'I want to sleep': Fight erupts on AirAsia X flight after passengers keep talking despite dimmed cabin lights
In response to CNA's query, AirAsia confirmed that the altercation took place on board flight number D7326, which was heading to Chengdu, China from Kuala Lumpur.
A man seated behind a group of women who were chatting reportedly asked them to quiet down so he could rest. This occurred shortly after the plane took off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport, according to the New York Post and Malaysian news outlet the Malay Mail.
The trio reportedly refused and carried on chatting, triggering a heated exchange between both parties. The male passenger allegedly called the group "stupid", asked them to "shut up" and said, "I want to sleep".
While a fellow passenger told the New York Post that the three women were "chatting too loudly", she noted that the man's tone was also "quite aggressive".
The incident went viral on social media, with footage showing one woman pulling on what appeared to be a lanyard the man was wearing, while screams can be heard in the background.
Cabin crew then step in to separate her and another woman, who was dressed in a green top and a baseball cap, from the man.
In another video posted online, the woman in the green top can be seen leaning over her seat before repeatedly punching the man, who tried to shield himself behind his tray table, while shouts to "sit down"
✈️ কুয়ালালামপুর থেকে চেংদু—মাত্র কয়েক ঘণ্টার ফ্লাইট হলেও কেবিন ক্রুর গুরুত্ব অপরিসীম। তারা কেবল খাবার দেয় না, বিপদের...
Posted by Seen & Real on Monday, July 21, 2025
AirAsia X told CNA that the cabin crew had "acted swiftly and professionally to manage the situation in line with established safety protocols".
"The (local) authorities were notified and they met the aircraft upon landing to ensure appropriate action was taken," it added. "The incident did not impact the return flight schedules or disrupt operations."
The South China Morning Post said on Wednesday that a total of five Chinese passengers got involved in the dispute, with airport police arresting three of them and fining the other two.
On unruly passenger behaviour, AirAsia X said it "would like to remind all guests to be respectful throughout their journey".
"The airline maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward any behaviour that may affect the comfort, safety, or experience of others onboard."
The US Federal Aviation Administration noted in August 2024 that airlines had reported more than 1,240 unruly passenger cases that year.
Some airlines like Ryanair have opted to tackle disruptive behaviour by imposing fines. Ryanair, Europe's biggest airline by passenger numbers, said in a statement on Jun 12 that "disruptive passengers whose unruly behaviour" result in their removal from aircraft would be fined £500 (US$677).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
2 minutes ago
- CNA
Team lead of ICA's Visit Pass Unit sought sexual acts from men to help them with applications
SINGAPORE: An Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officer who oversaw a team in the agency's Visit Pass Unit, which grants passes to foreigners, obtained sexual favours from six men in exchange for helping them get passes. Kannan Morice Rajagopal Jayaram, 55, pleaded guilty on Monday (Jul 28) to three charges of corruptly obtaining gratification in the form of sexual acts in exchange for helping the bribers with short-term visit pass applications. Another three similar charges involving three other men will be considered in sentencing, which was adjourned to August. Kannan, who has been suspended from duty, was an inspector with ICA at the time of the offences between 2022 and 2023. The court heard that he first joined ICA in 1996 and was promoted in November 2018 to become a team leader of the Visit Pass Unit. He was promoted to the rank of inspector in June 2021. As a team leader in the unit, he was responsible for overseeing a team of 10 to 11 ICA officers, who reported to him. The officers were tasked with processing any applications submitted by foreigners seeking to extend their stays in Singapore, such as applications to extend their short-term visit passes. The unit also handled cases involving overstayers in the country and cases involving the loss of travel documents. There were prevailing guidelines governing short-term visit pass extensions, but Kannan's subordinates had the discretion to grant or reject such extensions if there was enough justification to do so. They would usually consult Kannan, as he was their team leader, whenever they encountered difficulties with such extension applications. Kannan had the discretion to approve any short-term visit pass extension applications that were handled by his team. Occasionally, Kannan would man the walk-in counter at ICA's headquarters and personally attend to any such applicants wanting to renew their short-term visit passes. Kannan knew that it was not right for him to contact foreign short-term visit pass applicants and initiate sexual meet-ups with