"Top Pilot is accused of £500k cocaine drug smuggling"
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update
Delay in Anglesey Airfield drug-smuggling trial
Jan 30 2010 Daily Post
THE trial of a pilot accused of smuggling drugs into an Anglesey airfield has been delayed until August.
Flying instructor David John Lloyd, 63, of Llangristiolus near Llangefni, is charged with conspiracy to import illegal drugs.
A passenger aboard a light aircraft which landed at RAF Mona on July 29, Paul Roche, 53, of Prestwich, Manchester, is also charged with conspiracy to import drugs.
Their trail should have started at Liverpool Crown Court on Monday.
But last night a spokesman for HM Revenue and Customs said the matter had been adjourned.
“Another man has recently been arrested and charged in connection with this matter and the trial has been adjourned so all matters can be dealt with at the same time,” he said.
Lloyd and Roche deny smuggling 14kgs of cocaine worth more than £1m aboard the aircraft.
Jan 30 2010 Daily Post
THE trial of a pilot accused of smuggling drugs into an Anglesey airfield has been delayed until August.
Flying instructor David John Lloyd, 63, of Llangristiolus near Llangefni, is charged with conspiracy to import illegal drugs.
A passenger aboard a light aircraft which landed at RAF Mona on July 29, Paul Roche, 53, of Prestwich, Manchester, is also charged with conspiracy to import drugs.
Their trail should have started at Liverpool Crown Court on Monday.
But last night a spokesman for HM Revenue and Customs said the matter had been adjourned.
“Another man has recently been arrested and charged in connection with this matter and the trial has been adjourned so all matters can be dealt with at the same time,” he said.
Lloyd and Roche deny smuggling 14kgs of cocaine worth more than £1m aboard the aircraft.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better give it a good scrub with Dettox first, in case somebody doing a ramp check decides to sniff it 
Might have some serious explaining to do otherwise. I get worried enough carrying two 0.5kg bags of silica gel
Might have some serious explaining to do otherwise. I get worried enough carrying two 0.5kg bags of silica gel
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if you can get convicted on possession alone. How would one get out of something like that?
I am sure the French would lock you up on possession alone, however.
Got to keep the plane locked up. It is a lot more common to have stuff stolen, e.g. headsets.
I am sure the French would lock you up on possession alone, however.
Got to keep the plane locked up. It is a lot more common to have stuff stolen, e.g. headsets.
And, can I buy the Diamond cheap?
See the full story on below link - and do read between the lines, especially in the concluding paragraph.
http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/aero...nts/AA-9-1.pdf
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very strange: your engine starts with great difficulty, yet you go find the nearest sea to fly over, where you happen to have an 'engine failure' but luckily you can execute a perfect ditching and as if your luck can't run out there happens to be an inflatable with a couple of your friends just happening to be diving in the exact area where you happened to have an engine failure.
Things happen...
Things happen...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand this.
If he scuttled the plane because he was carrying something which he didn't want to be discovered upon landing, surely they would have found that when they fished the plane out of the water.
A smarter way to do an insurance claim would be to not make any radio calls and later claim the engine just stopped. A fuel blockage can never be disproved. Still very risky and stupid, though.
If he scuttled the plane because he was carrying something which he didn't want to be discovered upon landing, surely they would have found that when they fished the plane out of the water.
A smarter way to do an insurance claim would be to not make any radio calls and later claim the engine just stopped. A fuel blockage can never be disproved. Still very risky and stupid, though.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who'd have known that the ECU had a data recording function?
It must have been obvious he was up to no good, because a plane would not normally be salvaged unless there are corpses inside.
But we do have some fine observers round here, I'm glad to observe.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of the border
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DA 40 sinking
I would also like to find out what the insurers made of the fact that several components were timed out calendar wise and subject to AD's but that the AAIB said that this did not have any effect on the crash.
Who has the final word, the AAIB or the agency that produced the AD ? Was the a/c in a fit (ie legal) condition to fly with the calendar items timed out ?
Who has the final word, the AAIB or the agency that produced the AD ? Was the a/c in a fit (ie legal) condition to fly with the calendar items timed out ?
