how is that criminal and who did he endanger?
-i'm not saying he didn't/it isn't but i can't see how..
The internet has wasted no time in celebrating the dramatic resignation of air steward Steven Slater. Slater, 39, took exception to a jetBlue passenger who "refused to apologize after accidentally striking him with luggage" as Flight 1052 from Pittsburgh taxied to a halt at New York's JFK airport yesterday. Instead of an …
Escape chute might have explosives to blow the door away, expand the chute etc. (a little like airbags), he could have got someone with the chute itself, or could have tangled the chute in other machinery and caused damage/fire/tipping of the airplane, could have disturbed refuelling lines of the plane, could have caused a static spark if the plane hadn't properly grounded itself, etc. He abandoned his post as a safety officer for the passengers, provided passengers with an unauthorised escape route which may have got some of them onto the airfield itself, may have left the cabin effectively "unmanned" because of the necessary legal ratios of passengers to stewards, etc.
That's just a handful, some of which are not unreasonable at all.
Not that I'm disagreeing with your point, but I could well imagine that he's not cleared to be on the runway or the outside areas of airport that are a controlled zone - especially if the airport is one with jetways.
But fair play to him, we've all wanted to do something like that. Although I have noticed a tendency for American cabin crew to over-react to most over things, wouldn't be surprised if this were one too. Remember the man who was booted off for asking about a meal?
Arrested for "Wreckless endangerment"
Spokeman said "At no time was the security or safety of our customers or crewmembers at risk"
Hmm, can you say "not guilty m'lud"
Can anyone explain what 'criminal mischief' is?
This storys' legendary status hinges on the grabbing of the beers before departing down the chute :D
He 'damaged' the plane by using the escape slide to exit the plane. Replacing the escape slide and making the plane flightworthy again costs around $32,000. The airline may consider that criminal mischief on the basis that the airline had to take the plane out of rotation, which in turn damages its ability to generate revenue (presumably the next sector that was to be flown by this airframe was delayed in order to swap in a replacement).
Nonetheless, Steven is the perhaps unwilling hero of many a flight attendant in the US who have to deal with rude and a****le customers/passengers on a daily basis.
heck, as a passenger I applaud his efforts in making a stand for decent behavior.
I've never had a problem with a flight attendant that wasn't grounded in some stupid corporate policy or money making scheme... but I've lost count of the number or rude, smelly, drunk, fat people I've been crammed next to for 5 hours (not to mention trampled on the way to the gate ... absolute classic last week flying out of LAX... snotty business type on his cellphone literally ran over a mother and child and knocked the mothers bag and child over... turned, looked back and ... didn't even pause his conversation and went on his way.)
The airspace above an airport is "controlled airspace" - meaning that you have to get permission to enter it.
The 'speed' film presumably worked because the cops told the airport to deny permission to the news crews, or that there was an understanding that the airport never permits such aircraft, or the airport took it on itself to deny permission for a news crew to monopolise their airspace.
Either way, it's entirely possible.
Whereas in this incident, airport controllers will have been aware of the incident and may have chosen to give permission for news crews to fly over the terminal building on the understanding that they avoid interfering with normal airport operations (ie avoid the runway/approach/departure routes)
I think Airspace varies in radius and altitude depending on the airport, where it is and what kind of traffic it handles. All I know for sure is the low end here in the states for our radio towers. Anything over 200ft has to be registered with the FAA and have marker lights on it. If you have a GPS that has an airplane mode it will show you the airspace of near by airports.
To you sir, another beer salute.
@Sir Runcible Spoon - the entire world, barring perhaps one irate airline passenger, agrees. It is now a matter of public record that he endangered no-one and caused no inconvenience. To prosecute him the airline would surely have to perjur itself?
Seriously, this guy is a hero.
Treated like shit by an arrogant twat of a customer, he quits in a way of which most of us can only dream . Grabbing the beers was the crowning touch :-)
Good on you Steven! You, Sir, have raised the resignation bar for us all and given us all something to which to aspire!
As for being arrested and charged? For what? They themselves said there was never any danger.
Arrested? The guy should be given an award!
I bet this poor sod has had the same thing happen to him on every flight. "Ladies and Gent's please remain seated until the plane stops" queue some clown standing up and getting their luggage.
How many of us have the same, PLEASE DO NOT USE EMAIL as the system is being patched, etc queue the phones calls that they can't open outlook. We've got a number of Xerox Phaser printers, they really don't like to be power cycled as when they warm up they use a lot of wax, so we have BIG DO NOT POWER OFF signs on them, found a user switching one off, got the reply to my question of didn't he see the sign "oh didn't think that applied to me!"
Only thing missing in this story was the bloke should have punch the t*at in the face, at least the arrest would have been for something worth while.
> Only thing missing in this story was the bloke should have punch the t*at in the face,
> at least the arrest would have been for something worth while.
No problem. I'm pretty sure there are thousands of us happy to queue up to use the anal orifice as a punchbag while Hero Steven cheers us on. As he opens another refreshing beverage.
Improper activation of an aircraft's emergency slide doubtless resulted in delays and expense for the owner of the aircraft.
Uttering naughty words within the earshot of a minor without that minor's parent's consent... may not be a criminal offense in most U.S. jurisdictions, but I see that as a pity.
And, of course, a bottle of beer is an item of property, so theft charges are also possible.
"Uttering naughty words within the earshot of a minor without that minor's parent's consent... may not be a criminal offense in most U.S. jurisdictions, but I see that as a pity."
How can words ever be naughty? You would like to see America's jail population swelled even more by people going down for trivial offences, would you?
Where's the redneck icon?
This may have been a huge inconvenience to the passengers - who undoubtedly had to suffer a lengthy delay on the tarmac as everybody tried to figure out what the hell was going on - but without things like this, our society would lose a big element of humanity. Hats off to him - disproportionate response or not, he's livened up a lot more people's days than he's ruined.
Much is made in the good old US of A about airport security and how tight it is. So how come a guy can activate the escape chute of a plane and walk of the airport without being aprehended? Guess the security isn't all it should be. Could that be the guy's biggest crime? Demonstrating that airport security is lax is not something that is going to make you popular when the authorities keep shouting about how good it is.
What if, for example, a terrorist wanting to get into the USA had pulled the same trick (minus the beer and PA shinanegins)? Is it always so easy to jump off an incoming flight and walk out of the airport? If so are heads going to roll?
A flight steward would likely have had the proper credentials to move through restricted areas. Were a terrorist to try the same stunt, he'd likely also have the proper credentials, don't you think?
Then, there's always the tendency to assume a person in uniform, and already in the area, belongs there. After all, he came from the tarmac, also a restricted area.
Both those arguments are no defence at all.
Somebody has just blown the escape shoot on a plane. People don't do that by accident, it's expensive (very - you thing refitting the airbags for a car at about £2K is steep? Muliply by ten and you're probably not close), it's dangerous (very - anybody on the ground near that plane could have been badly hurt) and it's not normal. So until they knew what was going on security should have had the airport locked down.
Assuming that a man in uniform has a right to be airside is a massive security fail. It would normally be very unusual for a steward to be wandering round on the tarmac anyway. Air crew don't usually disembark directly onto the tarmac. So security should at the very least have been asking "what the hell are you doing here?". And how hard would it be for a terrorist or an illegal to slip on an air stewards uniform in the toilet?
I suspect that heads will be rolling quietly. I'm sure the US authorities don't want
Small point. I guess from the WSJ article that the plane had just landed.
Any delays to the rest of the passengers would have been minimal. Also if they didn't have to wait in the plane they would inevitably have to wait longer for baggage.
Hat's off to him.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021