PDA

View Full Version : Stansted protestors sentenced


autobrake3
8th Jan 2009, 17:48
Stansted protestors sentenced

The group of environmental protestors who succeeded in bringing London's Stansted Airport to a standstill towards the end of last year have been sentence today.

Twenty two people pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated trespass at Harlow Magistrate's Court.

While the majority were given community service orders of 50 to 90 hours each, two were made to pay fines of over £100, one was given a referral order and one a conditional discharge.

Leo Murray, a spokesman for the group, who himself received a sentence of 70 hours community service for his part in the protests, said: "I do think the sentences were surprisingly harsh.

"But we don't take this lightly, we went into it with our eyes open and we are ready to take the consequences."

The protests, organised by members of the environmental group Plane Stupid, caused 57 Ryanair flights to be cancelled on the morning of December 8th.

aviatordom
8th Jan 2009, 17:59
Good!

serves them right for disrupting the thousand's of not just business but also leisure passengers-who have probably been saving for a long time to go on holiday. The last thing they need, is to be delayed by irresponsible treehuggers.:ugh::ugh:

Flame me if you like, but i'm just stating my opinion across.

soddim
8th Jan 2009, 18:01
The sentences, in my opinion, are far too lenient and do not accord with common justice. The passengers inconvenienced by the action lost far more in monetary terms than the protestors were fined and the total cost to the air transport industry was obviously much much more.

I believe the punishment should at least go some way towards fitting the crime.

CaptAirProx
8th Jan 2009, 18:17
If that old 1011 is still there, get some old RB211's strapped on and fill her with some old derv, I am sure they would run ok.

Then fire them up and line the offenders a few yards either behind or infront of the aircraft and go to TOGA.....

Now that would make them realise WHY they were bad people and stupid too!

leeds 65
8th Jan 2009, 18:25
arseholes cost me half a days pay:=

Loose rivets
8th Jan 2009, 18:26
And then there is the issue of the promises made when folk were being sold on Stansted's suitability. What has happened bears no resemblance to the blissful descriptions of how it would be...and how it wouldn't be allowed to develop.

Tree hugger? Well, I waited most of my career to get a job there - family and friends being in Essex. In the 60s, my little Auster was often the only movement for hours, and I would commute by from Luton at night in the 70s in my Rallye, and not see another aircraft at all. Now the sky is solid aluminium - ask anyone that's trying to get a word in on the RT.

The change for the people underneath is total. An entire way of life has been ruined for thousands.

Much as I love aviation, I really don't think we have the right to do this, but as said above, that's just my opinion. But when we thought we could shake the Vauxhall workers out of their beds every night in the 70s, they soon let us know that it wasn't going to continue. I don't think any of them were prosecuted, and they were certainly carrying weapons.

As for a beautiful village being wiped off the face of the Earth for further expansion...I'll bite my tongue.

Carrier
8th Jan 2009, 18:59
Quote: “The sentences, in my opinion, are far too lenient and do not accord with common justice. The passengers inconvenienced by the action lost far more in monetary terms than the protestors were fined and the total cost to the air transport industry was obviously much much more.”

I agree, but don’t those who have been inconvenienced and suffered financial losses have any rights? Can't they still take action in the civil courts? Look at how O. J. Simpson was pursued through the civil courts. What is to stop those who suffered losses, both air operators and pax, from suing the culprits for damages? That should amount to tens of thousands of dollars. Having their homes, vehicles and bank accounts seized by bailiffs and wages garnisheed should serve as a deterrent for the future. The victims should also be able to apply to the courts for restraining orders, which would set up these convicts for more severe penalties if they should re-offend.

green granite
8th Jan 2009, 19:05
The concept of suing these muppets is fine, the trouble is they don't have the money to pay any awards the courts might make, even when their assets have been seized

unablereqnavperf
8th Jan 2009, 19:42
I would have prefered to hang them! Iiots like this do't have the right to mess peoples lives. Mind you a good beheading could work! Especially the silly girl that was on the radio!

ballyctid
8th Jan 2009, 19:43
Hang them from the tree they are hugging!!!

Engineer
8th Jan 2009, 19:51
Sorry such hard sentencing was awarded But I suppose the concept of the law being seen to be done had to be applied, all charges should have been drop. It is good to see minority group willing to risk freedom for a cause

Paradise Lost
8th Jan 2009, 20:23
From URPN "I would have prefered to hang them! Iiots like this do't have the right to mess peoples lives. Mind you a good beheading could work! Especially the silly girl that was on the radio!"

