police" and pleaded guilty.

It's probably the right way to treat a first offender.

Not all bad (stupid) behaviour requires punishment. A ticking off will sometimes do it.

[Keg]

So let me understand this correctly. We actually don't subscribe to the theory of 'zero tolerance'. It appears that we actually are prepared to tolerate assault as long as it's a 'stressful' situation. Personally i'd prefer to live in a society where everyone understood that it's actually not acceptable to flip your lid and resort to physical violence to solve the issues.

[OhForSure]

Amen Keg...

[Blue Sky Baron]

I wonder if the magistrate would have been as kind had the incident occurred in the air? I bet not, so when is assult acceptable?
Don't forget, flying can be stressful for some too!

BSB

[Qantas 787]

What a joke - imagine what would have happened if the JQ staff member touched her?

Airports are stressful places..........so does that mean all the staff can punch people? I can't believe she got away with that. The courts are a joke.

[assasin8]

Rather than paying an insignificant $70, as a fine, she could do 70 hrs community service, handling irate customers at the airport checkin... It is such a stressful place after all...:rolleyes:

[Mr. Hat]

Before passing judgment on the magistrate's, maybe it would be wise to read a full transcript of the proceedings and review the evidence before you comment on what the press has published.

Err did she punch the staff member or not? Thats really all that needs to be said.

People have bad days all the time. Very few of those punch people in the face. May i add that in certain unfortunate circumstances people have died from this.

Highly reccomend passing this persons name to the relevant manager where you work so she can be blacklisted. The 70 bucks won't hurt, but tell you what, not being able to fly anywhere in Australia indefinitely certainly will.

Enoughs enough.

[amos2]

I'm surprised that you're all missing the connection here!
Female Uni lecturer...
Female magistrate...
aw!..c'mon guys!!
Are you really that thick?

[Howard Hughes]

Very few of those punch people in the face. TWICE!!:rolleyes:

[Wod]

Keg Absolutely do not subscribe to "zero tolerance". Most of those who use the term sound like the leaders of the lynch mob to me. (And I don't think you are one of them)

That aside, this idiot did not get off scot free. She was arrested, charged, went to court and we are discussing her here.

My post was intended to say that I found that an adequate outcome.

[capt.cynical]

FEMALE Uni Lecturer :yuk:
FEMALE Magistrate--Uni Graduate ??:confused:

Short Hair:*
Big Earings:(
Hairy Legs:E

Mmmmm !!!:eek:

[sinala1]

It's probably the right way to treat a first offender.

Not all bad (stupid) behaviour requires punishment. A ticking off will sometimes do it.
Why don't you say that to the person who actually got punched, twice, in the face?

A $70 fine and the "inconvenience" of having to appear in court is not nearly sufficient. You say you are quite happy with the process thats taken place... what if it were you or your wife/husband or your kid or your parent that was punched in the face twice for NO reason whatsoever? I doubt you would be as forgiving then...

I wonder if this offence could actually be classified under the CAO's/CAR's as violence against an airline officer? Although I guess Magistrate Forgive-a-lot wouldn't care anyway :*

[amos2]

So, I guess I gotta spell it out!

Michael Kirby!

[soldier of fortune]

may be just a couple lesbo's looking out for each other-not that there is anything wrong with that

[wessex19]

http://www.business.ecu.edu.au/news/album/SCAMParty/scam_bbq09.html

:=

[DEEWHY]

How is it possible to plead guilty to assault and not have a conviction recorded?

"You poor stressed wee lamb,you obviously didn,t mean to punch the nasty man twice"

It is unbelievable

[B A Lert]

How is it possible to plead guilty to assault and not have a conviction recorded?

Very easily. As I posted earlier, all red-necks should read the transcript and review the evidence before sounding off in an irrational way. Reports of matters before the courts often omit serious material facts and factors in mitigation. After all, the papers are only interested in a story that grabs the attention of the reader, often in a sensational and mis-leading way - just look at most of the reporting concerning aviation incidents to see what I mean.

.

[ScottyDoo]

Capt. Cynical hit the nail on the head. She may've escaped conviction but I'm sure the magistrate still gave her a tongue-lashing.

Uni Lecturer Gets Off after Punching Jetstar Crew.

"See me in my chambers after court, Professor.." :p

[Taildragger67]

Amos,

What's Kirby J. got to do with this?

B A Lert,

Is the transcript - or judgment - available on the net? I would like to read it.

