|
because your a Guiness heiress...........
You can obviously behave as badly as you want to if your family is friendly with the Judge and you want to behave just as you like.!!!!!!!
"Clare Irby a member of the Guiness family was cleared by the Judge at Isleworth Court yesterday of not being guilty of drunkeness and letting a stranger fondle her br....sts , letting her naked child run up and down the a/craft, abusing the cabin crew and generally behaving badly. Despite evidence from other pax and crew the jury was told they could not convict her because she had not lost control over British airspace - only because the crew had refused to let her drink any more and the Capt had banned her from drinking. At the start of the case Judge John Dennis dismissed a Crown Prosecution Service application to amend the charge so that it applied anywhere in international airspace rather than just above Britain. " I thought that you could be charged wherever and whenever you did this sort of thing???? Sounds like the old boys network to me!!!! |
I couldn't agree more.
A chap by the name of Levitt comes to mind and a certain Baroness will probably get off despite the fact that, as reported so far, she broke the law which she had a hand in drafting. No doubt we can all escape the tax man having flipped our residences and forgot to tell about our mortgages that we had paid off.. New labour at its best!!! |
There's some useful legal gen on the case here on The Magistrate's Blog.
Edited to add: Link won't work - here's the story: Mile High Club The Daily Mail has done a good job today in reporting the acquittal of a woman charged with drunken and indecent behaviour on an aircraft. Unlike other papers the Mail goes into the legal reasons for the acquittal; the location of the aircraft was critical, since the illegal acts had to happen over the UK for an English court to have jurisdiction. My understanding is that if the aircraft is registered in the UK then British courts have jurisdiction wherever it may be, but foreign-flagged aircraft have to be in our airspace. There was a case a decade or more ago when a drunken American kicked off on a Pan Am flight from the Middle East to the USA. The captain landed in the UK to offload the idiot, who was arrested and held in custody. He was, if I recall aright, fined a lot of money that had to be returned to him when it was realised that with an aircraft travelling at about 600 mph nobody could be sure where it was when the trouble started. Pan Am had the last laugh though, because they sued in the American courts for the very high cost of diverting the aircraft, together with the hotel bills of the other 300 passengers. |
Well, I guess the law's the law, but I would hope that this, or any pax who behaved like this, would end up on the no-fly list pretty damn sharpish! No doubt commercial reality will intervene - sad!
|
my 2p worth, based on only what I read in the papers mind..
1. she was just tired, yeah I always drink loads of wine and strip off when im tired... 2. If you can afford a good enough lawyer you can get off anything. Ask O.J 3. She left the cabin crew to change her baby - I hope she is proud of that one. 4. They should have charged her with something other than indecency Jet 2 flew Glasgow Rangers fans yesterday / back today from Germany. Now thats what I call dificult pax. All drunk outboand early morning, pax urinated in sinks ? and into bottles left on plane. Truly should not have been brought back. Please no more european football fans flights. |
Perhaps the Indian Authorities may show an interest in this.
She can then enjoy a while as a guest of the Indian Government. I wonder whether there will be a few previous convictees who launch appeals and no doubt win compensation from Her Majesty's Government (aka the taxpayer). Once again English Law is shown to be an ass. |
I think its the old boys network - the judge was probably a friend of the family!!!!! CPS wanted to prosecute but the judge threw the case for international jurisdiction out of court before the case started and the jury had to decide on the "over Britain" case.
The CC didnt just have to change the baby they had to put a nappy on it because it was running around the plane naked because the mother (the child should be in care really) took its dirty nappy off and threw it into a pax seat behind her!!!! She then asked a female crew member to wipe the s...t off her hand. CC and F/D crew all testified to her behaviour but she got off the charge in spite of being arrested at London. Dont know why she and her mother were pictured so overjoyed after the case was heard, I would have been ashamed to be seen in the photo with her!!! |
The function of the Justice system in Britain is not to provide Justice but to protect the establishment. A conviction in this case was never possible.
|
You said it TS.
That has been one of the pillars of my belief for more decades than I care to remember. In an increasing number of cases, the police are there to protect the establishment against the likes of you and I. "Justice" is increasingly only available to those that can afford it ! |
"Justice" is increasingly only available to those that can afford it ! |
The Big question is
Did she leave a tip? And where was the nanny? |
Trolleyboy wrote:
2. If you can afford a good enough lawyer you can get off anything. Ask O.J Correct me if I'm wrong but OJ is in jail. |
OJ.
Robbery not murder, I thought.:ugh: |
Didn't O. J. Simpson murder his ex-wife and/or her boyfriend? I have to admit in having no interest in the doings of lowlife scum, but when this stuff is in the newspaper it's hard to totally avoid it.
I believe that due to his ability to pay for the best defence money could buy, the charge of murder was reduced on a technicality to something like 'voluntary manslaughter'. So if you want to split hairs here, he got away with killing two people. Let's not call it murder, even if it was. |
This just shows how incompetent and useless the Crown Prosecution Service is:
The incident took place in an Indian airliner somewhere over Asia, and they fail to realise that a UK court will not have jurisdiction. When they do they then try to get the Judge to declare that its ok to proceed. You can't claim that this "lady" got off becuase of who she knew, the worst legal representation in the World would expect to succeed in such a case. |
Why oh why did the Captain and Cabin Crew appear in court wearing full uniform? I assume the picture was taken outside, so it just looked like a cheap publicity stunt by Kingfisher. :ugh:
|
Gee Tightslot
The function of the Justice system in Britain is not to provide Justice but to protect the establishment. A conviction in this case was never possible. I'd agree entirely if you took out "in Britain". |
The male party to this incident had actually pleaded guilty but changed the plea after the Judge gave the ruling that it had to be proven they were drunk in what amounted to the last 20 minutes of flight.
|
any future repercussions?
will this woman be able to fly with this airline again or because the judge decreed there was no case to answer,are airlines powerless to prevent this unpleasant woman flying with them again?surely she is a threat to all the passengers on any flight and now even more arrogant in getting her own way as proved in the courts.
|
Tightslot
read up on the law before pontificating:ok: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 19:16. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.