I guess when you read this again, you may not be so proud of either the sentiment or the grammar!

Arkwright
8th Jan 2009, 20:38
I wonder how "Green" their actions actually were when you consider the many tonnes of jet fuel consumed whilst aircraft held and subsequently diverted, with passengers being bussed to their final destination, and the aircraft subsequently being returned to Stansted empty!!!

I hear MOL is considering Civil action???

Avman
8th Jan 2009, 20:55
Hang 'em all! And Engineer too :E

Loose rivets
8th Jan 2009, 21:08
Don't you want to hang me? I feel quite left out.:}

fireflybob
8th Jan 2009, 21:26
As this case was heard in a Magistrates Court the guidelines for sentencing would be laid down in their "Ops Manual". That said my feelings are that they have got off pretty lightly.

Donkey497
8th Jan 2009, 21:45
I'm still waiting to see if anyone has an answer to my point on the earlier thread on this subject: as in.....

We have a significant number of armed police and huge numbers of airport security staff at every airport, all of whom are allegedly there to spring into instant action and protect us, the long suffering travelling public from potential terrorist attack. How come these protestors had time to cause significant damage to the airport security fencing and how come none of these protestors were on the receiving end of at least a warning shot, or is all of the security apparatus merely an expensive ineffectual sham?

What would have happened, had any of these worthy protestors actually turned out to have been a terrorist who had infiltrated Plane Stupid as a cover for their activities? Would the rest still defend their actions?

I am sorry if I upset anyone's fine sensibilities, but I am afraid that I regard these people as inherently dangerous, occupying the same moral high ground and using virtually the same tactics as the Animal Liberation Front. Personally, I feel that they have been treated exceptionally leniently and the punishment that they should have received should have been commensurate with the costs of the disruption caused and the potential level of danger amd distress that their actions could have caused to thousands.

WindSheer
8th Jan 2009, 21:45
Half of them don't even know what they are really campaigning for. They are just Hippies jumping on yet another Volkswagen band wagon!

CR2
8th Jan 2009, 21:57
Wait until this thread hits JetBlast for it to really take off :}

Seriously though; the sentance tells me I can shut down an airport for a day for 100 Pounds? Hmmm... :uhoh:

manrow
8th Jan 2009, 21:58
How long will it be before 'they' or another group carry out another such act?

They brought an international airport to a complete halt at vast expense to the country, achieved international notoriety and the sentences bear no resemblance to any of that. Shame.

aviatordom
8th Jan 2009, 21:59
Cost of repairs to perimiter fencing: £5,000

Cost of delays/cancellations for airlines: Millions

Seeing hippies jet-blasted by 757: Priceless!!!

yes, it's a bit of a lame joke, but it had to be done by somebody:}

soddim
8th Jan 2009, 22:26
Our biggest problem is that they are breeding!

Standard Noise
8th Jan 2009, 23:45
Hanging's too good for 'em!
I go to work and get treated like a criminal - no liquids worth talking about (can't take in soup or baked beans or pasta sauce). Have to live on microwaved sh!te or sandwiches when I'm there. Car searched, boots/shoes and coat off to go through the scanner etc etc.
These workshy wastrels come along with their wanky ideals and break into the restricted zone of one of this country's busiest airports and cause chaos (oh, and with the subsequent missed approaches and holding create more pollution than there would have been that day!:ugh:) yet they get away with community service and 100 sov fines!? F**k me, what next?

I might as well just give up and go live in a hole in the ground FFS cos being a member of the law abiding majority ain't doing me any good.

Never mind blasting them with a 757 engine, feed the f**kers through the bluddy engines!

Loose rivets
9th Jan 2009, 06:25
Jet?............Blast!


I thought I'd at least get one post score of the 4,871 they owe me. :*

keel beam
9th Jan 2009, 06:37
Sentence is too lenient!

The magistrates should have sent the case to the high court. The charges should have had a terrorist element to it. 70 hours would then have seemed a breeze in the park!

Whilst we have the injustice of councils using the terrorist act to put surveillance cameras on wheely bins there will NEVER be justice in this country.

