Jerome Kenneth Kingzio, 28, received a remarkably light sentence for a truly disgusting crime of assault. On a Continental flight from Los Angeles to Honolulu, a 66-year-old woman was watching an in-flight movie when Kingzio stood up in the seat behind her and urinated on her. For this assault, he received just three weeks in jail.
Even when the women pushed Kingzio back, he continued to urinate.
Kingzio is a resident of the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and had been drinking. I do not understand why this was not viewed as akin to a violent assault. Even if one considers intoxication, the injury to the woman was awful and should be treated with more gravity in sentencing.
The woman can clearly sue for battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress, but something tells me that this is someone who may be judgment proof financially.
While airlines have been sued over other cases of bizarre and disgusting behavior on planes, Continental cannot be sued for the unforeseeable attack. As long as the flight attendants attacked quickly, Kingzio is entirely responsible for the incident.
If Kingzio had hit the woman, would he have faced only a three week sentence? I doubt it. Even with substance abuse, this assault warranted something a bit more weighty even with the six-month probation. I would have thought that three to six months in jail would have been the minimum. This is a case where a tort lawsuit might at least give the victim more of a sense of justice, even if it means garnishment of wages to recover the damages.
My wife, who flies regularly, was bumped to first class only once. She sat next to a gentleman who urinated himself several times. She doesn’t want to upgrade ever again.
What do you mean “just three weeks in jail”? How lengthy a sentence does one deserve for this relatively harmless crime?
Stories like this should be suppressed. Like the release of the torture memos, it will only give the terrorists ideas and let them know what punishments they’ll eventually face.
Seriously though, we live in an incarceration nation and our punishments are generally way too high. However, I agree with JT that this sentence doesn’t pass the “smell test.” Stealing some food, or even some beer (as a lot of my public defender clients do) is a “relatively harmless crime” but urinating on someone during a flight? That’s way too lenient and makes me wonder if there’s more to the story than we know about, perhaps some mental issues, etc.
Air travel is annoying enough today, but can you imagine hearing your newly arriving relative tell you the flight was great but that the guy in front of you urinated over the seat mid-flight? Wow.
Does anyone understand that this is a Specific Intent Crime. I know voluntary Intoxication is not a Defense to most cases, but, if the guy is truly a Full Blown Alcoholic then I maybe can see why he got this penalty.
I have worked with a number of good people and they are still good people but when they took that first drink they became different people. I am not minimizing the harm, risk (STDs), or anything psychological issues that the man cause. He may not be able to stop himself.
What I have learned that the common theme is that at one time, when drinking was fun they were able to stop. Once John Barleycorn took over they could not stop. The compulsion was just too great. So maybe proper treatment is more appropriate than incarceration.
I am aware that the Islands are or were a strategic strong hold for the US at one time so Federal Laws should control as well as local collection laws.
I’d just like to remind everyone that in this warped world in which we live, some people would pay a premium for this service.
Like leann.
Buddha,
I’m afraid that the person you allude to doesn’t have to pay for it, she and her hubby include it regularly in their once a month repertoire.
I really do enjoy everyone’s different views on all the issues, I wish this world had a justice system like that, abunch of people would explain their views on the matter, in which he or she (the judge) would base their verdict and sentencing on.
Huh? What? Who does that? I must admit I’ve been in this industry for over 13 yeas now and I thought I heard it all. I guess not!
There is no justice in this country. We all know how it worked, there was not enough money for the courts to (steel) from the perpetrator in the form of ”fines” so it goes away. Because these panty waiste judges have no grit.
what is it with this blog and pee?
Taking a piss on someone is indeed an act of intentional violence. Some people do it overtly, some couch it in nasty snarky verbal behavior, but it is violence in-deed and intent. If he was drunk, he was a violent drunk.
Society currently reflects the pale response to these behaviors…whether by a drunken assh*le (and peeing ON someone is not the same as fumbling incontinence ala Depardieu), or the Corporate entitlement and dodging of taxes and damages towards those twho hey inadvertantly harm. That too, is violence.
The difference is not subtle.