Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#51

Post by syshum »

_n_b_ wrote: post #22
Rygian wrote: post #2

"Based upon the need for airports to be absolutely secure so that people feel safe to travel, I do find those alleged actions do make him a danger to the community." That is such an obvious non-sequitur, shoot-the-messenger attitude to security. The "danger to the community" stems from the officials at the airport who failed to make the airport safe and prevent this sort of situation from developing.

It seems like this was a bail hearing, where “danger to the community” is a condition—-and not a particularly rigorous one—-required to set bail[0]. Since his bail was set at $1000 according to the article, it seems like the judge also didn’t believe this guy was really all that dangerous either. It’s important not to confuse this finding purely for bail purposes from a preliminary exam with any actual finding of gui…

The raw amount of the bail is not, and should not be relevant, as to a person with no money $1 bail is unattainable.

This is why the Cash Bail system is regarded as punishment for the poor, and in part what makes the Legal system different for the "rich" vs the poor

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#53

Post by tankenmate »

aww_dang wrote: post #13
tankenmate wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm left wondering why this is being treated as a felony rather than a mental health issue. I'm wondering what else hasn't been reported in this case (or can't be reported).

Perhaps there's a conflict of interest in concluding that a largely sensationalist media may be a contributing factor.

Do you mean that reporting is influencing the prosecutor's decisions? i.e. the media is suggesting that mental health issues are over blown? or that the prosecutor feels that media reports on mental health are over blown? I ask because I have seen different media sources report diametrically opposed views on this.

I know this is somewhat naive, but I would have thought that evidence would be the primary reason in decisions of whether to prosecute. I also realise that there are cases where the public good is also considered.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#54

Post by snarfy »

bonoboTP wrote: post #28
cycomanic wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came here to say the exact same thing. If anything him living for 3 month in a highly secure area without doing anything nefarious is proof that he is not a danger to the community. What is wrong with that judge, if it was the prosecute saying this ok, but the judge?!

They often reason backwards. They want to order bail, but danger-to-community is a required condition for bail (as pointed out in another comment), so they proclaim that he is indeed a danger.

If he's not a danger, then why require bail?

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#55

Post by pc86 »

syshum wrote: post #51
_n_b_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like this was a bail hearing, where “danger to the community” is a condition—-and not a particularly rigorous one—-required to set bail[0]. Since his bail was set at $1000 according to the article, it seems like the judge also didn’t believe this guy was really all that dangerous either. It’s important not to confuse this finding purely for bail purposes from a preliminary exam with any actual finding of gui…

The raw amount of the bail is not, and should not be relevant, as to a person with no money $1 bail is unattainable. This is why the Cash Bail system is regarded as punishment for the poor, and in part what makes the Legal system different for the "rich" vs the poor

I'm curious if you would still say the amount of bail is irrelevant if it were a well-off person getting a $1,000 bail. For what it's worth, bail is supposed to set to an amount based in part on the person's wealth. So for two people ~~convicted~~ accused of identical crimes, where one has 10x the means of the other, the bails should be 10x different. It doesn't always happen that way of course, but it is part of the guidelines.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#56

Post by baobabKoodaa »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #49
Aeolun wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, we are talking about the area you are in after a flight, yes? Since he had an employee badge, I have to assume he also entered other areas.

Downvoted. I don't see why you would assume that.

Hey, to all the people downvoting my comment: the article paints a pretty clear picture that this person was staying in the arrivals area which is accessible to passengers, and the reason for his arrest and prosecution was that he was embarrassing airport security. At no point does the article claim or even hint at the possibility that the person used the stolen badge to enter other areas besides the arrivals area. So why are you just "assuming" that the person entered other areas with the badge? We're talking about a person who has already been doxxed and embarrassed for their mental health issues. On top of that you want to add your baseless speculation that he did some crimes? And you don't want to give any explanation why you believe that he did some crimes? You just want to smear the man some more, because hey, let's kick him while he's down?

Furthermore, I find it ironic that the people who downvoted me are giving me less courtesy than I did with my downvote, where I explained the reason for downvoting.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#57

Post by cwhiz »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #56
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoted. I don't see why you would assume that.

Hey, to all the people downvoting my comment: the article paints a pretty clear picture that this person was staying in the arrivals area which is accessible to passengers, and the reason for his arrest and prosecution was that he was embarrassing airport security. At no point does the article claim or even hint at the possibility that the person used the stolen badge to enter other areas besides the arrivals area. S…

I am sure he stole the badge because he just enjoys collecting quirky things.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#58

Post by totalZero »

scotty79 wrote: post #36
_n_b_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like this was a bail hearing, where “danger to the community” is a condition—-and not a particularly rigorous one—-required to set bail[0]. Since his bail was set at $1000 according to the article, it seems like the judge also didn’t believe this guy was really all that dangerous either. It’s important not to confuse this finding purely for bail purposes from a preliminary exam with any actual finding of gui…

Is it fine for the judge to say false things in the court if it's a part of the protocol?

If 'danger to the community' is a term of art that sets a standard for imprisonment/bail, then it's not so cut and dried as to say that the guy seems harmless so the judge is lying.

Clearly this guy exploited a security problem that endangers the community, and clearly he didn't physically harm anyone during his time in the airport.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#59

Post by mamon »

pc86 wrote: post #55
syshum wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The raw amount of the bail is not, and should not be relevant, as to a person with no money $1 bail is unattainable. This is why the Cash Bail system is regarded as punishment for the poor, and in part what makes the Legal system different for the "rich" vs the poor

I'm curious if you would still say the amount of bail is irrelevant if it were a well-off person getting a $1,000 bail. For what it's worth, bail is supposed to set to an amount based in part on the person's wealth. So for two people ~~convicted~~ accused of identical crimes, where one has 10x the means of the other, the bails should be 10x different. It doesn't always happen that way of course, but it is part of the…

Also, please keep in mind that bail is not punishment, it's just means of ensuring that the defendant will attend their trial. That's why it's refundable at the trial's end. Good bail should be low enough that defendant can afford to pay it, but not afford to lose it.

Re: Man found 'living in airport for three months' over Covid fears

#60

Post by howlgarnish »

rkachowski wrote: post #44
Rygian wrote: post #2

"Based upon the need for airports to be absolutely secure so that people feel safe to travel, I do find those alleged actions do make him a danger to the community." That is such an obvious non-sequitur, shoot-the-messenger attitude to security. The "danger to the community" stems from the officials at the airport who failed to make the airport safe and prevent this sort of situation from developing.

I feel this quote hits on a nerve - what's more important than the actual safety is the perceived feeling of safety. For all the TSA shoe removal and bottled water prohibition, they couldn't prevent someone living undetected in a restricted area of an airport for 3 months. It's almost 20 years since 9/11 and there is still this ineffective security theatre.

But what's the risk to having someone live for three months in an airport? He's gone through the same TSA security as everybody else.
Post reply on HN