Blacksheep
9th Jan 2009, 07:27
The sentences were appropriate for the one charge that they faced and to which they pleaded guilty - aggravated trespass.

The problem is that they were not charged with the correct offence, or offences. One suspects that the local Police and/or the Public Persecutor who handled the case, live locally and are sympathisers. :ugh:

rubik101
9th Jan 2009, 08:06
None of this would have happened if 'security' was properly addressed by the BAA, MOD, CAA and Home Office.

Building an airport and surrounding it with a chain-link fence, making a few gates and posting low grade muppets to check the credentials of those that require access is simply not acceptable.

If the above mentioned plonkers were serious about 'security' then they would have men with dogs constantly circling outside the wire.
Instead of having 300 security staff sitting at 'security' stations with the sole purpose of delaying and annoying the very people who work there, put half of them on such patrols and such events would be prevented.

Many years ago, when the new runway was built at STN, they had the opportunity to build the runway where the old runway sits, close to the northern edge of the airfield with the terminal building to the south, where the new runway now sits. A further runway could have been built to the south of the terminal within the confines of the airfield, where the new road was recently constructed.

The fact that this layout was considered and then discarded because the airport was never going to be expanded beyond a single runway simply reflects on the short-sightedness of the planners at the time.

Imho, the second runway will never be built.

Sir Lee B´stard
9th Jan 2009, 08:13
Does anyone have a list of these criminal's names and addresses? I would have thought that at least one US Agency would wish to be aware of them against future possible visits less they carry out such quasi-terrorist actions there.

Perhaps Ryanair could bring a civil action against them, lack of ability to pay now does not cancel a judgement for damages and it would be gratifying to see them spend their lives carrying it around like Marley's chains :D.

moist
9th Jan 2009, 10:10
All the TV reports about this stupid action carried snippets of the stupid British public and some "experts" stating that "They should have the right to protest!"
Perhaps so, but the right to break into a high security airport, the right to disrupt thousands of people's lives, the right to cause damage????

Idiots all of them. :ugh:

radeng
9th Jan 2009, 10:47
Yes they should have the right to protest. They should get this by taking out a licence which costs £10,000 per person per day, payable in advance. Plus a bond to pay the expenses incurred by the travellers and airlines.

Not Bloody Awful Airports, though. Knowing them, it's a wonder they didn't send round a snack van and taken half the profits!

As it was, the protesters got away far too lightly - wrong charges.

Avman
9th Jan 2009, 10:51
OK, hang Loose rivets too! ;)

Scumbag O'Riley
9th Jan 2009, 10:59
The airport and airlines can pursue them in civil court and they now have a guilty plea in a criminal court as evidence which is pretty final.

Regarding the criminal side of it. I am sure the authorities were mindful of the Power Station protesters who were recently cleared by a jury who found they had lawful excuse to cause criminal damage as the power station was considered to be causing immediate harm to other property. A jury might have found the same applied to FR's 737s. I suspect neither FR or BAA wanted that to happen.

corsair
9th Jan 2009, 11:50
Well look at this way. If any try something similar again. The sentences will be correspondingly heavier. Which means those individuals will probably not try it again.

chopper2004
9th Jan 2009, 11:54
One has to accept there is a freedom of speech, (laughable) and everyone has a right to an opinion (begrudgingly and agreeing under protest) , these individuals stepped over the mark showed disrespect and disruption. If I was getting hours in the air, around that region and tine allowed to fly into class A or airspace and allowed to practise hovering in a particular area outside the fence over a populated group of individuals to see the effect of downwash from my beloved Raven II or Beta II (temporarily changed a/c for a few months) .
Unfortunately they remind me of the various characters, the future Mrs Chopper2004 befriended in our local town, during her naïve uni years and post. The tree hugging-hippy-have-more-money-than-sense-anti-this-anti-that-lets-sit-in-a-pub-all-day-planning chaos and taking leisurely substance. I also know half are hypocrites and too much in a “collective” rather than someone speaking up and disagreeing with what is happening. :*
But this is not about my gripe with what’s happening in my back yard but more to the point of wondering if the aforementioned ladies and gents who just been to court are in fact sons/daughters of middle to upper class families, have large wads of cash in the pocket, lots of time, a freedom of movement and have never had a bad thing happen to them in life except up to now. I am sure they appreciate the travels to various sunny resorts in the Med, the Caribbean and beyond and the cheap options to fly that come with it. Just wondering if some of these people, at school were either the bullies who used manipulation to get their own way and if caught, hurry to the corner of the room, curl up in a ball, howl like the wolf to get sympathy and escape the ticking off or responsibility. What made me laugh on Look East was that one of the protesters who spoke in a reasonable well educated voice, had stubble, said he feared that the earth is at risk and at demise blah blah blah and that they would do the protest all over again.:=
I work in the MRO world keeping it alive with information, am learning to fly my passion with the rotary wing world, sit on numerous committees and hold memberships of bodies such as HAI, AHS and RAeS. I live and breath aviation (well more towards rotary wing) like most folks on here, since knee high and worked operationally prior to this post and with the mindset of a Hellfire missile, have a contempt and like to think that these individuals are nothing more than a joke but what they did in effect disrupted happy holidaymakers, hardworking individuals at STN and for what?

