Nuts on board - a serious issue!

[opusman]

You're nuts if you think that

 

[medhead]

Why? Because I get offended at being called a troll? Sorry if you think I'm being unreasonable.

 

[Moody]

Actually the prosecution would have failed because it would be difficult to prove opening the bag of nuts caused the reaction.
The same author that Princess Fiona quoted studied children who reported severe reactions with inhalation of peanut protein and in a blinded study could not get any to have a severe reaction ie anaphylaxis,which this girl had.They did get minor reactions such as skin rashes.

The charge would not be attempted manlaughter (or whatever). He was met by police on the request of the airline, and this is usually due to a passenger disobeying instructions of the cabin crew (or worse). He is obviously guilty of that, but has apparently claimed language issues were to blame. As mentioned before (and I'm not sure why I am doing it again), the police are only interested in proceeding where there is a good chance of conviction. In this case the pax definitely disobeyed the cabin crew, which possibly caused a near-fatal event, but it is not as cut and dried as a simple assault. But Ryanair were convinced.

And I have friends with a son who has severe allergies (including peanuts). It is definitely triggered by airborne particles and is a nightmare to manage. The one time they came over to our place we had to be briefed on providing a safe environment (which we were happy to do), and they were pathetically grateful before during and after the visit. We told them to not worry as it was a minor inconvenience for us and would be what anyone would do for a fellow human being.

Apparently not.

 

[amaroo]

Clearly you were referring to me. I'd report your post if I could be bothered to go back and find it. Insulting another member by calling them a troll is pretty disgusting.

Clearly you believe that the man was a clever chap for opening himself up to the accusation, regardless of whether the effect was caused by him? Would love to know you thoughts about preventing 25 or more passenger eating nuts, a situation that has resulted in a reaction according to the link papers.

Actually, no.

Like all internet forums AFF has it's fair share of trolls.....no great shock there.

Feel free to report me - wouldn't be the first time!

 

[Moody]

Wonder if the parents asked the airports at either end to be made nut free within a four row distance between their vehicle and their seats?

Do you really??? If so then I can't give you the answer here.

 

[Moody]

You speak of wondering about motives........I agree totally. What's yours? My answer may not be one you were seeking, but it's the one I gave. Take it or leave it(I don't care which).

My motive is to call out BS where it pops its ugly head up.

Some trolls on this thread were claiming that the entire episode was a beat-up by the mother. The facts that the airline called the police and subsequently banned the pax would refute that argument. Seemed to be too complex for some to grasp.

 

[mannej]

My motive is to call out BS where it pops its ugly head up.

Some trolls on this thread were claiming that the entire episode was a beat-up by the mother. The facts that the airline called the police and subsequently banned the pax would refute that argument. Seemed to be too complex for some to grasp.

I feel offended that you are labeling some of us here trolls...

You claim to call our BS, however that is debatable considering the information that was released in the media.

Yes there may be those claiming it's a beat up, however like I have been saying along, with the limited number of sources, there is more to the story than what is being claimed to in the media.

I don't know how hard of a fact that is to grasp.

 

[Pushka]

The peanuts is a red herring.

There is no crime in eating peanuts.

His crime is not obeying the orders of the crew. Whether those orders were clear enough or just part of the normal discussions isn't clear. I wouldn't listen to another passenger telling me not to eat the peanuts. If the crew told me I would. If he didn't understand the instructions then I'd hope the crew would tell him in a way that he did. I suspect they didn't which is why the police didn't charge him with that.

That's this guys issue.

The mother - really needs to take responsibility for attending to her child herself as there are so many exposure points in public life that simply banning peanuts on a plane does not cut it.

 

[RAM]

Still you refuse to answer a simple question ... I wonder why. (Actually I don't).

But I will answer your question (and in doing so answer my own). The police charge people when there is at least a fair chance of prosecution. All your favourite cretin had to do was say "Sorry - my english is not so good and I didn't understand the crew's repeated requests and thought that the man beside me was a weirdo for not wanting me to eat my nuts." Too many witnesses would need to be called to disprove that defence, so the police wouldn't bother. So they left it to the airline to take action.

Now why did Ryanair call the police in the first place? Because the flight crew informed them of a serious incident on board, potentially caused by a pax disobeying an explicit instruction. How did they finger the offending pax? It could only be because the adjacent passenger dobbed him in, and they decided that it wasn't a case of misunderstanding but a deliberate act of arrogance and bloody-mindedness. (There's a lot of it about.)

