Teen Arrested after flight to Nashville (for hijacking)

Teen Arrested after flight to Nashville (for hijacking)

news.yahoo.com

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A teenage passenger from California was arrested in Nashville for plotting to hijack a plane from Los Angeles to Nashville, the FBI said Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

FBI spokesman George Bolds told The Associated Press the 16-year-old boy was removed from Southwest Airlines Flight 284 Tuesday night by authorities at Nashville International Airport and found with "suspicious" items.

Bolds said the teen had handcuffs, rope and duct tape in his bag and was believed to be traveling alone. The juvenile's name has not been released.

(visit the link for the full news article)

On the surface this looks like a positive "news" story but I found something that really REALLY bothers me. At the end of the article it says..

Bolds said the teen was calm throughout the flight and never made an attempt to hijack the plane but told the FBI after he was apprehended about his original plans to commandeer the aircraft.

So if he never actually attempted to hijack the plane, what law did he break? I may have a plan to rob a bank, but if I don't actually do it should I still be arrested for bank robbery? Apparently this plane landed and it says he was calm through out the whole flight, so as far as I can see there is no need to arrest him. You might want to consider having him committed for his mental health if he is having these types of thoughts, but it is not criminal to think regardless of what you are thinking about. Every item he had in his bag was not listed by TSA as banned, so I am really interested to know what charges he is being held on and what federal charges he could be facing. From where I sit, he didn't actually commit a crime.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 25-1-2008 by MrWendal]

So if he never actually attempted to hijack the plane, what law did he break?

I may be mistaken, but I believe the charge would be conspiracy to commit a terrorist act. And yes, it is against any number of federal laws.

It makes no difference that he lost his nerve and did not follow through. It was a pre-meditated act and the intention was evident by his own admission and based on the items found in his bag. Thank god nobody actually died.

I think for a conspiracy charge they would be better off arresting him in L.A. At that point he had a plan and I would agree that he should be charged with conspiracy. Instead he got on the flight. The plane went from L.A. all the way to Nashville without incident and he didn't make a move. At that point there is no conspiracy anymore is there? If he was able to be arrested in Nashville, how did the FBI find out about this whole thing while he was in the air? Did they already know and allow him to board the plan so he could have a chance to hijack it? The more I think about this, the more questions I get and it just is not adding up.

Wouldn't this be covered by the recent thought crime stuff?

I agree his mental health probably needs looking at, but without more information it doesn't look like it developed into a felony. However, "intent to supply" drugs is treated as a crime, even when no supplying is done, if enough illegal substance is found then it's obvious the intent to supply was there.

could someone please enlighten me as to how he got the handcuffs onto the plane , i thought thouse where on the restricted list of items even before 9/11

and an other thing , if they had knollege of the handcuffs why did they even let him board or where all the items taken away from him before flight or after , handed back or what

im just suppriced by the lack of logic in some of your fellow americans actions ,

i remember in 2000 -01 when i was flying back home from NY , i had a tiger furr coverd handcuff , the ones you strapp your mate on the poles of the bed , with me in the inflight bagage , i was informed i could not take em with me(after xray) on the flight because it was on the restricted list, i told em go a head takem , no fbi or any other security service was on me after the incident .

now the unlogical thing about this is that if they feard he could attempt to hijack why did they let him fly .,

well then again ive never understood the mentality / legality behind cops selling drugs then to later bust you or cops posing as hookers then later to arrest you,

but then again i live in a country where you are inocent untill proven guilty

reply to post by BlackOps719

They cannot charge him with conspiracy. Legally speaking, in order for there to be a conspiracy, 2 or more people have to conspire to commit a crime. Since he did not conspire with another person, there is no conspiracy.

According to the article the handcuffs are not on the TSA ban list, which I find surprising. You would imagine it would be.

The above poster makes a very good point about conspiracy...it takes more than one person.

I don't think you can compare it to someone who has a large amount of drugs...that is not a conspiracy charge, it is "intent to distribute".

I am trying to find out more about this story, I still can not figure out what the actual crime is. Maybe this could be a part of the "Thought Crime" legislation that was recently passed.

umm one thing I dont get .. how can you hijack a plane using a rope , handcuffs and tape ? ahh and beeing 16 years old ..

Not like he had ANY means to terrorize the pasangers , the most he could have done was create a nervous atmosphere for about 5 min before the passengers jumped him ..

handcuffs, rope and duct tape? that's it? sounds like the dude has more of a fetish than anything else... perhaps he was on his way to meet some kinky chick... i alwayz thought a boxcutter was the weapon of choice for a highjacker...

Handcuffs, rope and duct tape? Possibly for his suicide? Just guessing.

so you can't take a babies bottle on an aircraft but you can take a rope, duct tape and hand cuffs, which passanger should be seen as more suspicious. this stuff cracks me up. it's gotta be clear from this type of story that public perception of security and threat is far more important than actual sucurity and threat.