Latest Passenger Rage

[Dog One]

From the NT News today

A MAN on a flight to Darwin threatened to "smash" the captain and blow the plane up after cabin crew refused to serve him more booze.

Sydney man Simon Wilson Menzies, 31, was drunk and angry when he told the female cabin crew manager on a flight this week that he could"bring the plane down if he wanted."

Menzies said: "I'm half muslim, half Aboriginal and everyone else is a white a*******. I could f******blow up the plane."

He then began to sing a song about the plane crashing and everyone dying.

Last week in Darwin Magistrates Court the child counsellor became the first person in Australia to be charged and convicted under new Commonwealth laws relating to threatening and assaulting plane crew members. The amended laws came into effect on March 30.

Magistrate Elizabeth Morris gave him a one month suspended sentence for the offence.

The court heard Menzies was on Jetstar flight JQ81 from Brisbane to Darwin on Tuesday com when he became abusive after being refused a fourth beer.

The court heard he was refused service because he continued to be rowdy despite repeated warnings.

After he was refused service Menzies, who is 190cm and solidly built, stood over the cabin crew manager and told her to get the captain.

"Send the captain I will f****** smash him I'm the biggest guy on the plane," he said.

Later, in the galley, Menzies confronted the captain, who feared that the drunk man was going to assault him.

When a female passenger approached the pair and told Menzies that he was causing her friend to have a panic attack he said: "I don't give a f*** about your friend."

Menzies eventually returned to his seat and when the plane landed in Darwin he was arrested by police and held in custody overnight.

The court heard he had been taking strong anti-depressant for three months and it was the first time he had mixed them with alcohol.

Menzies was travelling to Bali for a family holiday via Darwin when he was arrested.

Ms Morris fined him $400 and released him on the suspended sentence in time for his flight to Bali the following morning. (my highlighting)
Under the new laws the maximum summary penalty for threatening or assaulting a flight crew member is two years prison or a $13,500 fine.

I am surprised that the carrier allowed the passenger to board the Bali sector, the next day.

[dizzylizzy]

So essentially a $400, naughty naughty don't do that again. Oh my, maybe Ms. Morris needs to observe this happening in reality and realise how many other people it effects.

[puff]

It was a NT court - suprised the judge wasn't quoted saying ' harden up princess he'd only had 4 beers I would have got the sh*ts with ya as well if you refused me as well' - dismissed.

They breed em different in the NT !

Cannot believe that sort of conduct didn't bring him a ban from flying with the QF group forever to be honest. Stuff the law system if they won't punish them the airlines should ban them and share the list - people might not get fined but if they had no access to the airlines perhaps their behaviour might improve !

Zero tolerance of this sort of behaviour is the ONLY answer - hope the FAAA is riding the company over this, what about the safety of the members of the FAAA for this person to be allowed travel the following day.

[c100driver]

Was this guy actually a child counsellor?

Last week in Darwin Magistrates Court the child counsellor became the first person in Australia to be charged and convicted under new Commonwealth laws relating to threatening and assaulting plane crew members.

If he was then there are a whole lot more questions about this guy!

[flightleader]

The new law fine even lesser? What do you think of this:

Drunk passenger Khairulddin Mohammad Yahya 'behaved like terrorist' (http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/drunk-graduate-behaved-like-terrorist-20110414-1dg00.html)

[Mud Skipper]

What the he'll was the Captain doing in the cabin after a passenger had made a threat on his life, don't Jetstar have any procedures for this situation.

Let's take this a little further and say you've got one of these 200 hour cadets left in charge and a dead of unconscious Captain. God help the passengers!

No excuse this idiot was able to approach the Captain, what where the cabin crew doing, clearly thinking was not on their list. Will it take lives before people in power understand that experience and subsequent awareness of the entire crew is critical to safe flight? This is not and should not be treated as a fast food drive through with the cheapest dumbest staff you can hire.

What is more I can not believe the apologetic sentencing by the judge, so what if the offender is a depressed aboriginal, he threatened to kill the captain and only got a suspended sentence, wow that's going to set an example to to community, sham it did not happen in the USA. :ugh:

[Mr. Hat]

The court heard he had been taking strong anti-depressant for three months and it was the first time he had mixed them with alcohol.

Standard excuses in Australia: Difficult childhood, under the influence etc blah blah blah.

I say chuck him in jail and throw away the key for a year or two might give him an opportunity to realise what an idiot he's made of himself.

[standard unit]

What the he'll was the Captain doing in the cabin after a passenger had made a threat on his life, don't Jetstar have any procedures for this situation.

Let's take this a little further and say you've got one of these 200 hour cadets left in charge and a dead of unconscious Captain. God help the passengers!

No excuse this idiot was able to approach the Captain, what where the cabin crew doing, clearly thinking was not on their list. Will it take lives before people in power understand that experience and subsequent awareness of the entire crew is critical to safe flight? This is not and should not be treated as a fast food drive through with the cheapest dumbest staff you can hire.


Never were truer words spoken.