IMHO assault is serious enough not to qualify for a s.556A (a section of the Crimes Act whereby you can have a penalty imposed but no conviction recorded for a first offence - allows behaviour way out of character to be sort-of excused) but Lert is right in that we don't know all the facts.

But, it appears that Jetstar are considering appealing (http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2007/11/27/Cost_of_punching_a_Jetstar_worker_70). For once, I wish JQ well.

[Sunfish]

Considering Jetstars booking practices and half hour "cutoff" point, I'm surprised Jetstar staff haven't copped more abuse and assaults.

Jetstars business practices put their staff at risk. It also cannot be very pleasant for other passengers to witness these types of goings on, but then again, what would Qantas or Jetstar management care?

[ScottyDoo]

What's the difference, Fishy. They could invoke a 5min cut-off and some people like this professor tw@t would still cut it by a minute or two and start swinging their manbags when told to fcuk off.

Why TF should management take responsibility for some dick throwing punches??? You're living in a dreamworld, man...

Is there any airline you actually like?

[Sunfish]

???





http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/49/49776_800.jpg

[Starts with P]

Just take her to civil court. A lot easier to get money out of her there.

[Capt Wally]

...............obviously the attack was unacceptable as most have indicated in here & so it ought to be. But ponder this...................the person doing the assaulting was a male !!!..............I doubt it very much that the outcome would be what we have here. I believe that punishing someone for such an act is the only way now in our stressfull society but may I put it to the masses here that rather than fining someone here huge amounts (obviously not in this case) or a custodian penalty (that's obviously needed in very serious cases) but rather a recorded conviction that will follow her for the rest of her life. That action will do more harm for an individual than any other lessor penalty making anybody think twice before behaving poorly in public.
Still road rage is now very common place out there & maybe this is a sign 'Air Rage' is becoming part of our busy & hectic lives having an effect on every rational thinking person.

Capt Wally:-)

[Jabawocky]

In the words of the great Jeff Foxworthy.............


If you think ya boarding pass is a permission slip to punch the cabin crew in the face............YA MIGHT BE A REDNECK!!!


And she sure looks like a redneck, great to see our educational dollar being spent wisely!

J:ok:

PS not your mum is it Rove?:E

[LewC]

Perhaps the AFP might consider lodging an Appeal against what appears to be a totally inadequate sentence.

[Mr. Hat]

Scotty Doo is spot on. You buy the ticket you know the deal 30 minutes and thats that.

I ask again did she or did she not punch a staff member? No need to spend hours trying to work out pros and cons. If the answer is yes - Simple, life ban from all air travel.

I wouldn't waste time waiting for the justice system to provide justice to its citizens.

[200psi]

Sunfish touches on a significant point and I think Jetstar may have to appeal the apparent leniency of the punishment.
The company has a "duty of care" to provide a safe working environment and it may come to pass that if they are seen as not doing this or are not making a serious attempt to protect their staff then it could precipitate industrial/OH&S action down the track.

[Worrals in the wilds]

"At the risk of offending The Daily Telegraph and John Laws' talkback show, I do not need to record a conviction," she said.

"Just be careful, airports are very stressful places for a lot of people."

I worked in a terminal with pax for about seven years.

From many examples, I remember...
A woman returning to China with the ashes of her only son,
Several families travelling with severely disabled children,
A woman travelling with her paranoid schizophrenic teenage son, who thought the PA messages were demons and needed her constant reassurance,
A couple returning to New York after their nephew was killed in the WTC on 9/11,
Many, many people who had missed their flight (sometimes therefore missing an important personal occasion) and hundreds (thousands?) of other people dealing with air travel while undergoing appalling amounts of stress.

None of those people lost control to the extent of resorting to physical violence. Some were verbally abusive, and in the circumstances that was probably understandable, but NONE of them felt the need to punch a staff member in the face.

This is just the latest example of the lack of personal accountability seeping into our culture, where a person can physically assault someone, then jump back and say "Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean it!! I was very upset at the time...", then receive a pat on the head and a "there, there" from the judiciary.

It sends a message to all the erks out there that they can treat customer service people like serfs and escape any major repurcussions.


B A Lert I take your point about reading the transcript (I had a trawl on the net and couldn't find anything), but she did plead guilty to two counts of assault, and has been widely reported as having punched the employee.

[B A Lert]

This has nothing to do with Jetstar as it is a criminal matter. The DPP may appeal, sometimes as a result of public dismay.

