20 minute delay but satisfied passengers

 
  drivesafe Assistant Commissioner

Last nights 66 run was delayed for more than 20 minutes at International.



There was a handful of grubs running amuck through the train, yelling and banging things, and one of them kicked in the rear car’s Crew Compartment door.



The Guard was walking up the platform apologising for the delay and stated it was just a simple fault and they would be on their way soon.



A few minutes later, a number of police officers arrived on the platform.



One went to the rear car and two stood outside the 6th car.



When the officer emerged from the rear car with one of the offenders, he signalled to the two officers outside the 6th car, who then entered the car and removed four more offenders.



It seems they must have been watching what was going on on their CCTV.



Anyway, by this time there were dozens of passengers on the platform and as the officers took the grubs away, the passengers all started clapping.



That could only be taken as customer satisfaction.



BTW, the police were Federal Police officers so it would be interesting to hear how these grubs got on?

Sponsored advertisement

  fixitguy Chief Train Controller

Location: In Carriage 4 on a Tangara
what were the AFP doing there? don't they have drugs to find or something?
  Blackadder Chief Commissioner

Location: Not the ECRL
AFP are responsible for the International Airport, so presumably that includes the Station.
  Airvan99 Junior Train Controller

^^ the airport is on Commonwealth land.
  fixitguy Chief Train Controller

Location: In Carriage 4 on a Tangara
AFP are responsible for the International Airport, so presumably that includes the Station.
Blackadder
^^ the airport is on Commonwealth land.
Airvan99
thanks guys
  Highrise Assistant Commissioner

I wonder how vandalism is seen under commonwealth law..
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
I wonder how vandalism is seen under commonwealth law..
"Highrise"
Are you implying that if it is suitably harsh relative to state law, we should set up vandals to be arrested at International? That's actually something...
  V-Setcommuter Locomotive Fireman

Location: Blue Mountains
Are you implying that if it is suitably harsh relative to state law, we should set up vandals to be arrested at International? That's actually something...
Watson374
From the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 which under the definitions covers the Airport Stations:

Section 26
(2)  A person is guilty of an offence if:
                    (a)  the person does any of the following things:
                             (i)  destroys or seriously damages the facilities of a prescribed airport;
                            (ii)  destroys or seriously damages any aircraft not in service that is at a prescribed airport;
                           (iii)  disrupts the services of a prescribed airport; and
                    (b)  doing so endangers, or is likely to endanger, the safe operation of the airport or the safety of anyone at the airport; and
                    (c)  either of the following applies:
                             (i)  the Montreal Convention, when read together with the Protocol, requires Australia to make the act concerned punishable;
                            (ii)  if the act concerned relates to an aircraft—the aircraft is in Australia, or is a Commonwealth aircraft or a defence aircraft, or the act is committed by an Australian citizen, whether in Australia or not.
Penalty:  Imprisonment for 14 years.
  FullSeries Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
From the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 which under the definitions covers the Airport Stations:

Section 26
(2)  A person is guilty of an offence if:
                    (a)  the person does any of the following things:
                             (i)  destroys or seriously damages the facilities of a prescribed airport;
                            (ii)  destroys or seriously damages any aircraft not in service that is at a prescribed airport;
                           (iii)  disrupts the services of a prescribed airport; and
                    (b)  doing so endangers, or is likely to endanger, the safe operation of the airport or the safety of anyone at the airport; and
                    (c)  either of the following applies:
                             (i)  the Montreal Convention, when read together with the Protocol, requires Australia to make the act concerned punishable;
                            (ii)  if the act concerned relates to an aircraft—the aircraft is in Australia, or is a Commonwealth aircraft or a defence aircraft, or the act is committed by an Australian citizen, whether in Australia or not.
Penalty:  Imprisonment for 14 years.
V-Setcommuter
Are you sure the Airport Stations are covered under that act? I'm pretty sure its under the Rail Safety Act/Regulations. The only reason they would have gotten the AFP to respond was because they were the closes and most convenient. I can only think they got handed over to the NSW Police once they were taken upstairs.
  Blackadder Chief Commissioner

Location: Not the ECRL
It is definitely on Federal land (or under to be exact), however AFAIK the Avation laws only apply to the Terminals, the vandalism should come under the Criminal Act (1900), and the Summary Offences Act (1998?)
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
The question that thus stands to make or break this discussion is, 'Are the stations legally considered part of the airport terminals?'
  Raichase Captain Rant!

Location: Sydney, NSW
I'd suspect that the AFP were simply the closest law enforcement at the time, given their role at the airport. Thus, they would detain the offenders and hand them over to their NSW Police counterparts when they arrive.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Raichase

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.