[Ushuaia]

I am gobsmacked. A $400 smack on the wrists? If (and that is a big IF, unfortunately) this story is 100% accurate, then the whole legal system is a farce.

I will only add - knowing the quality of journalism these days, I'd hold fire on the issue of the "Captain" confronting the pax in the galley. That's what the newspaper told us. In reality, it may well have been a male cabin-crew member, who knows? Not that this pr!ck could likely tell the difference, nor most pax, sadly!

It would indeed be a of major concern should an independent investigation determine that the Captain did, in fact, come out and confront this guy! Then again, maybe the skipper sent out the cadet, sorry, the F/O..... :uhoh:

[Jabawocky]

Can someone...anyone get this referred to the DPP for reconsideration?

This is far from acceptable behaviour by a Magistrate to allow such things to go unpunished.

If that happened to a police officer or say the Prime Minister in the street, would it be treated so trivially? I doubt it.

I have said it before and will again, the magistrates/judges etc in this country need hauling over the coals for the number or absolutely moronic decissions they make. Often when unqualified to make them. In this case the only qualification required is common sense, and clearly she is lacking some.

[Icarus2001]

determine that the Captain did, in fact, come out and confront this guy!

Read the article. The Captain DID NOT confront the passenger in the galley, it was the other way around. The Captain was probably bursting for a pee and was hiding behind the galley curtain on the way through when the hero passenger bailed him up.

If you are going to have a rant about an article at least read the thing carefully!:ugh:

[Mud Skipper]

Icarus,

I never suggested the Captain confronted the passenger but he should have been informed of the situation in the cabin and not left the flight deck even if that meant pissing in a bottle or on the floor or diverting the aircraft to the nearest suitable airport if he had to go.

Lets say he even had a gut full of nasty from the cheap vindaloo the night before and did go to the loo, there are other things which could be done so that the convicted passenger could not approach him. Blocking the aisle with a cart or using ABP's to prevent the passenger entering the galley.

This incident should and hopefully is being internally investigated, these pilots do their Security Training with the Mainline pilots and should not have allowed the situation to occur as reported. If the Captain went into the cabin with the knowledge that a threat has been made on his life and the safety of the aircraft then I believe he would have been in breach of company procedures and would ask if retraining or disciplinary action should be considered.

The days of going back and working things out left the station years ago. If the FA's down the back are too small or weak to cope then they should use ABP's or what ever they can but the flight crew should never compromise the safety of the aircraft. (LARGE CAPITAL FULL STOP)

[Ushuaia]

Crikey Icarus, I was simply suggesting caution be exercised about what the article said! I sure did read it carefully and consider there could be lots of reasons people think the pax did confront the "Captain", but in reality no such confrontation may have occurred. So you now go and assert that the "Captain DID NOT confront the passenger in the galley, it was the other way around"?? You don't know, that is just what the paper wrote! Maybe what you postulate happened, maybe it didn't. What I do know is that around 25% of what is written in newspapers is plain wrong.

I also never said the Captain came out and confronted; I said it would be a worry if it was determined that he did. Under the circumstances most crew would not be so foolish to put themselves in such a position. The paper implies that the Captain did. I do not believe the Captain would have and am prepared to be open minded, that the paper has got the facts wrong.

What I AM ranting about is the slap on the wrist this goon got. That is fact. That is disgraceful IF the behaviour truly was as written in the report.

Hold fire about criticizing the flight crew for going to the cabin/being in the cabin/going for a slash. As I said before, you don't know who the "Captain confrontation" really involved. Or who confronted who in what order.

I was kidding about the cadet/FO. :rolleyes:

I think there's something in the water around here today........!

[gobbledock]

Cannot believe that sort of conduct didn't bring him a ban from flying with the QF group forever to be honest.
QF have a panel that convenes regularly (or used to) in which a list of names such as the clown mentioned in this thread are discussed. Bans are then initiated from time to time but it is usually a small list of names that get sidlelined, mainly due to the adverse publicity and potential litigation banning can cause....I know it sounds ridiculous and it is, but banning a pax from flying for a set period of time is a lot harder to do than punting them off just the flight in question on the day.

[Boomerang_Butt]

*IF* it is found that any of the flight deck crew left the cockpit during this threat scenario then someone will be in very deep do-do.

*IF* the cabin crew had anything to do with flight deck crew coming into the cabin then they will be in deep do-do.

I don't know what they are teaching these days but I always knew we (the CC) would be on our own in that department had someone decided to run amok (not including ABPs/other customers jumping in of course)

Obviously without going into details of group procedure, IF it happened as described (verbally escalating to physically threatening behaviour to the crew & other pax) I am surprised the idiot wasn't spending the rest of the flight in flex cuffs!

$400 and a 'suspended sentence' is a :mad: joke!! No wonder these idiots kick off nearly EVERY WEEK on flights these days. No kidding it has got worse even in the relatively short time I've been on the scene.

Does anyone have any statistics for JQ 'disruptive incidents' and in-flight restraints? I heard for one international airline it's at least one a week, out of hundreds of flights. Quite scary.

