Airport silences critic with ASBI

[PlywoodPascal]

Utterly bizarre story, and feels - to me - anyway, like an abuse of power by the police and the airport.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/03/fa...

Can writing to organisations and campaigning against actions which (unarguably) will have some negative effects on a local area and its amenities really be antisocial? The bit that made me laugh from below is this:

He was accused of “bombarding” the airport and relevant authorities “with endless questions about air traffic”

God… imagine that, asking the airport about…. The air traffic they generate… how antisocial?

the guardian said:

For four years, Colin Shearn, a 62-year-old retired corporate executive, led the Farnborough Noise Group, a watchdog for locals worried about the operations of Farnborough airport, the UK’s busiest private jet airfield.

Then, one day in August, police came knocking at his door.

Shearn, they claimed in a 92-page document, had conducted an “aggressive and relentless campaign against Farnborough airport”. He was accused of “bombarding” the airport and relevant authorities “with endless questions about air traffic”, while “adopting a belligerent and aggressive style, distorting or misrepresenting a point of view to suit his agenda”.

With just seven days to prepare for a court hearing, he was unable to persuade a judge to deny Hampshire police’s application for an antisocial behaviour injunction (asbi) – the successor to the much-derided asbo. He was ordered to stop “causing any harassment, alarm or distress, nuisance or annoyance to any person” in Surrey or Hampshire, or face jail or a fine, or both.

Three weeks later – just as Shearn, its chief critic, was silenced – Farnborough announced that it planned to double weekend flights.

[Timothy Bucktu]

Ah yes, we must all take the Climate Crisis seriously, and cut back air travel amongst a range of other things...unless you're part of the elite, obvz.

[oddman]

No way this should be a criminal matter and cops should have been nowhere near this - poor judgement. Bitterly ironic that legislation used to preserve the peace and privacy of ordinary citizens is used by a business to facilitate more disruption and misery on their neighbours.

The statistics on passenger numbers on flights out of Farnborough are shocking

Democracies need people who are a PITA to bring these issues to attention of the rest of us.

I've a feeling Farnborough may be a 'beneficiary' of the Streisand effect due to this.

[CoolHands]

He’s probably a nut, so I don’t really care. Some members of the public do bombard you (at work) as if they’re the only person in the world that matters.

[DeejRC]

How are they shocking?
Shockingly high, shockingly low?

[Eric Mc]

oddman said:

No way this should be a criminal matter and cops should have been nowhere near this - poor judgement. Bitterly ironic that legislation used to preserve the peace and privacy of ordinary citizens is used by a business to facilitate more disruption and misery on their neighbours.

The statistics on passenger numbers on flights out of Farnborough are shocking

Democracies need people who are a PITA to bring these issues to attention of the rest of us.

I've a feeling Farnborough may be a 'beneficiary' of the Streisand effect due to this.

What's "The Streisand Effect"? Singing loudly in a nasally way?

I live in Farnborough and haven't noticed it.

[oddman]

DeejRC said:

How are they shocking?
Shockingly high, shockingly low?

From Linked article

One in 10 departures from UK airports are now private jet flights, according to Possible. Planes using Farnborough airport carry an average of only 2.5 passengers per plane and 40% of aircraft fly empty. This means that, per passenger mile, those passengers are 20–40 times more polluting than a passenger doing the same journey on a commercial flight.

Even if you disregard/deny the environmental angle, ITSM that the noise and disruption to provide convenience for a tiny number of people is wholly disproportionate to the disruption and inconvenience to neighbours and a legitimate source of concern/protest/anger.

Eric Mc said:

What's "The Streisand Effect"? Singing loudly in a nasally way?

Trying to silence this will backfire

Edited by oddman on Wednesday 3rd January 10:12

[captain_cynic]

CoolHands said:

He’s probably a nut, so I don’t really care. Some members of the public do bombard you (at work) as if they’re the only person in the world that matters.

This.

I suspect a lot of people don't realise how bad some people get.

An ASBI just means that he's officially been told to stop contacting the airport and related authorities like the CAA. He was presented with a 92 page document so I think it definitely has solid grounds to be called harassment.

The airport and CAA need to be able to respond to legitimate queries and concerns when it sounds like this guy was trying to waste their time with frivolous complaints, likely because he bought a place under a flight path and is now complaining that the world has to change for him. Basically he's committing a denial of service.

Now he's claiming victimhood in the media.

I think the only victims here are the poor sods who had to listen to this guy rant because they are legally required to address all concerns, queries and complaints (which is why it had to become a police matter).

[captain_cynic]

Eric Mc said:

oddman said:

No way this should be a criminal matter and cops should have been nowhere near this - poor judgement. Bitterly ironic that legislation used to preserve the peace and privacy of ordinary citizens is used by a business to facilitate more disruption and misery on their neighbours.

The statistics on passenger numbers on flights out of Farnborough are shocking

Democracies need people who are a PITA to bring these issues to attention of the rest of us.

I've a feeling Farnborough may be a 'beneficiary' of the Streisand effect due to this.

What's "The Streisand Effect"? Singing loudly in a nasally way?

I live in Farnborough and haven't noticed it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

If anything the unintended side effect will be to point out what an utter pillock this guy is.

Also, he's not being silenced. He can continue is social media campaign bit he's been told not to contact the airport or related authorities as he's been harassing them frivolously.

[Tommo87]

CoolHands said:

He’s probably a nut, so I don’t really care. Some members of the public do bombard you (at work) as if they’re the only person in the world that matters.