[Ejector]

I don’t know much about the legalities here, but I wonder what would have happened if the Jet* employee hit back? :confused:
Well, lets see what Jet* does, if they don’t appeal, why don’t we all starting hitting the heads of check in staff of the same gender? ( I am kidding here, Just pointing out how stupid this is)
The precedent has been set.
I am disgusted the way this has been treated. :mad:
I wish she was allowed on my plane, If I saw this happen I would go back and “accidentally” shove her face into the seat arm as she is going down to the floor where I would knee her in the neck while controlling her with a fist full of her hair and cuff her. Hey, I am allowed to on the plane. :O:O:O
If Jet* doesn’t reply, then they are just an embarrassment and left them selves open to future problems.:=

[ScottyDoo]

It has everything to do with J*, Lert. They recognise the fact it happened on their time and they appear to be supporting the cause. This does not mean it is J* taking action against the b!tch; they're a difference and it seems J* appreciate this. For once (from what I hear) acting pro-staff.

The company has a "duty of care" to provide a safe working environment and it may come to pass that if they are seen as not doing this or are not making a serious attempt to protect their staff then it could precipitate industrial/OH&S action down the track.

If you believe this means protecting staff from idiots like this woman, then you might be a part of the problem rather than the solution.

The campany shouldn't have to dance around reacting to every act of anti-social behaviour by any miscreant who walks through the door. Okay, maybe kick the arses of the security morons whose fat @rses maybe took too long to get there and stop the second punch.

Are there gaping holes in the floor, waiting to endanger the staff, or anything like that? No? Do they provide hearing protection and hi-vis vests for the staff? Well then I think they are providing a safe environment. Saying they need to preempt some slag like this uni-bitch is unrealistic and silly.

As for the conviction, I'd say if the strikes had been described as "slaps" or even "bitch-slaps" then there'd be a case for letting her off. But if they were truly "punches" then this bitch should be on ice.

[Taildragger67]

B A Lert,

You're quite right, as a criminal matter it is the prosecutor who appeals, rather than the victim - and JQ is a further step remote from the prosecution.

On another point, why are airports 'such stressful places'? Could it be that a punter gets 'stressed' when their expectations are not being met? OK, on one hand that comes from being sold something in advertising and then having the reality fall short - but that happens in many spheres (eg. few men suddenly get set upon by nubile females just for wearing a certain after-shave or piece of clothing). Personally I find that, when I walk into a terminal, I know I'm going to have to wait in queues, no matter if it's business or cattle, Changi or Sydney or Heathrow - so I take a mag to read in the queue. That is, I have low expectations, so pretty much everything is upside!

Hence - whether it was a punch or a 'bitch slap' (:confused:) - you just don't hit anyone else.

[Checkboard]

It looks like this judge may be slowly learning something about running a court:

"Over the past five months, Ms Gilmour has sent the office police statements alleging incidents including a security manager being "glassed" and a patron being struck on the head with a billiard cue. Other cases involve swearing at and hitting police.

Ms Gilmour first wrote to the office in May after she became fed up with dealing with three or four hotel-related incidents a week.

"Generally speaking, people of good character holding down good jobs … were all coming in asking for 'section 10s' - no recorded conviction," she said.

She said that for a while she thought "fair enough" but it became so prevalent that she had to stop doing section 10s and start fining people as a deterrent.

"I think the one that started me off was this very nice 23-year-old [with a] full-time job who had done well at school and never been in trouble with police before," she said.

He picked up a female police officer and threw her against a window after he became drunk in a pub and was asked to leave. (Didn't take much to wake her up, then!! )

Ms Gilmour said she was fining people $500 for urinating in the street - "a very expensive leak".

In one incident, a man returned home to Coogee with his four-year-old child to see a man urinating on the security keypad of his block of units. "People shouldn't have to put up with that," she said.

She said the first thing defendants were saying was: "We wouldn't have done anything wrong except for the state of intoxication."

To her surprise, the department and the Government are eagerly supporting her plan."

from: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/word-is-out-on-violent-drunks/2006/09/24/1159036415587.html

[Sunfish]

There are comments here regarding "Personal Responsibility" and "In all my days I've never seen...."

Has it dawned on anyone that perhaps Jetstar is providing a stressful low quality travel experience that triggers such behaviour? Let's see if this is an isolated incident or does Jetstar frequently have to deal with irate Bogans?

The solution of course is simple. Provide no service and put your employees behind glass and provide them with an emergency button, you already have AFP security goons.

Then you can treat people the way you really want to.

Oh and for good measure...

Melbourne Sydney Friday 30th $139 jetstar vs $147 Qantas. Some saving!

