I'm shocked that the flight attendant thought it more important to try to stop a passenger from filming rather than dealing with the real and serious situation. In fact, he should have been welcoming the filming and asking the passenger to please provide a copy on landing for the ensuing criminal prosecution.

Maybe there's a training opportunity here.

I'm shocked that the flight attendant thought it more important to try to stop a passenger from filming

And the same was attempted by CA's recently during an RTO. Are there laws in force that forbid filming on board? If not then the order from CA's has no weight.

Perhaps the flight attendant thought the filming was inflaming the situation?

And regardless of any specific prohibitions, an appropriate order given by a flight attendant attempting to maintain discipline in the cabin would carry weight because he/she is acting with the authority of the commander.

In fact filming the situation may well provide evidence which will help the airline with litigation against the offending passenger(s). I think that this "no filming" is a typical knee jerk reaction by some F/As.

Personally, I'd prefer to permit filming BUT inside an aircraft is not a public place.
If a cabin crew member exercises the authority devolved from the Pilot in Command to order filming to cease then you are in breach of the Air Navigation Order if you continue and are committing a criminal offence.
I'd suspect that not a lot of passengers are aware of that.

Speaking of airports and alcohol, today the world's first airport distillery opened in LGW.

Oh Dear God....I just watched that video.....bright yellow hard plastic seat backs with hamburger advertising stuck to it.....:{ for the love of God..is there any wonder...:hmm:

Expecting to be flying through Northern Europe later this year....this vid vindicates my decision not to even entertain a LCC.....not that I am expecting much more from a 'legacy' carrier nowadays, but a tacky seat back like that !! :yuk::yuk:

Actually I don't entertain any LCC nowadays....I travel less and enjoy it more, even though 'the Golden' times are over.....I don't pay to be bombarded with fast food advertising.....I refuse to accept that level of disdain of me...f*%k you.....my money goes elsewhere....shame more people didn't do the same :=

And just how many passengers would be aware of, or even heard of, the ANO at the point of online booking or being briefed regarding at the point of check-in, boarding or during the pre-departure safety briefing?

A scenario of common sense prevails, don't endanger the aircraft, don't behave like a total idiot etc. but on board video movies are all over youtube, the web, so, common sense prevailing, what could possibly be wrong with filming on board?

So this, and many other, video(s) is illegal and should be removed from the web forthwith?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqh8e2KYIrU

The person filming tells CC that he is doing so as he intends to make a complaint. Seems honourable.

The video then ends up with The Sun newspaper. Doesn't seem honourable.

You mean O'Leary wouldn't sell something if there was a buck to be made out of it?

Filming before being required to stop is not the point.
At the beginning of my post I said:
Nevertheless, failure to obey an ORDER to stop filming is a criminal offence and ignorance of the law is no defence.

Not in my case. The receipt I was given had the name of the airline printed on it. It did not have a VAT number printed on it though.

When compared to a pint paid at 'airport' prices at the departure airport I found the price of a 33ml tin of Stella to be obscene. My point is the airlines, particularly those that are known for charging high prices for alcohol, are partially to blame for the 'pre-loading' some passengers do at, or before, the airport.

I certainly don't envy the flight crew, but senior executive's bonuses come first, I suppose.

In Ontario right now, it's big news about this Muzzo person, who, with his drunken buddies arrived home to Toronto YYZ from a stag party in Las Vegas, then attempted to drive home drunk. It ended with horror:

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/marco-muzz...074300965.html

I hope they throw the book a these goofs, and cost recover all expenses, including other passenger's time lost due to their selfish behavior. These are the same human blobs who would be obstacles and obstructions in the case of an emergency evacuation, further endangering the rest of the passengers.

When I was very new working for a Canadian charter airline, I was in the YYZ Terminal 2 baggage area, having returned from England on business with our Vice President. Staggering around near us was a totally drunk passenger, also jut off this flight. I recall watching him pass out, and fall face first onto the floor. This was thin carpet on concrete, and he made no effort to break his own fall. I'm sure I hear his nose break as he hit. Hi wife, obviously used to this, instead of helping him, kicked him in the ribs and said "Get up Howard. you're drunk!". I told the security staff that a passenger might require medical attention in the baggage area.

I never heard any more of this event, but I pointed out to the VP that we had given him all that booze, and were probably liable for his injuries. We slowly adopted a policy of limiting serving to drunk passengers.

The filming passenger says he intends to use the film to complain about the flight. Sounds like a valid point to me. As no electronic device without active emissions is considered to be dangerous inflight anymore stopping the filming is just censorship.

So you'd rather antagonise the thug by filming him?

Valid point, or is it? You can't reason with drunken idiots, therefore it might be a good idea to film as long as feasibly possible for the sake of recording irrefutable evidence of their actions.

Incidentally, I very much doubt that this CC was following a direct order from the Captain. More like his own initiative.

How is this handled on the ground in similar cases? Could -let's say a barkeeper- "order" you to stop filming a scene like this if you feel offended and expect to need this as evidence etc.? I'd say in today's iPhone age these days are gone. Pratically everything can and will be recorded and stored and made available to the Sun.

I haven't read anything which suggests that the commander of the aircraft gave such an order.

A Flight Attendant on duty certainly has the power to give orders to pax by himself. Just not sure about censoring witnesses or destroying evidence.

Interesting about the timing of the diversion and captain's knowledge. If this muppet was somewhat fuzzy when boarding it is >1.00hr from STN - SXF. i.e. well into the flight. I was just curious how long it was before the volcano reached critical pressure. Equally, as has been mentioned, SXF seems well off route to Bratislava. Looking at a google map I would have expected them to be closer to HHN than SXF, assuming a diversion into a RYR base would offer better & knowledgeable ground service: also a base captain to represent RYR's interests in any immediate action & follow-up.