Trial begins for Heather Cho

By Kim Rahn

Heather Cho

Prosecutors and lawyers of former Korean Air Vice President Heather Cho exchanged barbs over whether she forced a flight from JFK International Airport in New York to change course during the “nut rage” incident.

In the first hearings of Cho’s case at the Seoul Western District Court, Monday, the two sides argued over the allegation for which she could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

Cho entered the courtroom wearing a green prison uniform. The judge checked her identity by asking name and other information, and when he asked what her job was, she answered: “I don’t have a job.”

During the hearing, the judge said Cho was allowed to say anything if she had something to say. But she only said, “No, I don’t,” and remained silent during the whole hearing.

She was indicted and put behind bars after she ordered a plane bound for Incheon to return to the gate at the JFK from a taxiing area on Dec. 5 and kicked a chief flight attendant off the plane because she was dissatisfied at the way a junior attendant served her macadamia nuts.

The charges against her include: forcing the change of an aircraft’s course; committing acts of violence that disturbed flight safety; coercion; interfering with business; and interfering with official duties using her authority.

According to the Aviation Safety Law, jail terms of one to 10 years are given to people who interfere with a flight’s normal operations by forcing a scheduled flight to change course using their authority.

Prosecutors claim the charge applies because the flight was “in operation,” and because the law states that a flight becomes officially in operation when the gates of a flight are closed and the operation ends when they are opened.

However, Cho’s lawyers claimed that refers to an “air route,” saying this is defined as existing 200 meters above the ground according to the transport authority. “It is not right to include ground movements as in operation when there is no clear standard,” a lawyer said.

The lawyers also claimed that when Cho ordered the plane to return, she did not know that the aircraft was moving.

However, prosecutors said that Cho told the chief flight attendant: “Stop this plane. I won’t let this plane take off. Tell the pilot to stop the plane now!”

On Cho’s violence allegation, the lawyers also claimed that testimonies from some witnesses, including the chief flight attendant, were exaggerated.

As definitions of “in operation” and “air route” are debatable, Cho’s final sentencing will depend on how the judge interprets them.