[wessex19]

With regards to the Magistrate Lee Gilmour's apparent soft touch, I asked my sister and her husband once (they are both Barristers) about why are local court judges constantly coming under public criticism for their perceived weak penalties. "Bloody left wingers" was his reply!!! My brother-in-law explained that you do not become a local court judge for money, he said its like taking a job for DOC's, its attractive to people that think that they can make a difference and don't really care about that hard cash so much, although local court judges can represent all walks of life, he believes (like DOC's) that they have had a strong left wing creep over the last 20 years. He said the more you criticise these guys, the more resolute they become in giving out the soft touch!! Thats how he explained to me anyway

[Sunfish]

Wessex - Bolleaux!

My brother is a Magistrate and I wouldn't call him a soft touch or a left winger by any stretch of the imagination, neither would I call any judge or Magistrate a soft touch, and I know one or two.

Furthermore, the easiest, simplest and most "guaranteed to inflame public opinion" news story a journalist can write is the courthouse story about X getting a light sentence, all you have to do is omit certain facts and skew others the way you want them, and perhaps add a statement from the victim.

Jail is not trivial. A conviction is not trivial. And a tongue lashing from a Magistrate is not trivial. The person involved now has a "record" - even though she was discharged without conviction and this record stays with her for life, and it will be taken into consideration if she reoffends in almost any form.

I don't believe anyone here has ever seen the inside of a jail, from all accounts incarceration is highly traumatic for almost all of the population and Magistrates and Judges are well aware of this because they visit them regularly.

A conviction for anything more than a speeding ticket is going to seriously impair a persons ability to travel overseas, work in public service or anywhere else for that matter thanks to the creeping phenomenon of "Police Checks" for many forms of employment.

The best advice on this thread is to find, and then read, the judgment. We do not know anything about the case except that there was no conviction.

For example, we do not know what was said by the Jetstar employee or his demeanour prior to him getting punched - there may have been extreme provocation (ie "Too bad! Your late, slut!", or "Can't you read the conditions on your ticket, Idiot!").

We do not know if the offender immediately apologised. We do not know her background and personal circumstances. We do not know if the person in front of her was allowed on the aircraft, but then the bar was lowered on her. We do not know if the failure of another Jetstar employee or a bit of Jetstar equipment (like an Eftpos terminal) made her late.

In fact we know SFA unless we read the judgement, which just goes to show how gullible the general community (including pilots) are in the face of a badly written inflammatory newspaper article - as this thread, which I started, conclusively demonstrates.

[Buster Hyman]

If she was the very first person to be denied boarding...ever...then perhaps this would be a suitable test case. However, having been in the same position and been verbally assaulted many, many times, I have yet to see any physical assault worthy of reporting to the Police. (6'5" frame helps a lot!)

I'm sure there's a wealth of information in the transcript Lert, but the pertinent information is already available. That being a guilty plea for physical assault.

FFS, we're making people strip at security these days & getting arrested overseas for saying Fair Dinkum!:rolleyes: Talk about mixed messages!

work in public service
So, she'll lose her job at the Uni??:confused:

[wessex19]

Sunfish, don't shoot the messanger mate, just passing on what I was told "first hand" by my brother-in-law. I do not for a moment claim to be an expert in law in as most likely you are, however I did say they represent all walks of life and that in his opinion there was a left wing tendency at the local court level. Have I ever been to jail, no mate, haven't even had a parking ticket!!I'll give you an example of soft sunfish, last month a friend of mine fronted Newtown local court on his 6th drink driving offence in 10 years, on his 5th he got 6 months weekend detention, on his 6th last month, he received a 9 month suspension of his licence, NO FINE as the judge actually forgot to fine him and 100 hours community service, my personal opinion is YES, local courts are as soft as ****e but that is just my opinion!!!
When it comes to personal experiences, i live in the inner western suburb of Petersham in Sydney, my local "The white Cockatoo" has been held up 5 times this year, in fact every pub in Petersham/ Leichardt has been held up this year, actually they have all been done at least twice. I have been in 2 pubs when they got done over(no I am not a piss head!!:}), I have walked into our local newsagent when she ( a lady in her 60's) had a wiltshire knife to her throat during a hold up, our local bank has been held up this year, 2 weeks ago I was walking down Norton Street at lunchtime when a black BMW fired off a few rounds across the busy street full of shoppers, mothers with babies etc, our local Coles was held up 5 tuesdays ago at 9 in the morning(no I wasn't there), place was full of elderly and mothers with youngsters, and I live in a so called trendy inner city suburb with a million dollar price tag. These crimes almost always involve firearms or tasers. There are many reasons for the crime stats but one I believe is that these kids have no fear of the ramifications because the courts go soft too often!!