I don’t disagree with you that it’s possible, as I have seen first hand how some people will highjack an opportunity to further their own sense of importance. I can name a few people on PH who fit that same profile perfectly.
Typically, such people move on quickly when people stop reacting to their posturing, or the next shiny subject appears.


But, in this particular case, it could also be exactly as laid down in the article and they HAVE abused a legal process to silence a legitimate critic.

[PlywoodPascal]

captain_cynic said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

If anything the unintended side effect will be to point out what an utter pillock this guy is.

Also, he's not being silenced. He can continue is social media campaign bit he's been told not to contact the airport or related authorities as he's been harassing them frivolously.

question here -

if the airport and CAA have a legal duty to respond to queries...
How is it frivolous (the query could be important to the individual, the duty exists to serve those individuals) or harassment to contact the airport or the CAA with queries?

[Vanden Saab]

oddman said:

No way this should be a criminal matter and cops should have been nowhere near this - poor judgement. Bitterly ironic that legislation used to preserve the peace and privacy of ordinary citizens is used by a business to facilitate more disruption and misery on their neighbours.

The statistics on passenger numbers on flights out of Farnborough are shocking

Democracies need people who are a PITA to bring these issues to attention of the rest of us.

I've a feeling Farnborough may be a 'beneficiary' of the Streisand effect due to this.

He lives in Tilford which is 10 miles from the airport so not even close to Farnborough airport. The asbi included antisocial behaviour to his own neighbours as well as airport and regulator staff so it seems to be a bit more than big business using the police to silence an innocent man asking questions...
He is a friends of the earth nutter who thinks as long as he is not violent he can do anything he likes. Stop thinking the guardian are telling you the whole story or even the truth.
https://www.wokingnewsandmail.co.uk/news/farnborou...

Edited by Vanden Saab on Wednesday 3rd January 10:46

[captain_cynic]

Tommo87 said:

I don’t disagree with you that it’s possible, as I have seen first hand how some people will highjack an opportunity to further their own sense of importance. I can name a few people on PH who fit that same profile perfectly.
Typically, such people move on quickly when people stop reacting to their posturing, or the next shiny subject appears.


But, in this particular case, it could also be exactly as laid down in the article and they HAVE abused a legal process to silence a legitimate critic.

In this case they aren't silencing him. An ASBI doesnt prevent him from continuing his campaign, it just orders him to stop harassing the airport, it's owner and the relevant authorities like the CAA.

He can continue to shout from the rooftops as long as he wants. He just can't continue a harassment campaign.

I used to live in FBro, never had any noise issues from the airport (lived under 2 miles as the Gulfstream flies) and not likely to unless you bought directly under the flight path.

[spikyone]

PlywoodPascal said:

question here -

if the airport and CAA have a legal duty to respond to queries...
How is it frivolous (the query could be important to the individual, the duty exists to serve those individuals) or harassment to contact the airport or the CAA with queries?

589 complaints and 80 questions to the airport alone in the space of a year, from one person, according to the newspaper article. I can't imagine how one person could come up with that many questions. It certainly sounds like he was taking the proverbial and that his actions amounted to something more than a concerned citizen.

[captain_cynic]

PlywoodPascal said:

question here -

if the airport and CAA have a legal duty to respond to queries...
How is it frivolous (the query could be important to the individual, the duty exists to serve those individuals) or harassment to contact the airport or the CAA with queries?

Erm... Are you asking how frivolous complaints end up being harassment?

Calling them "frivolous" is giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. It's far more likely the calls were directly harassing.

However to answer your question, repeated frivolously contact is essentially a denial of service, meant to waste time and resources. As organisations like the CAA that are entirely publicly funded they don't have the resources to waste in that manner.

As mentioned, the guy is not being silenced. He's been told to stop harassing certain organisations. An ASBi doesn't even go on your criminal record.

[Vanden Saab]

spikyone said:

589 complaints and 80 questions to the airport alone in the space of a year, from one person, according to the newspaper article. I can't imagine how one person could come up with that many questions. It certainly sounds like he was taking the proverbial and that his actions amounted to something more than a concerned citizen.

12 complaints every week for a whole year seems legit...and aiming a laser range finder at aircraft if he thought they were flying too low.

[PlywoodPascal]

captain_cynic said:

As mentioned, the guy is not being silenced. He's been told to stop harassing certain organisations. An ASBi doesn't even go on your criminal record.

but ASBI's are to prevent harassment of people, individuals, not organisations.

[i]can't make italics work...
(1)In this Part “anti-social behaviour” means:

(a)conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person,
(b)conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person's occupation of residential premises, or
(c)conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.[/i]

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/12/secti...

Edited by PlywoodPascal on Wednesday 3rd January 11:08

[768]

Can't they just bin his letters if they've had enough?

Even if they're legally required to respond to queries in general I assume there are limits as under FOI.

Presumably if he had legitimate concerns and his questions were going to unearth something spectacular he'd have hit gold before this point.

[Silvanus]

DeejRC said:

How are they shocking?
Shockingly high, shockingly low?

Low passenger numbers, as in a high frequency of private jets carrying low passenger numbers. That's a lot of fuel used per passenger.

[Lotobear]

.mmmm, a 62 year old 'corporate executive', now retired, used to being listened to/telling folk what to do and now having nothing to occupy himself with and needs a 'cause'. Yes, it all makes sense