A JUDGE yesterday called for Parliament urgently to reconsider increasing maximum sentences for air rage after he jailed a Dundee man for two years for attacking and headbutting passengers during a flight from the US to London.
Judge Anthony Thorpe said the current maximum sentence of two years for air rage offenders, as laid down by the Air Navigation Order, was not an ''appropriate deterrent''. Under the order offences allegedly committed in the air aboard a British-registered aircraft fall within the jurisdiction of British police to investigate.
BA and Airtours - which were recently involved in high-profile air rage incidents - added their backing to demands for stiffer action against air rage offenders following the latest case.
Chichester Crown Court yesterday heard that an air hostess had to stand ''spread-eagled'' against an aircraft door to stop Kevin McGuggon, 32, from Dundee, kicking it open at 33,000ft during a drunken rampage.
Second officer John Nelson had to leave his seat on the flight deck while attempting to land the Gatwick-bound Continental Airlines DC10 from Newark, to help restrain McGuggon, who was described as ''out of control''.
The court heard that passengers, including mothers and children, were clearly terrified when McGuggon kicked the rear aircraft door about eight times in a determined attempt to open it.
McGuggon had begun annoying other travellers by flicking food and small pieces of rolled up paper at them about an hour before the plane was due to land.
Passengers said he became drunk after returning from the galley with a number of small bottles of alcohol and began harassing a male flight attendant.
As the plane was preparing to land in London, McGuggon sat on the floor of the galley and refused to move. The second officer had his hat and glasses snatched off, causing a cut to his left eye, during attempts to pacify him.
After finally being persuaded to return to his seat, McGuggon leapt out and ran to the rear of the galley and lashed out at the rear door.
His rampage ended only after a passenger rugby tackled him as he continued to kick out, the court in West Sussex was told.
McGuggon, who was new to flying, was sentenced to two years on a count of affray and given a further 18 months to run concurrently for acting in a manner likely to endanger the aircraft. No penalties were given for four separate convictions of common assault. Two years, and/or a maximum fine of #5000, is the maximum sentence for any breach of the Air Navigation Order.
There are moves at present by the Department of Transport to alter the terms of the legislation to extend the maximum sentence from two to five years for air rage incidents.
Delivering sentence yesterday on McGuggon, Judge Thorpe said: ''These cases are coming through the court with very worrying frequency and, in my judgment, the sentencing powers of the Crown Court need urgent reconsideration by Parliament, given the short maximum sentence currently allowed when what is called for are appropriate deterrent sentences.
''The travelling public expects, quite rightly, that the court will protect them from this sort of dangerous behaviour, and the courts can only do so by passing appropriate sentences to make it clear that such offences will not be tolerated.''
The judge also ordered that four passengers and four crew should each be given #200 from public funds by ''acting so bravely in trying to restrain McGuggon''.
A BA spokesman said: ''In line with the rest of the airline industry, we are concerned about the increasing incidences of air rage and would welcome changes in the current legislation which would lead to greater sentencing powers.''
An Airtours spokeswoman said: ''There is a joint airline industry and police panel considering the increasing incidences of air rage at present. We await the outcome of the panel's findings with interest.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article