Some readers were a bit disappointed with the punishment dished out by the court to a 29-year-old man for making a false bomb threat to Princess Juliana International Airport (PJIA) related to a JetBlue flight from Boston last year (see Thursday story). The prosecutor had requested eight months behind bars and after calling that “rather mild” the judge nevertheless handed down only a suspended prison term for the same period on two years’ probation.
First, it’s relevant to note that 240 hours of community service and a fine of 4,500 Antillean guilders are also part of the sentence. Jailtime could yet follow if the convict fails to comply with either.
Second, he did spend 37 days in pre-trial custody. While that might not seem like much, considering local detention circumstances more than a month of incarceration is hardly a trivial matter.
Still, when looking at all the inconvenience and financial loss caused to PJIA, the airlines, emergency services, the travelling public, motorists in the area, etc., the verdict gives the impression of a mere “slap on the wrist.” This also seems the case when compared with the one year in prison given to a man involved in two similar bomb scares in 2015.
On that occasion the demand had been for 18 months. Although there may be good reasons for this discrepancy, consistency in the administration of justice is obviously very important.
Locking up these culprits may not be highly necessary in the sense of preventing a repeat of the crime or protecting society, but doing so would at least send a message that such actions have serious consequences. Perhaps the prosecution should consider filing an appeal to try to arrive at an outcome that can serve as a more effective deterrent.