Probably a good thing it DIDN'T happen in the US, then the crew might have asked any ASO's for help like they have on several occasions... :ugh:

[Oakape]

I think there's something in the water around here today........!


Ushuaia, you're on PPRuNe - there is something in the water every day! :hmm:

[Boomerang_Butt]

With regard to litigation for 'banning'- happens in pubs & clubs everyday, why the F not???

If I recall correctly liquor licensing laws apply to airlines therefore they should be able to ban someone for drunk & disorderly behaviour just like any pub or club can if their staff have been physically threatened and/or assaulted.

Flying is not a right, provided the person cannot prove any life-threatening reliance on air transport I am all for making them take the bus after they behave like this, maybe then people will learn. As long as they get a slap on the wrist they will continue to behave like chimps :{

[psycho joe]

What a BS excuse.


Just once i'd like to try this excuse as a Pilot. Especially in a P.A.

'Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to appologise about .......but I've been taking strong anti-deprssants for three months and this is the first time that I have mixed them with alcohol'....:zzz:

[Skynews]

You guys are as soft as the magistrate.

He said he was a Muslim aboriginal, case closed.

I would not dare use the black word to a passenger, yet you regularly here them call us white #{^*'s.
Now have a look at the court decisions regarding race and see who wins.

Lock the prick up regardless of who his grandparents were and forget about political correctness.

[Worrals in the wilds]

If I recall correctly liquor licensing laws apply to airlines therefore they should be able to ban someone for drunk & disorderly behaviour just like any pub or club can if their staff have been physically threatened and/or assaulted.


Also IIRC, not quite (any F/As in the know, feel free to prove me wrong). Responsible Service of Alcohol applies, but the grog service is governed by one of the federal aviation acts. Airport bars are covered by the Airports Act, not the relevant state legislation.

This means that there is not the same provision as the state Liquor Acts provide for bouncing drunken FWits. I assume he was nabbed under the relevant disturbance to aviation legislation so it all ended up the same in the end. If the airlines got together and supported a ban then they could lobby the government, but we all know how likely that is. :rolleyes:

Maybe commercial aircraft should have a brig :E. I think he should be forced to walk everywhere from now on because I hate drunken bullies, but obviously the courts don't see threatening people on an airline as serious. If it's like anything else, some innocent staff member or pax will have to get badly hurt before that changes.

Personally I think that anyone proven to have made a threat against an aircraft should automatically be banned from air transport for twelve months, no matter how much they've drunk or how bad a hair day they're having. It seems that the airlines can't do it so the OTS should grow a collective pair for a change and do it for them.

[Boomerang_Butt]

Now you mention it I think it does depend on where the airline is headquartered, e.g. for QF I guess it would be covered by NSW legislation.

I'd really love to know the answer to this as no one could ever explain it properly, not even when I went to do the RSA course they had no idea when it came to airlines.

If there isn't that provision, there should be!!!!

Sadly I think you are right, someone will have to be killed first as clearly crew getting punched doesn't cut it.

[The Green Goblin]

This was all over Brisbane centre, with the Pilots giving the situation over the radio.

The pax was in 25D, and they wanted the AFP to meet the aeroplane and board via rear airstairs to remove him before they disembarked the rest of the passengers.

It would have been more of a mission to keep everyone seated once they parked at the gate than offloading the offender and keeping him subdued.

The Pilot did sound a little anxious on the radio thats for sure.

As for Muslim Aboriginal, so it was a famous boxer then hey? Sounds like his style :p

[Worrals in the wilds]

I'd really love to know the answer to this as no one could ever explain it properly, not even when I went to do the RSA course they had no idea when it came to airlines.


Actually, so would I. I must say that when I did an RSA and bar managers course (for non aviation purporses) I found they had no idea about anything outside the pub scene. More government approved bits of paper that cost a fortune to tell you stuff you could figure out yourself.

Having looked at the Qld Liquor Act it has provision for airports, so I'm wrong at least once over :uhoh:. However, there is no provision for airlines (or interstate trains and boats for that matter which also serve grog). There are several airlines based in Qld so...:confused:

As for Muslim Aboriginal, so it was a famous boxer then hey? Sounds like his style :p

Style is NOT the word. Same goes for his bloody 'family', father being a notable exception.

[Wally Mk2]

Why are you all surprised that this idiot got only a slap on the $400 wrist? I'm not in fact I almost yawned when I read his penilty. This is Australia remember where the our judicial system is really as pathetic as discussion time in parliament.
With crims pretty much running this country I'm surprised this guy didn't get paid to go to court with a taxi outside waiting to take him to the pub afterwards!!!:ugh:
We must look like fools to those OS who have adequate laws.

As for the skipper going back there with this loose cannon in the same space? Well gotta be a not so clever act.

Wmk2

[halas]

Child Councillor? Half indigenous? Half Muslim?

Let me get this straight.... He is a aboriginal drinking muslim - counselling children.

Social services at their best. Probably paid for his ticket and three beers too!

halas