[Pinky the pilot]

I think that the Customer Service Manager showed remarkable restraint in not retaliating!

[Sunfish]

Wessex, no offence intended. I'm in the inner city in Melbourne and we have our share of trouble as well.

I think you are making a connection between stiffer sentences and deterrence of crime that has not actually been shown to exist. Most drug users for example couldn't give a damn what the penalty for robbery and assault is, especially amphetamine users, who can be psychotic and totally off their tree when they commit offences. They just don't care - this is both from my brother the Magistrate as well as several police I know.

My brother has to think long and hard before he convicts and/or throws someone in the slammer because the "knock-on" effects for that individual and possibly his (her) family can be simply enormous and destructive for society as a whole.

Do it to a young first offender and you may be setting him up for a life of crime since prisons are the "Universities" in this respect and from what one hears there is very little rehabilitation work done in prisons these days.

For example, a conviction for assault in this particular case would probably trigger a "show cause" letter from a University Vice Chancellor, followed by a disciplinary hearing, sacking, and a complete loss of Academic career prospects with possible financial and personal consequences for her family if she has one. I would expect that her defence lawyer would have made exactly this argument.

On the other hand the young lady who told my brother to "get stuffed"(and other suggestions) in an assault case hearing was surprised when she got three months in the slammer and was lead away in tears. She expected to be back on the streets that afternoon.

I suggest "Light sentences" are something of an urban myth these days, as is the one most teenagers believe about their record being "secret" and getting a fresh start at age 18. I've had to explain to more than one teenager that once you have "form" you have it for life, and if you commit offences after age 18, your Judge WILL have access to your entire history and take it into account when sentencing.

[Allan L]

I'm confused!

So telling the beak to 'get stuffed' justifies three months in the slammer.

But physically assaulting a person is not worthy of a conviction because they may now suffer from having a criminal record?

Huh?

No wonder the legal profession charge such high fees to make sense out of it all!

[priapism]

Whichever way you look at it , a disturbing legal precedent has been set.

[Sunfish]

Allan L. - As my brother pointed out, he doesn't give a stuff what names he is called but he considered that she wasn't abusing him, she was abusing the Court itself by abusing the office of Magistrate (let alone the police)

Don't EVER think of abusing a judge or not complying with their directions. They can lock you up on the spot for contempt of court if the feel you are abusing the system or not paying due deference to the bench.

In my brothers case, what she got was perfectly within the law and the correct sentencing range. The usual penalty for whatever offense it was (I can't remember) was three months - usually suspended by the Magistrate but that is at the Magistrates absolute discretion, and in this case she copped it.

I would imagine the Academic involved in this Jetstar case was a model of remorse, respect, tearfulness and all the other virtues that get turned on in a courtroom, not like the abusive slag my bro put away.

[simsalabim]

Fact ( female) pax turned up 12 minutes late for 30 min requirement and was denied boarding pass then verbally abused male check in person and threw mobile phone at him. Airport security was called and pax physically hit ( male) security officer. Police called , pax resisited arrest and was then arrested. At hearing Magistrate (female) stated airports are stressful places and fined pax $70 in court cost with no conviction recorded.
Alan Joyce Jetstar CE has declared pax persona-non-grata across the Qantas group of Airlines. The matter is now closed as far as John Hatzistergos the NSW Attorney General is concerned.

Agree with all expressions of disgust at leniency of this magistrate . If it's any consolation Radio Talk back host Ray Hadley of Sydney station 2Gb has been giving the Magistrate Lee Gilmour and the pax Patricia McManus 42 of Carlingford an absolute pasting over this for the last 2 days even to the extent of ringing Miss McManus' (note spelling McManus not MacManus)home phone (number publicly available in White Pages ) to ask her opinion on the outcome . Apparently a male person (partner?) said she didn't wish to discuss the matter with 2GB.

[ozangel]

Quite simply,

There is NO place for that sort of behaviour, regardless of personal circumstances! It was blatant violence and aggression on the part of the offender, and what message is being sent by justifying this kind of behaviour with 'airports are stressful'!

I suppose i'm just repeating what has already been said...

This just makes all our jobs that little bit harder in the end...