In my frame of mind, I have come to a number of conclusions from all of this and those are:

1)Nothing like staring through either TopOwl or age old IHADSS and having the target cursor locked on the protesters and ‘Weapons Hot’ appear along with selection of munitions such as 30mm chain gun or cannon or Hellfire, Sneb or CRV-7 rockets J
2)Couple of Oshkosh FFVs on hand with water cannon trained, though not filled with water or foam but with oil and dust perhaps J
3)My beliefs is that we preserve, protect and encourage aviation as a whole but above all, lets please keep the beautiful leggy (sorry generalisation here) stewardesses in check, in employment in a safe environment for now and ever more.;)
4)Aerospace and aviation is a great world, lets keep it that way!!

Apologies if I have offended or confused anyone.

Chopper2004

fireflybob
9th Jan 2009, 12:09
Also I hope these individuals are banned from ever flying with the airlines!

I cannot help feeling that the way they have been dealt with so far is very "political" - what they did was a serious breach of airport security. As a crew member if I attempted to breach security (for example by circumventing the "screening" system) I am sure I would immediately be arrested and prosecuted not to mention the headlines in the tabloids.

What do BALPA and the IPA have to say about this? We need to lobby our MPs too.

sled dog
9th Jan 2009, 12:29
Why not try the " Chinese style " method of justice . Give them a fair trial, then take them around the back and shoot them , then send their families an invoice for the bullet :E

Blacksheep
9th Jan 2009, 13:04
If the above mentioned plonkers were serious about 'security' then they would have men with dogs constantly circling outside the wire.
Nah, they'd have a tower every fifty yards with a machine gun and searchlights. ;)

Evanelpus
9th Jan 2009, 15:14
I hear MOL is considering Civil action???

My God, he's doing something I wholeheartedly agree with!!

Storminnorm
9th Jan 2009, 15:30
I still don't know WHY the protesters were not taken into
the Terminal building to explain to the delayed passengers
just WHY they had ruined everyones' day.
I think that would have been really interesting. :E

MD11Engineer
9th Jan 2009, 15:49
What about some oldfashioned police brutality? Loudhailer voice: "You have 5 minutes to get your @rses out of here!" and, if not complied with, a massive baton charge (or, even better, learn from the Indian colleagues and introduce Lathis :E).
The Japanese and South Korean cops are also quite good at things like this, not to speak of the old style South African Sjambok (spelling?) charge.

A few bruises and broken bones will do the job.or, let the airport employees (rampers, engineers, pilots etc.) loose, all those who would loose their livelyhoods if those jokers ever got their will. Big spanners, jack handles and other tools might come in handy (just think of a big runway snowplough just pushing the protesters aside :E)

tigger2k8
9th Jan 2009, 15:55
so a group of protesters enter a secure area... and they get community service and a low fine? oh dear, any1 see them doing it again...?

eastern wiseguy
9th Jan 2009, 17:33
Standard


Never mind blasting them with a 757 engine, feed the f**kers through the bluddy engines!


Feckin liberal!! :}:}

TrakBall
9th Jan 2009, 19:44
But what a total waste of an RB211.

TB

Admiral346
9th Jan 2009, 20:25
...or is all of the security apparatus merely an expensive ineffectual sham?

Hey, someone is getting the hang of it...

Don't tell, though. The entire concept of ruling by creating fear would be endangered...

Nic