them, but he did so anyway. Court documents described how he had such encounters with three men. One of them, an Indian national then aged 26, was in Singapore to study hospitality management. He had received only in-principle approval for his student pass application at the point of entry into Singapore in March 2022, so he was given a short-term visit pass so he could continue to stay legally in Singapore while he waited to get his student pass. He had to repeatedly apply for extensions of his short-term visit pass at ICA's headquarters. He first got to know Kannan in October 2022 when he went to the headquarters for such an application. When he went back again in November 2022, Kannan attended to him personally, and they exchanged contact details. After the foreigner completed his application, Kannan contacted him on WhatsApp, asking to meet up. The foreigner initially declined as he was in school, but later called Kannan for help when his application was rejected. Kannan instructed the foreigner to bring his immigration documents and meet him at the void deck of a block of housing flats near Kallang MRT station on Dec 24, 2022. They went to a nearby supermarket where Kannan bought beer and took the foreigner back to his home, where they drank it. At Kannan's home, he instructed the foreigner to submit a short-term visit pass extension application on the ICA website. Kannah then called his subordinate who was at ICA's headquarters and instructed her to approve the application, granting a short-term visit pass for two weeks. He said he had granted the foreigner the "wrong number of days" for an earlier extension application. The officer followed Kannan's instructions, even though the foreigner's previous application had already been rejected. When the foreigner realised his application had been approved, he thanked Kannan and continued drinking beer with him. After this, Kannan asked for a kiss. The foreigner declined as he was not sexually attracted to Kannan. Kannan persisted, and the foreigner eventually acceded as he was "grateful to the accused for his help in granting" the application, said Deputy Public Prosecutors Bryan Wong and Benjamin Low. He was also afraid that Kannan would cancel the pass if he was rejected. They went to Kannan's bedroom, where Kannan performed sex acts on the foreigner. The foreigner later admitted that he would not have allowed Kannan to carry out those acts if he had not been an ICA officer with the capability to extend the pass. Kannan admitted that he knew the foreigner was not likely to reject his advances due to his status as an ICA officer. ICA previously said in a statement that it had received information on Kannan's acts and immediately reported him to the relevant authorities for further investigation. Kannan's case was adjourned to August for mitigation and sentencing.
CNA
2 minutes ago
- CNA
'I would never have suspected there were drugs': Doctor on trial for consuming MDMA at party says drink was spiked
SINGAPORE: A man on trial for consuming drugs at a Sentosa hotel villa in 2023 said that he had no idea the drinks he had accepted from strangers during a party were spiked. Dr Rayson Lee Rui Sheng, 35, testified on Monday (Jul 28) that it had not crossed his mind that drugs were involved in the birthday party that his partner had organised for a friend at Sofitel Singapore Sentosa Resort & Spa. "This is not something that I could have prevented ... I would never have suspected there were drugs there. None of my friends talk about drugs, none of my friends do drugs," said Dr Lee. Referring to Singapore's strict drug laws, he added: "Never in my mind would I have suspected that someone would have brought drugs to the party." Dr Lee and a co-accused Tan Li Ming, 28, are each contesting a single charge of consuming MDMA, a controlled drug also known as "ecstasy", on or before Aug 9, 2023. Both had attended the party between 8pm on Aug 8 and the early hours of Aug 9, 2023. Urine samples from Dr Lee and Tan were analysed by the Health Sciences Authority and found to contain MDMA. On Monday, Dr Lee resumed the stand to give his testimony while Tan observed in the dock. Both are represented by lawyer Tania Chin. Ms Chin took Dr Lee through the events that occurred from when he returned to the villa with his partner at about 2.45am on Aug 9, 2023, after briefly leaving for a club. Upon his return, he found that the number of party-goers had increased, with many unfamiliar faces. He later learned that many of these were foreigners hailing from countries like Australia and the United States. He commented to one of the party-goers, an Indonesian known as Richard, that the villa was "very crowded". "I was wondering where all these additional people came from. He was equally puzzled," said Dr Lee, adding that he thought the party would have died down by then. "I think it was a little bit odd when I asked them who invited them. I didn't even recognise the name of the person who called them as well, I thought it was a little bit odd that people were, like, calling without