French jail sentence for former airline CEO
Thread Starter
French jail sentence for former airline CEO
A French court on Tuesday sentenced the former head of a Thai budget airline to four years in jail over a 2007 crash that killed 90 people, nearly two-thirds of them foreigners.
The suit, filed by the families of the nine French victims aboard the flight, claimed the crash landing on the resort island of Phuket was "an accident waiting to happen".
The Paris court found Udom Tantiprasongchai, the former head of the airline One-Two-Go, guilty of voluntary manslaughter and also set a fine of 75,000 euros ($82,300).
https://www.france24.com/en/20190903...ver-2007-crash
The suit, filed by the families of the nine French victims aboard the flight, claimed the crash landing on the resort island of Phuket was "an accident waiting to happen".
The Paris court found Udom Tantiprasongchai, the former head of the airline One-Two-Go, guilty of voluntary manslaughter and also set a fine of 75,000 euros ($82,300).
https://www.france24.com/en/20190903...ver-2007-crash
Thread Starter
Udom will never appear in any court as he is too well connected
The AFP agency report on this case was quickly removed from the Bangkok Post.
The NTSB report was damning but the Thai Aviation Authorities tried to cover it up.
The result was a serious downgrading of Thailand’s aviation operations.
In the case of the accident below it appears neither the captain or co pilot was flying the aircraft.
The NTSB report makes interesting reading.
NTSB CD List Of Contents
For more read this.
Investigate Thailand's Udom Tantiprasongchai
The AFP agency report on this case was quickly removed from the Bangkok Post.
The NTSB report was damning but the Thai Aviation Authorities tried to cover it up.
The result was a serious downgrading of Thailand’s aviation operations.
In the case of the accident below it appears neither the captain or co pilot was flying the aircraft.
One-Two-GO Airlines Flight 269, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashed into an embankment beside runway 27 at Phuket International Airport bursting into flames upon impact on 16 September 2007, about 15:41 ICT during an attempted go-around after an aborted landing, killing 89 of the 130 persons on board. Wikipedia
The NTSB report makes interesting reading.
NTSB CD List Of Contents
For more read this.
Investigate Thailand's Udom Tantiprasongchai
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Age: 47
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French courts are allowed to hear cases involving accidents or attacks anywhere in the world if French citizens are victims.
The French have no legal criminal jurisdiction with regards to an incident that happens outside of their territories.
Thread Starter
Agreed but if you read the background to this story his Orient Thai Airline was flying in breach of many ICAO regulations and was banned from European airspace. I actually paxed witn Orient Thai from Phuket to Gatwick many years ago when they were operating old 747’s which are now abandoned in Bangkok,Hong Kong and other locations. There was a long running thread on Pprune some years ago on the Phuket crash.
See One-Two-Go crash report released
See One-Two-Go crash report released
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French court can rules trial as there were French citizens on board. This is true for ONE TWO GO crash and also on the MALAYSIAN MH 370 affair. In the last one for example BOEING sent files (last July 2019) requested by French inquiries of the court. You can check this point on the Web.
Have a nice week.
Last edited by aixois; 9th Sep 2019 at 19:05. Reason: word correction
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Age: 47
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French court can rules trial as there were French citizens on board. This is true for ONE TWO GO crash and also on the MALAYSIAN MH 370 affair. In the last one for example BOEING sent files (last July 2019) requested by French inquiries of the court. You can check this point on the Web.
In case of the files which were sent, Boeing may have decided to cooperate with the French authorities for other reasons.
Think about what would happen if the verdict of this French court would be internationally accepted. Now all of a sudden Thailand could ask the U.S. for my extradition if I were to accidentally say that their king has a small penis.
It simply doesn't work like that.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 71
Posts: 881
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
For example, under Australian law, it is an offence to engage in a hostile activity in a foreign country, unless serving in or with the armed forces of the government of a foreign country.
Australia also has laws concerning engagement in sex-related crimes in foreign countries, subject to prosecution in Australia.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not how criminal law works. Penal jurisdiction is determined by the geographic location of the alleged offense, not by the citizenship of the alleged victims.
In case of the files which were sent, Boeing may have decided to cooperate with the French authorities for other reasons.
Think about what would happen if the verdict of this French court would be internationally accepted. Now all of a sudden Thailand could ask the U.S. for my extradition if I were to accidentally say that their king has a small penis.
It simply doesn't work like that.
In case of the files which were sent, Boeing may have decided to cooperate with the French authorities for other reasons.
Think about what would happen if the verdict of this French court would be internationally accepted. Now all of a sudden Thailand could ask the U.S. for my extradition if I were to accidentally say that their king has a small penis.
It simply doesn't work like that.
Wow.
Just look, where on this planet the US has arrested "terrorists" and put them in torture camps....
Wrong Court
From my reading of the matter, the Suit was brought in a commercial jurisdiction, not a criminal one. While the finding may have found gross negligence on the part of the aforesaid Thai responsible, the enforcement of any sanction could only be completed if the individual responsible landed in a French Territory. As has been stated before, you can 'prosecute' a claim in any court that offers jurisdiction, but your ability to enforce any finding is considerably constrained.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not how criminal law works. Penal jurisdiction is determined by the geographic location of the alleged offense, not by the citizenship of the alleged victims.
In case of the files which were sent, Boeing may have decided to cooperate with the French authorities for other reasons.
Think about what would happen if the verdict of this French court would be internationally accepted. Now all of a sudden Thailand could ask the U.S. for my extradition if I were to accidentally say that their king has a small penis.
It simply doesn't work like that.
In case of the files which were sent, Boeing may have decided to cooperate with the French authorities for other reasons.
Think about what would happen if the verdict of this French court would be internationally accepted. Now all of a sudden Thailand could ask the U.S. for my extradition if I were to accidentally say that their king has a small penis.
It simply doesn't work like that.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Age: 47
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may be correct in this case but your argument is not strictly correct.
For example, under Australian law, it is an offence to engage in a hostile activity in a foreign country, unless serving in or with the armed forces of the government of a foreign country.
Australia also has laws concerning engagement in sex-related crimes in foreign countries, subject to prosecution in Australia.
For example, under Australian law, it is an offence to engage in a hostile activity in a foreign country, unless serving in or with the armed forces of the government of a foreign country.
Australia also has laws concerning engagement in sex-related crimes in foreign countries, subject to prosecution in Australia.
In this particular case there is no relationship between the individual and the country, France, other than that the victims were French citizens. What's next? The French prosecuting American citizens who exercise their 1st amendment rights and insult a French citizen?
Each country has their own soevereign laws, and France has no business going outside of that.
Just look, where on this planet the US has arrested "terrorists" and put them in torture camps....
Can't say that I always agree with that either.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 71
Posts: 881
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
You are partially right, and let me explain. Many countries have laws prohibiting their citizens from committing certain acts. A lot of countries have laws on the books to prohibit sexual predator tourism, making it possible to prosecute child abuse in their own countries if committed by a citizen or permanent resident. In those cases, there is an existing relationship between the country and the individual (NB. being the perpetrator)
Only the Ukraine or Russia could issue an arrest warrant or request extradition to face trial, in that case.
