|
Banker, 33, is cleared of assaulting BA cabin crew
I wonder if BA will ban him from all their flights?
A west London banker has today been cleared of assaulting five BA cabin crew after taking a cocktail of alcohol and sleeping pills. William Clegg, 33, claimed he had 'no conscious control' during the mid-air ruckus on a transatlantic flight between San Jose in the US and Heathrow. He told jury members he had taken two Ambien sleeping pills, along with three glasses of wine and two travel-sized bottles of Baileys, prior to the incident in August 2019. While under the influence of the drugs and alcohol, Clegg allegedly assaulted five BA cabin crew. This included attempting to headbutt a female flight attendant, and pulling a male flight attendant onto the ground, a court previously heard. The banker, who lives in London's pricey Notting Hill district, denied the allegations and has been on trial at Isleworth Crown Court. Today he was found not guilty on all counts after the jury deliberated for just under an hour, following the four day trial. |
Like the other recent case discussed in this thread it is hard to understand how they are found not guilty.
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/brit...nger-ever.html However, also like the other case the jury took less than an hour so clearly they didn't struggle to reach their verdict. The verdict is surprising based on what was reported, but I wasn't there in the trial or in that jury. |
The fact it was two Ambien (which is never a prescribed dose and is also quite dangerous) seems to make the verdict baffling.
|
So the Ambien was his defence?
How is this different to a pissed up driver running in to someone or a coked up freak picking a fight? Spike |
Same apparent combination which apparently made the seemingly normal guy sitting next to me on the UD of a flight from HKG get up, start to assault the crew and then collapse in the space between rows 61 & 62. I had to sit on him whilst the crew got the restraints. He turned into a zombie from having been completely normal 10 mins earlier.
|
Originally Posted by Funky Spike
(Post 33898911)
So the Ambien was his defence?
How is this different to a pissed up driver running in to someone or a coked up freak picking a fight? Spike It certainly is the case the jury was in not at all persuaded he was guilty to the standard required - although the article doesn't state this it would have been a unanimous verdict since it was so quick being under an hour. |
Banker taking Ambien on BA vs builder drinking vodka on EasyJet
|
Originally Posted by Funky Spike
(Post 33898911)
So the Ambien was his defence?
How is this different to a pissed up driver running in to someone or a coked up freak picking a fight? Spike I was always under the impression being under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs could not be used as a defence or mitigating circumstances for criminal behaviour in the UK. But then I guess being able to afford the best lawyers is always going to make a difference. |
Yes, I, too, don't understand it. Perhaps we are not getting the whole story. But I have always held the belief that one is responsible for one's actions no matter what substances (legal or otherwise) one has consumed.
rb211. |
Given that Ambien is a prescription drug over on this side of the Pond there's a page or so of paperwork including warnings of side effects both the drug by itself and when it's being used with other things (not just other drugs), that's also on the bottle (much more compact from and type). For example, I've got one of my prescriptions that I need to avoid grapefruit juice because it causes it to be too effective. He was lucky to have enough money to get a very good lawyer., a lot of places over here he would have been in trouble for using his GF's prescription.
Hopefully he gets banned by BA for a fairly long period of time. |
Hard to fathom why he was found not guilty, but all I can see is the press report. I did jury service last year, which also resulted in acquittal - simply put the evidence was not strong enough for conviction, and this was after two days of deliberation. I am sure that if the press had reported on the trial that the acquital would've been met with anger as the nuances were left out.
I also sat on a second trial, which resulted in an hour's deliberation prior to acquital. The evidence was far too weak to persuade anyone of guilt, which I can only imagine is what's happened here. I think if I were BA I'd be banning the passenger regardless here, though. |
Originally Posted by KSVVZ2015
(Post 33898798)
The fact it was two Ambien (which is never a prescribed dose and is also quite dangerous) seems to make the verdict baffling.
|
Now imagine it was a young working class man in a tracksuit...
|
So, if the banker has been cleared of assault, who headbutted the crew and who threw the other crew to the floor?
or was this case handled by this guy? https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...749e2e9c0.jpeg |
Originally Posted by 13901
(Post 33899393)
So, if the banker has been cleared of assault, who headbutted the crew and who threw the other crew to the floor?
or was this case handled by this guy? https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...749e2e9c0.jpeg more like... https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...eec024791.jpeg |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:45 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.