seeking permissions or something," he said. Richard then shared with Dr Lee an alcoholic beverage which he said he had taken from another party-goer at the dining area. According to Richard, the drink came from a person who had an "American accent", and who claimed that the beverage was a "cocktail" of the beverages available, which included gin, vodka and coke. While the defence has sought to call Richard as a witness, the Australian resident has declined to testify for fear of being detained upon entering Singapore. About an hour later, Dr Lee had a second drink offered by a foreigner. He said he accepted and shared the drink out of courtesy. Asked if he had asked what the drink was, Dr Lee said he had not as it "looked and tasted" the same as what he had had before. Dr Lee also maintained that he was aware of the kinds of alcohol available as he had made drinks for himself earlier. When presented with a list to identify the individuals who had offered him drinks, Dr Lee said he was unable to recall as there had been too many people. A total of 49 men had been arrested at the party. Ms Chin then asked if Dr Lee had suspected his drink had been spiked at that point, to which the latter said "definitely not". He would not have expected a "benign birthday celebration" which he had believed to be a "safe space" to have drugs, he told the court. His third drink, also from a stranger, came about an hour after the second. Each time Dr Lee took the drink, he felt "high", "happy" and a bit "light-headed"; however, he attributed the sensations to alcohol. At some point, Dr Lee felt overwhelmed by the crowd and went to the pool to take a break. He returned shortly before police officers arrived, at about 5.40am on Aug 9, 2023. Officers had received information about drug-related activity at the villa. POLICE ARRIVE Dr Lee said he initially believed that the police were investigating a noise complaint. He then noticed people forming a line to jump out of the bathroom window, which he felt was "odd". One of these people broke his leg from the attempt, according to Dr Lee, although he added that nobody knew who he was as he could not speak English. "I thought it was just a noise complaint, why would people be jumping out of the window?" he added. "The lights came on and the whole place was a bit more brightly lit, that was when I realised the extent of the movement of drugs, the extent of how many people were there and the presence of these drug-looking items," he said. As the police began gathering everyone into the living room, party goers were told to sit down and "shut up", Dr Lee said. Police officers then had "one-on-one" sessions with participants where they conducted searches on their belongings and bodies, Dr Lee said. Nobody owned up to the drugs or paraphernalia when asked by the police. Packets of drugs, pills and syringes, among other items, were found around the villa, including on a couch, under furniture and at a sink. Dr Lee maintained that he had not seen any of these items as they were in "obscure places" and the venue had been crowded. Dr Lee was also asked at length about previous instances where he could have consumed drugs, in particular during a trip to Pattaya, Thailand, in June 2023. While there, Dr Lee said that he had been pressured by a Thai national to consume pills, which he had believed were mints at first. He told the court that he regretted the incident and has since promised himself that he would never take pills from a stranger again. While mostly calm while on the stand, Dr Lee briefly revealed his frustration over his court case when asked about a statement recorded by an officer. This was when Dr Lee was asked why he had not admitted to the offence in his statement, despite his understanding that he could have been placed in a Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) or on a supervision order. Dr Lee said he had considered the option as "who in the right mind" would not have wanted to go on "the path of least resistance". "But I couldn't in good conscience admit to something that was not the truth," said an emotional Dr Lee, who pointed out that he now had to defend his innocence in court. Those assessed to be at low risk of offending could be placed on a supervision order, while those who undergo a DRC regime will not have a criminal record. PROSECUTION'S QUESTIONING After Ms Chin completed her questions, Deputy Public Prosecutor Jocelyn Teo cross-examined Dr Lee. She argued that the accused had taken the drugs knowingly as he enjoyed the euphoric and lightheaded sensations they caused. Part of the prosecution's argument hinged on the results from Dr Lee's hair sample. Three segments of his hair, each corresponding to different periods of time he allegedly consumed drugs, were analysed and found to contain MDMA and Ketamine. The time periods ranged from between January and late March 2023, between late March and late May 2023, and late May to late July 2023. Dr Lee could not explain why he tested positive for drugs for the periods between January and May 