United Airlines 777 Jet Diverts to Chicago O’Hare Due to Unruly Woman
United Airlines Boeing 777-200
A United Airlines jet flying from Los Angeles (LAX) to London Heathrow on Tuesday diverted to Chicago O’Hare Airport when an intoxicated woman became unruly and shoved passengers and crew.
United Flight 934, a Boeing 777-200, took off from LAX at 6:11 PM local time and diverted at 1:21 AM Canadian time. Reports say the woman, who is from Redondo Beach, California, became unruly and would not follow crews’ orders.
‘Police responded early today after the flight was brought to a United gate at O’Hare, said Chicago Police News Affairs Officer Robert Perez.’
Charges have not been brought against the woman because the incident occurred over Canadian airspace.
Image: Flickr [skinnylawyer]
Category: Airnation
RULES FOR COMMENTING BELOW: Profanity, inappropriate comments, NAME CALLING, racial slurs and attacking others on this blog will not be tolerated. Breaking these rules will first get your posts removed and then you will be banned. In other words, spirited debate is always encouraged here but be respectful doing it. :)
What is 1:21 AM Canadian time as the acft landed in Chicago.
The plane was in Canadian airspace when it turned around to O’Hare
There is no such time as 1:21am. Where is 1:21am US time. Canada has time zones just like in the US.
Make that 1:21am Canadian time.
You are doing a big seen about it being written “Canadian Time”? You must be kidding me.
To make it simple the time was 0121 hours.
Like the military uses and a good portion of the rest of the world which makes it easy to tell if it is a.m. or p.m.
Wait… what?? “Charges have not been brought against the woman because the incident occurred over Canadian airspace.”
She wasn’t drunk when she boarded the plane in LAX?? Can’t they at least charge her with public intoxication? What about when the a/c landed at Chicago? She wasn’t disorderly then?
I guess this is how criminals get away with stuff. Just do the crime in an aircraft over a foreign country. Laughable…
The law is the law we can’t do anything about it. And I’m Canadian.
Law is open to interpretation. Airline is incorporated in the US, flight crew was presumably American as was the unruly passenger. That sure sounds like grounds for the US to take action. At a minimum put the woman on a no-fly list.
It’s obvious why so many once great airlines have disappeared from existence, becoming decommissioned, when they hire idiots that do not know how to calm passengers (in fact, many of the cabin attendants airlines hire these days, incite these agitated PAX making the situations worse, and creating these situations that planes are being rerouted, and land, at significant, tremendous costs to the respective airline. When passengers are in such a state that the plane must land because of the PAX belligerent behavior, in the past they have been subdued and strapped to the airline seat, where they would stay until the plane landed at the intended destination. CEO’s, lets put a stop to this nonsense of ill-prepared cabin crews that do not know how to handle these types of out-of-control PAX !!!
Have to be careful, cabin attendant could be breaking the law also by doing that. Verbal massaging (tactful talking to)I can see, restraintant for the remainder of the flight,unh, unh, unh.
TK:
Agree with what you stated. However, when the threat of PAX, and flight itself, threatens all other PAX, the aircraft, and potentially cockpit crew as well, within the parameters of the law(s), restraining the offending passenger is warranted, and has been implemented in the past. Granted, laws have changed, but ultimately, the safety of the flgiht is the #1 priority, and when it endangers others, and “verbal massaging” is not working, dumping fuel, gate charges, landing/takeoff charges, refueling, et al, cannot be the only Plan B. I loved hearing your thoughts TK, and would enjoy hearing more!
Peter
“and potentially cockpit crew as well”: Your kidding me right? The flight crew is behind a lock and bullet proof door, nobody (and even less a drunk person) can get on the Flight Deck if the flight crew does not want them.
Umm, flight deck doors are now bullet proof? Since when? There is no such thing as ‘bullet proof’ only bullet resistant and last time I checked, sheet aluminum isn’t. Hate to dissapoint you but this isn’t Fort Knox, just held secure with a couple of latches not much different than on my sliding deck door.
Ok “Bullet Proof” no, but impenetrable yes.
Or very close to it.
Yes, and “potentionally cockpit crew” as well. Breaking-down the door to the cockpit is not by any stretch-of-the-imagination, anywhere near what I was stating, and implying. An out-of-control PAX is capable of endangering, and downing, the entire aircraft, every PAX onboard, every flight, and cabin, crew member, not even thinking of, nor intending to, get near the cockpit itself. Airlines, as they have been contemporarily run, have aircraft being diverted, and landing in, unscheduled cities so frequently now, due to unruly PAX. Why? Airlines hiring individuals whom do not have the personal abilities to fully function in the position of Cabin Attendants, before and after training, and retraining every six months. We had the same disgruntled PAX prior to the turn of the century, but Cabin Attendants, and/or, Cockpit Crew, had the personal abilities, in addition to their training specific to their airline, who successfully handled this furious PAX, with only rare occasions having to make an unscheduled stop to deplane the offending PAX. Now, I read of this occuring everytime I choose to read industry news, and/or world news.
” Airlines hiring individuals whom do not have the personal abilities to fully function in the position of Cabin Attendants, before and after training, and retraining every six months.”: Peter training is not the problem here, the problem is:
1. The scare of having a lawsuit and bad press.
2. Post 9/11 laws (I think).
Speedbird 95, yes I agree. Agree 100%. Although, I would like to share that my comments were not inclusive to only the ones that I typed (although, I was implying “Post 9/11 laws…”, with the phrase “turn-of-the-Century”. This list is in no way complete, nor are they listed in order of seriousness. Thank you, though, for responding. I enjoy hearing what others are thinking, and feeling (and experiencing), too! Thanks again, Speedbird 95.
You are the first one that agrees with me here LOL. Thanks.
Speedbird 95…I really appreciate that you took the time to send the above note (thank you!), and I too, am experiencing LOL (at first, I didn’t know what it was **smile**). Nevertheless, it was a gratifying feeling reading the note you shared, especially with the circumstances that are so far-reaching and implicit to this article, and articles with the same, and/or similar, subject matter. Responding to this article was not unlike what I imagine “walking on eggshells” must feel like. Ergo, the next time I hear that distinctive, snapping, crunching sound I associate with “eggshells”, I will turn around, and fully expect to see you walking over to me (or vice versa), in order that we may again offer one another a supportive lifeline!!!