[Capt Wally]

......ponder this............this aggressive woman was halted at the airport, BEFORE she got the chance to board the aircraft. If allowed to board after being abusive as in she bluffed her way onboard just enough to get thru then got further agitated at a Cabin attendant whilst in flight over perhaps another stressful matter such as cold coffee !. This would be highly probable 'cause she would most likely be very upset from the previous miss handled incident & not thinking clearly.
Am glad the situation was nipped in the bud (at the expense of another human sadly) before she was allowed to perhaps create havoc where further authoritarian assitance wasn't at hand at short notice.

The Aussie judicial system is constantly being questioned (we hear & see the poor outcomes almost daily thru the media) for it's leniency from the very people whom it was designed to protect.........US law abiding citizens !!

Capt Wally:-)

[Shot Nancy]

Sounds like a Pat O'Shane protege.

[tea & bikkies]

So you were checking in 12mins pror to departure and you decide to punch me twice because YOU are running late???????
Im STRESSED TOO,can I punch you.........and get away with a $70 fine... I think not
What sort of message is this giving to the general public????????

[Pugilistic Animus]

Will I get off if I punched myself?

PA

Professor of Aeronautics!

[A2QFI]

I think the problem lies with the prosecuters a lot of the time. In UK a person in breach of an ASBO can be imprisoned at once. Recently a charming yoof was on his 15th breach of conditions before being jailed, gaining much street cred with his mates as they saw how powerless or unwilling people were to enforce the law and/or his ASBO conditions. Link here
http://tinyurl.com/3c2hmd

[Qantas 787]

Imagine the punishment if the agent actually retaliated............

She might be banned from all Qf group airlines but I hope DJ and Tiger do the same - this stance would send a clear message to her.

[Sunfish]

Why you poor wilting little flowers! Someone dares to get angry at the disgusting level of service your company provides and throws a punch?

The Magistrate made her decision, and thats the end of it. What possible public purpose could justify a jail sentence or conviction? As it is, the offender will be lucky to keep her job.

Simsalabim has provided the facts of the case, but not the circumstances which have obviously influenced the Magistrate. For example, what frame of mind was the offender in when she went to board the aircraft? Was she rushing to the bedside of a dieing relative? Exactly how did the Jetstar employee tell her she couldn't board? As for radio shock jocks, **** em.

Oh! But its in an airport and the punchee was airline staff! that makes it different, special, and worthy of a full trial in front of the Supreme court.......................what do you want??? The judge donning the black hat and pronouncing the death penalty on the crying prisoner as she stands between two burly prison officers while her family weeps in silence?

Question for you little flowers...............what do you think happens daily to Nurses? Doctors? Ambulance officers? Fire Brigade staff? Hotel staff? Let alone police and other public transport staff? There are far more worthy targets for media outrage then mere airline staff, but of course your "special" aren't you?

Please explain why some slag throwing a punch at some mincing poof in a Jetstar uniform should be treated any differently from any other stoush???

Please explain?

P.S. On the ground of course, in the air its a different matter

[Buster Hyman]

what do you think happens daily to Nurses? Doctors? Ambulance officers? Fire Brigade staff? Hotel staff? Let alone police and other public transport staff?

Personally, I think they should have charges pressed against them, but thats just me.

If we are living in an "enlightened" society, then behaviour such as this is not tolerated & the law is in place to deal with it.

Maybe the Sudanese Teddy Bear treatment would suffice...:confused:

The Magistrate made her decision, and thats the end of it
Not if there's an appeal.

[Allan L]

Please explain why some slag throwing a punch at some mincing poof in a Jetstar uniform should be treated any differently from any other stoush???

Exactly SF. The one that appeared before your bro the beak, got 3 months (was it for the assault, or coz told yr bro to 'get stuffed'?).

This one, the Uni Lecturer, had no conviction recorded.

To paraphrase your good self: "why .... should be treated any differently" ?

I suspect your derogatory comments about both the airline and their staff have finally unveiled your true sense of lornorder - it's only for the bottom feeders, not for we educated chappies!

[Sunfish]

Good point Alan L. Why should the two examples be treated differently?

The answer is according to what I was taught (in a limited way, I'm not a lawyer) is that equal penalties do NOT mean equal justice - thats why the whole mandatory sentencing procedure, which is so popular with tabloid journalists and politicians is a crock.

A Judge needs to take into account the circumstances surrounding the offence, and the arguments from both defence and prosecution, in coming to a decision about the penalty - otherwise why have judges and trials???

Apart from the obvious invitation to corruption implicit in mandatory sentencing, do you honestly think that someone administering poison to his terminally ill wife should get the same penalty as an axe murderer?