2023, but disagreed when Ms Teo suggested that he had consumed Ketamine and MDMA multiple times before Aug 9, 2023. Ms Teo also alleged that Dr Lee's defence of being spiked was "speculative" and an "afterthought" designed to "piggyback" off the same defence that his co-accused Tan was attempting to use. She led a series of questions about Dr Lee's alleged encounter with the Thai national who fed him pills in Pattaya. Asked if Dr Lee had been force-fed the pill and a drink to wash it down, Dr Teo said he had not been forced but that the incident took place "very fast". "So today, if someone told you to smoke a vape, you would also smoke a vape?" Ms Teo asked. "If someone asked you to jump (from) a building, you would jump?" she continued. Dr Lee replied that he "would not" to both questions. "So it wasn't necessary to comply with the Thai national, was it?" Ms Teo asked. Dr Lee agreed that his behaviour had been "foolish" and that he expressed his regret over the incident. Ms Teo also noted that Dr Lee would not have consumed unknown pills or unknown liquids as a doctor. She put to Dr Lee that he had "worked hard" to get to where he was as a doctor, and "would not jeopardise" his efforts, to which Dr Lee agreed. Yet Dr Lee had taken drinks from strangers, pointed out Ms Teo. To this, Dr Lee said that it was "quite common" in a club or a party to share drinks as long as the person did not appear suspicious or to be potentially harmful. He later said it was a "common social practice" to share or offer drinks as a form of "social lubricant" in such settings. "I never would have suspected there was anything else inside ... I didn't suspect that there would have been anything off," he said. Ms Teo also accused Dr Lee of having "deliberately shut (his) eyes" to the drug activity in the villa as none of these had been conducted secretly. Dr Lee disagreed. The trial will continue on Tuesday with Tan expected to take the stand.
Independent Singapore
an hour ago
- Independent Singapore
Drink stall chain allegedly makes staff pay for incorrect orders, says part-time worker
Photo: Freepik/zinkevych (for illustration purposes only) SINGAPORE: A part-time worker has publicly criticised a 'drink stall chain' in Singapore for making her and other employees pay for any incorrectly made beverages. In a post on the r/SGexams subreddit, the worker wrote that she found the policy both 'unnecessary' and 'unreasonable,' especially since they are only paid S$9 per hour. 'It is already barely enough to make ends meet,' she said. 'It's hard to justify this kind of policy. I mean, yeah, a drink is just four dollars and everybody just needs to fork out a dollar to pay for it, which isn't that much, but I don't understand why employees should be held financially responsible when the drink can simply be remade or the order voided, with the reason written on the receipt.' She went on to ask fellow Redditors whether it was truly fair for management to impose such penalties on workers already earning minimum wage, just because of what she called 'a puny mistake.' While she didn't reveal the company's name, she hinted that 'it's not a small business' and that it has 'multiple branches' across the city-state. 'This practice is likely illegal & unethical.' Under her post, several Redditors urged the worker to report the company's policy to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM). One wrote, 'Illegal deductions are only permissible after the employer conducts a proper investigation to determine who is at fault. Keep track and ask the owner to pay back when quitting, or report to MOM.' Another said, 'Document it in writing and file report to MOM. Plus the cost of the drink definitely isn't worth 4 dollars.' A third wrote, 'This practice is likely illegal & unethical. Report to MOM.' A fourth shared, 'Nope. Usually, they will give it to the staff as a free drink/toss it away/if the next order is coincidentally the same drink. I have never heard of this. Not common when I work in F&B or juice bars.' Employers must hold an inquiry before deducting wages According to the Ministry of Manpower, employers are permitted to deduct an employee's salary 'for damage or loss of money or goods,' but only under specific conditions. They must first carry out a proper inquiry to determine whether the employee is directly responsible. The employee must also be given an opportunity to explain the circumstances before any deductions are made. If the employer decides to proceed, the deduction must not exceed 25% of the employee's monthly salary and must be made as a one-time lump sum. Read also: Woman says her brother keeps falling into debt chasing 'fast money,' and their mum always bails him out () => { const trigger = if ('IntersectionObserver' in window && trigger) { const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries, observer) => { => { if ( { lazyLoader(); // You should define lazyLoader() elsewhere or inline here // Run once } }); }, { rootMargin: '800px', threshold: 0.1 }); } else { // Fallback setTimeout(lazyLoader, 3000); } });
