Virgin flight delayed by Galaxy Note wi-fi hoax

Dave

Dave

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
104,449
Reaction score
130,074
Location
The sunlit uplands
_93098572_84c51a60-a881-4aa0-8632-013c35dd74f1.jpg


A flight in America was delayed and almost diverted on Tuesday after a passenger changed the name of their wi-fi device to 'Samsung Galaxy Note 7'.

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 phones were banned from planes by the US Department of Transportation after several of the devices caught fire.

Lucas Wojciechowski was on Virgin America flight 358 from San Francisco to Boston and told BBC News he photographed the hotspot after noticing it when he opened his laptop.

A call went out for any passenger with a Note 7 to press their call button.

Mr. Wojciechowski subsequently tweeted the crew's announcements from the late night flight after the pilot warned passengers they would have to make an emergency landing.

"This isn't a joke. We're going to turn on the lights (it's 11pm) and search everyone's bag until we find it.

"This is the captain speaking. Apparently the plane is going to have to get diverted and searched if nobody fesses up soon."

The owner came forward confessing there was no Samsung Galaxy Note 7 on board, but they had changed the name of their SSID wireless device to 'Samsung Galaxy Note 7_1097.'

According to Mr. Wojciechowski, the flight crew later announced: "Ladies and gentlemen, we found the device. Luckily only the name of the device was changed to 'Galaxy Note 7'. It was not a GN7."
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38404711
 
FrankieK said:
Charged with what?
Click to expand...

There are various possible charges, depending on the jurisdiction this falls under and what charges they have. It could even amount to a charge of a false bomb threat, which if it was under California would fall under Penal Code Section 148.1..

Anybody intentionally making false bomb threats that “may reasonably be believed” can be fined and/or imprisoned for up to five years
Click to expand...
http://www.sevenslegal.com/criminal-attorney/making-bomb-threats-california/
 
Marsport said:
highly unlikely
Click to expand...

What is highly unlikely? That there are various charges that could apply? The it depends under which jurisdiction this would fall? That it COULD even (aka, just a possibility) amount to a false bomb threat charge?

Or are you just agreeing with me?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X