We have the facts of the case. We don't know what the circumstances were.
On the one hand the offender could have been rushing to the bed of a dieing relative, and been denied boarding and abused by the Jetstar employee. She pleads guilty and throws herself on the mercy of the court.

On the other hand, she could have been late for a hairdressing appointment, and when politely told she couldn't board but offered a later flight, simply started swearing and screaming. Then she goes to court with an army of lawyers pleading innocence.

The facts of the case are not in doubt, what we don't know are the circumstances, and in the (hypothetical) example of what circumstances could be, you can see that entirely different sentences would have been called for.

The slut my Brother put away was bad mouthing the Court, not him, and that is a definite no-no, which is why she went in the slammer.

P.S. If you ever have to go to Court over a traffic offence, think long and hard about whether you want to be represented by a lawyer, you should perhaps consider getting coached by a lawyer and represent yourself because "Smart Alecs" with lawyers who take up a Courts time over trivial matters often get longer sentences if found guilty.

But it's fair to say that it's also the luck of the draw, and magistrates are only human, and the next person to deck a Jetstar employee may get a different sentence. In my only appearance in court over a traffic matter about 25 years ago, I was lucky enough to have a Magistrate who announced at the start of the day that tomorrow he was starting six months long service leave and simply couldn't wait, and who wanted to plead guilty and save him a lot of time? All of us criminals were discharged without conviction that day!:)

[Mr. Hat]

Here is what can happen when someone thinks its a good idea to punch another in the head:
A SYDNEY man has been jailed for at least three-and-a-half years for punching a pub customer who then fell, hit his head on the pavement, and died.
In the NSW Supreme Court today, Justice Stephen Rothman accepted Sesoni Bashford had not intended to kill Peter Dando.
Bashford, 24, of Matraville, pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Mr Dando, 46, who died in October last year after being punched outside Matraville's House of Pie, in Sydney's east.
Bashford and Mr Dando, who were strangers, had been drinking earlier at a nearby pub watching the Rugby League Grand Final.
70 dollars isn't a good enough deterrent when you look at the implications of the actions

[Buster Hyman]

P.S. If you ever have to go to Court over a traffic offence, think long and hard about whether you want to be represented by a lawyer, you should perhaps consider getting coached by a lawyer and represent yourself because "Smart Alecs" with lawyers who take up a Courts time over trivial matters often get longer sentences if found guilty.
been there, done that... Had an accident whilst still on my very first P plates. "Mama" decided that she was "severly" injured & played up as though I'd run over her & backed up a few times. Cops attended, ambos were called etc. The ambos weren't interested in her, but were checking the baby that was in my car (Not mine...don't ask). Anyway, it went to Court & young Buster had Legal aid supporting him. Just as were going in, the prat from Legal aid said he was too busy & "You'll be right!" Well, didn't the Judge pay out on me! Something about thinking I was so clever to represent myself...lost my licence for 6 months & some fine as well.

[Worrals in the wilds]

"What do you think happens daily to Nurses? Doctors? Ambulance officers? Fire Brigade staff? Hotel staff? Let alone police and other public transport staff? There are far more worthy targets for media outrage then mere airline staff, but of course your (sic) "special" aren't you?"

I don't think those people should be exposed to physical violence in their workplace either.

This is an aviation forum, so of course the incident will receive more interest here than other assaults in the workplace.

Call me an idealist or a left wing w:mad:nker, but I do not believe that it is acceptable for anyone (except soldiers and cops) to go to work and expect phyiscal assaults, particularly in a customer service environment.

I do not suggest for one minute that this person should be dragged off to a far western gulag for the term of her natural life, but going on the available facts, the penalty seems very light. FWIW my pet barrister (in another state) agreed with me, and predicted an appeal.

[Jabawocky]

OK

YOU "idealist or a left wing w:mad:nker"

But you are correct, unless you are a cop or ADF you should not expect it.

Maybe the Tax office or Casa might be exceptions:E

J:ok:

[Sunfish]

Can we all relax now or does anyone else want a shot? Nobody would suggest anyone should get assaulted on duty, but the magistrates call is the Magistrates call.

I think this thread has run its course.

[amos2]

What really ticks me off about this whole thing is that the poor lady had to pay her own court costs!

Surely her costs should have been paid by Jetstar?

I would appeal if I were her!

[ScottyDoo]

The slut my Brother put away was bad mouthing the Court, not him, and that is a definite no-no, which is why she went in the slammer.


Fish, if your brother can't rise above that then he doesn't deserve to be wielding the gavel.

