J.O. Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 This is a disturbing story. This guy was in law enforcement??? Hamilton Spectator A Toronto police officer who sexually assaulted a flight attendant and threatened to kill a planeload of passengers was stripped of his duties, suspended without pay and sentenced to jail time Wednesday. Ontario Court Justice Robert Weseloh sentenced Const. Amarjit Singh Grewal to four months for sexual assault and three months for threatening death, to be served concurrently. The judge also sentenced Grewal to one day for assaulting another flight attendant. The 15-year veteran officer of the Toronto Police Service also faces five Police Act charges, which will be dealt with through a tribunal after his sentence. It's likely Grewal will lose his job. "We've taken a position that we have no place for them once they've been to (jail)," said Staff Insp. George Cowley of Toronto's Police Professional Standards Branch. Grewal, 34, pleaded guilty to the charges in April. Court heard on the night of Aug. 27, 2002, he was drunk and boarded Westjet flight 659 from Edmonton to Hamilton. About 30 minutes into the 3 1/2 hour flight, Grewal placed his right hand into the air and shouted, "You have no idea what I can do to all of these people on the plane. I could ... blow them away". The flight attendant, who cannot be identified under a court order, tried to keep Grewal occupied and away from other passengers for more than two hours, the court heard. Grewal pushed her into a window seat, pressed up against her, and began to stroke her face while speaking in a foreign language. He told her that he wanted to jump on her and have sex. He later (sexually assaulted) her. Weseloh said the woman, who continues to suffer from nightmares and post-traumatic stress syndrome, displayed "phenomenal courage." She hasn't returned to her duties at Westjet and is in therapy. Grewal was also given three years probation, must submit a DNA sample, and is barred from carrying firearms for 10 years. He must take part in rehabilitation programs for anger management and substance abuse, and is not allowed to board an aircraft in Canada without approval from his Parole Officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canus Chinookus Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 you know, it really wouldn't hurt my feelings to ban passengers from drinking alcohol. We did it with smoking, why not booze? The VAST majority of air rage incidents happen under the influence. The skies would be a safer place, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 Unfortunately, most of the people who are a problem on board because of alcohol are already drunk when they board, like this cop was. Think they'd close all the bars in the terminals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canus Chinookus Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 could have a zero tolerance, and deny them boarding. and if they sneak on drunk, the cops will be waiting for them when the plane lands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 "...the cops will be waiting for them when the plane lands. ...' Wow. Does that bring this thread into a full circle or what? As long as big money is involved, booze will never be banned on aircraft. Unless it's a Saudia Airlines flight. Even then, some manage to sneak it on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsplat Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 What amazes me is the light sentence. In my books, any violent act done in flight should carry double the maximum sentence it could draw on the ground, PLUS a lifetime court-ordered ban from entering an airline terminal or boarding a commercial flight. 10 years and he can carry a firearm? Why? What a loser. his sentence is measured in months. What he did to the FA will make her pay for years, possibly forever. My opinion Vs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 I couldn't agree more, Vsplat. His actions should have been prosecuted under the air piracy act under which the maximum penalty in Canada is life in prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsgas Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 The Police Union will protect their own and he'll end up with his job and back pay . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beth Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 What I am trying to figure out in all of this is why anyone thought it was a good idea to try and 'deal' with this man for two hours on a domestic flight. Why did they not land the flight and have him removed? I believe that making intoxicated death threats against pax and crew is sufficient grounds no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverboy Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 A/C was enroute yeg to yhm, they could not divert due to fog in Sask. and Man. Hamilton was the best airport, or they could have gone to their alt. which would probably have been yyz. That is the only reason they did not divert! However, if an A/C is forced to land at some airport other than its intended destination due to an out of control passenger, that person gets charged under a tougher act of the criminal code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ikfu Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 What I am trying to figure out in all of this is why anyone thought it was a good idea to try and 'deal' with this man for two hours on a domestic flight. Why did they not land the flight and have him removed? I believe that making intoxicated death threats against pax and crew is sufficient grounds no? Exactly my reaction. The comment below on airports...not valid. YQT, YAM, DLH, GRB, etc, depending on the routing. The whole policy of disruptive passengers requires full support from the company, fully explained to the whole crew about the various levels and how to react to those. Allowing someone that has assaulted an fa, and has threatened death is certainly a valid reason to land ASAP. Over the years the problem of disruptive passengers, certainly at AC, has became exasserbated by the company's unethusiastic support for incidents, until they were forced to come up with much tougher guidelines to solve a problem that they had allowed to get out of hand in the past. I was involved in a couple of incidents in the past decades that cudda, shudda, been aggressively prosecuted, and were not. A couple of them involved people of repute, and AC was unwilling to proceed. That is way in the past now. I'm with the camp that suggests the cop should have been dumped upon, with large quantities, and from great heights. 7 months doesn't sound like much at all, considering he'll be out in 2 or less. What are the sentences for sexual assault on the ground, in a bar, on the street, at work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CD Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Unruly Airline Passengers - The Police Response The purpose of this guide is to provide an outline for airline staff in Canada of the role of police and applicable laws and how police and airline staff can better work together to combat the incidence of unruly or violent passengers. The bottom line is that aircrew involved in unruly passenger incidents expect the police to do their part after the aircraft has landed. However, there are certain things that the police need in order to carry out their job as effectively as possible, and the onus is on the aircrew to help with this. This guide will hopefully explain why the police do certain things, how the aircrew can help, and what the aircrew can expect on board their aircraft if the police become involved. An Information Guide for Airline Staff in Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beth Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Hi CD! How was your summer? Still looking for you on one of my LHR's - should make sure my manual is up to date Thanks for the link - informative - In your opinion, how was this handled? Do you think it warranted landing? If she was 'occupied' by this fool for two hours does that not constitute interference with a crew member's duties and therefore warrant a charge under the new legislation? Just wondering what you think from your view of things.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.