Ryanair have made their own judgement and on balance decided that the pax deliberately put the girl's health at risk and so banned him.

Hold on - one assumption too far.

The mother MAY have demanded the flight crew call the police. POSSIBLE.

The flight crew may have told the police what happened and how the mother did not administer the epi-pen etc - so Police go through the paces to stop her complaining.

All Possible - we'll never know but Moody have a think about the conspiracy/deliberate act by mother angle - it is possible...

 

[RAM]

Now listen sport, I can't hold your hand forever but I'll help you out just one more time. Try asking the question of the person who made the statement. I have not suggested any such thing and as such, I'm not entirely sure why you'd think that I'm the holder of all evidence. Brainy I am, handsome I am, likeable I am, but I'm sorry, I'm not the World Book Encyclopedia!

Try climbing down off your hobby horse for a bit and go back and read my posts and you might just learn I have not reached a conclusion either way.

But what I like most about you swanning_it is you are humble....

 

[RAM]

This girl had a skin reaction as well. 2 sources of exposure?

So, The Mother did it, in the Terminal using a Cloth washed in satay sauce!

I win!


Next game...

 

[RAM]

True, but could still leave the nut eater subject to aviation laws regarding disobeying crew member instructions. This was likely a lawful instruction given the allergy sufferer in close proximity.

Article said it was a crew 'request' not an 'instruction' so nothing illegal from that aspect.

 

[RAM]

You're safe. He was referring to me....

Never assume!

it makes an cough out of U and ME.

Mind you it does provide the excuse for a post or ten...

 

[RAM]

Lack of lasting/significant harm.



Clearly you were referring to me. I'd report your post if I could be bothered to go back and find it. Insulting another member by calling them a troll is pretty disgusting.

Clearly you believe that the man was a clever chap for opening himself up to the accusation, regardless of whether the effect was caused by him? Would love to know you thoughts about preventing 25 or more passenger eating nuts, a situation that has resulted in a reaction according to the link papers.

Medhead, given that several others have already assumed incorrectly are you not making an even bigger assumption?

And...

Following the double-think approach, then the post'er would deny it was you and make an even bigger point.

OR...

If they said it was general and not aimed at one person but the thrust several were taking then equally you are worse off.


Comes down to the comment 'better to leave the mouth shut....'

 

[RAM]

Why? Because I get offended at being called a troll? Sorry if you think I'm being unreasonable.

Medhead you don't use the old (1985 version) computer psychology program to generate your posts do you?

 

[opusman]

Medhead you don't use the old (1985 version) computer psychology program to generate your posts do you?

We were discussing you, not me.

 

[JohnK]

I feel offended that you are labeling some of us here trolls...

You claim to call our BS, however that is debatable considering the information that was released in the media.

Yes there may be those claiming it's a beat up, however like I have been saying along, with the limited number of sources, there is more to the story than what is being claimed to in the media.

I don't know how hard of a fact that is to grasp.

Obviously too difficult. This thread has had lots of twists and turns but you are right. We only have one side of the story. And I am not even certain if that side of the story contains any facts.

Still makes for good discussion and character assassination.

 

[Happy Trails]

Just as this thread runs out of steam, United Airlines to the rescue with another thrilling episode.

Family of nut allergy girl are removed from flight - Independent.ie

Family of nut allergy girl are removed from flight
THE family of an Irish child - who was given adrenaline onboard a transatlantic flight earlier this month after suffering an allergic reaction - were removed from their return flight home after the cabin crew told them it was not 'a nut-free airline'.

 

[defurax]

Just as this thread runs out of steam, United Airlines to the rescue with another thrilling episode.

Family of nut allergy girl are removed from flight - Independent.ie

Family of nut allergy girl are removed from flight
THE family of an Irish child - who was given adrenaline onboard a transatlantic flight earlier this month after suffering an allergic reaction - were removed from their return flight home after the cabin crew told them it was not 'a nut-free airline'.

I didn't know UA was offering First class on DUB-EWR

 

[Princess Fiona]

I didn't know UA was offering First class on DUB-EWR

Apart from that, at least this story is believable in that it involved the ingestion of nuts