Special justice for whomever offends the beak? Disgraceful. With lack of self-control such as that, he isn't fit to change the courthouse bog-rolls.

Is he a fish-man too, Fish?

Please continue your rantings and sloverings; they are highly amusing...! :{





PS: the results of this case merely confirm that in hindsight, the best possible outcome would've been for the punchee to have jobbed the slut (to use Fish's legalese) in the chops and removed her front teeth. Self-defence. :ok: Take that, bitch!!

[lowerlobe]

For the first time I agree with you Scotty...

I'm sure as both the Magistrate and the Uni lecturer are women they would believe in equality.......self defense would have been the best course.

Sunfish....I think this thread has run its course.

The thread is not finished just because you are unhappy with it's direction .....

[Sunfish]

Scotty Doo, next time you go to court, try telling the judge to get ****ed and see what happens to you.

Youi'll be in the cells so fast you won't believe it.

From Wikipedia:Contempt of court is a court ruling which, in the context of a court trial or hearing, deems an individual as holding contempt for the court, its process, and its invested powers. Often stated simply as "in contempt", or a person "held in contempt", it is the highest remedy of a judge to impose sanctions on an individual for acts which excessively or in a wanton manner disrupt the normal process of a court hearing.

A finding of contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial. A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of contempt of court. Typically judges in common law systems have more extensive power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems.

The woman concerned in my brothers case could have been prosecuted for the offence of Contempt separately to what she was being prosecuted for, and a finding that she was in contempt (of which there was no doubt) would have automatically meant that her three months suspended sentence would have become actual jail time. (suspended sentences require good behaviour).

So all my Bro did was apply the discretion he had been given by law and shorten the process, saving the state money and time....and the slut concerned now knows not to bad mouth judges when she inevitably appears next time.

[ScottyDoo]

Yes we all know what is meant by contempt of court, Fish, you ain't the only one who watches LA Law.... :rolleyes:

BUT - by your own admission, your brother locked that bitch up out of his own contempt - for her!

Now if he'd given her some time for contempt as a separate issue, that'd be different, wouldn't it? But he didn't. My guess is he was too lazy to file the paperwork or whatever you have to do as a beak so he tacked it on as punishment for the main charge.... talk about kangaroo court. And that is (one of) the problem(s) with our system. This asshole and that mole in the J* case answer to themselves and their petty whims, NOT to the people whom they serve. Power goes to the heads of some, hmmm...??? :=

Case closed.

[Prado]

Unfortunately cases like this are symptomatic of society today: "its everyone else's fault". Since when is it acceptable to punch anyone regardless of the circumstances? Since when do our ambos, firies, nurses and airline staff have to face this type of behaviour? There is a distinct lack of manners and respect in society today, and this is reflected in the behaviour people display "out" (gawd knows what their "home" behaviour would be like :eek:)

Sunfish, for all your defence of it, unfortunately the Court system is beginning to be seen as the "weakest link" in maintaining any sort of standard for society. Good on the shock jocks for applying some pressure where the court didn't!

Cheers
Prado

[ScottyDoo]

Far from it, Prado. The court system, as we've seen in Europe and the UK as well as here, is not at all the weakest link. Rather they are a defining force in shaping not only our mores and expectations but providing their own interpretations of right and wrong both legally and morally despite a distinct lack of mandate.

Rather than upholding the law, the court system actively re-shapes our society (barely) within the bounds of legislature by setting precedent where, when and how they see fit, despite the outcries from the public whom they invariably label as redneck, extremist, racist, anti-social, anti-establishment, anti-Australian, you name it.

So now you have a madge who lets off her "sister" with $70 costs for walking into a public place of business after having failed to meet the contract she took out with the airline (as stipulated in the fine print) and physically assaulting the staff, not once but twice!

Road rage, trolley rage, pram rage, air rage, airport rage - all the same thing and this slut has just sent completely the wrong message to the great unwashed masses. She should be disbarred or whatever they do with the beaks. Then judged by her peers as an ordinary citizen.

[amos2]

So, let's see if I've got this right Fish...

a female J* pax whacks a j* traffic officer ( which we would all like to do! )...

and walks free from the court system. And you agree with that.

Am I right so far?

Now, another female in another court, on some similar charge, tells your

brother, the judge, to go and get stuffed, ( which we would all like to do! )...

and gets 3 months! And you agree with that, and also refer to her as a sl*t!

Am I still right?

So, this is the logic of a Cessna pilot, is it? :=:=:=