Former Dunedin airport security worker convicted of planting a fake bomb

A Dunedin airport security worker was found guilty of planting a fake bomb in a restricted area.

Preetam Maid, 32, spent more than two weeks on trial in Dunedin District Court after denying a charge under the Aviation Crimes Act.

And the jury of eight women and three men took almost a day and a half to render a majority verdict.

The defendant shook his head and looked down before glancing at his wife in the public gallery when the verdict was announced.

Maid and her supporters wept openly in the aftermath.

Judge Michael Crosbie said that, in his opinion, the evidence was “overwhelming.”

Maid, The Crown said, had voiced her opinion on what she perceived as lax security at Dunedin Airport, particularly in the far north.

On March 17 last year, two days after the massacre at two Christchurch mosques, aviation security personnel were on high alert and urged to be more visible to reassure the public.

It was the perfect time for Maid to reveal the security gaps.

The swipe card data showed that that day, he twice entered a hallway leading to the dangerous goods store, spending a total of 20 minutes there.

Prosecutor Richard Smith said the defendant had used that particular door only twice in recent months and was only there for a few seconds.

Maid took items from the warehouse – a Soda Stream gas can, a dead cell phone, red and black wiring – and put them in her purse.

Later, CCTV caught him by borrowing a tape from the reception desk of the aviation security offices.

The Crown said it was when he was assembling the fake bomb, and that there was a locked room in the building that he could have used.

Soon after, Maid was caught on video making an unscheduled trip to the parking lot.

It was then, prosecutors said, that he stowed the laptop bag containing the copycat explosive device in the car that he knew he would use later to conduct a perimeter patrol of the airport facility.

During that assignment, Maid radioed her boss referring to “foreign object debris” she had seen through binoculars next to a cabin at the north end of the runway.

The Crown said at the time that there was nothing there: Maid simply wanted permission to approach the structure.

Parked a few feet away, Maid slipped the bag from the rear of the vehicle into the niche of the cabin and reported the find to her superiors.

Despite apparent concerns that the article was a bomb, the defendant allowed New Zealand Fire and Emergency personnel to approach.

There was an obvious reason for that, Smith told the jury.

“He knows it’s not a bomb at all, he put it there.”

Once the item was neutralized, it became clear that the parts inside the laptop bag came from the airport.

It was an inside job.

And strangely, the fake bomb came with a handwritten note.

“A: Alpha, B: Birds, C: Shock, D: Dunedin, E: Emergency, F: Fools,” it read.

That writing was compared to a sample from Maid’s and the similarities were clear.

A forensic document examiner gave evidence that she was convinced that the defendant had written the note.

So why did Maid do it?

Smith said it could have been that the disgruntled worker really wanted to draw attention to safety issues that he felt needed to be addressed.

His five calls to the media within half an hour of ending his shift on March 17 showed that he was eager to push the issue forward.

But there may be another reason.

“It would get more work, more hours and more pay,” Smith said. “Young man, young family, baby on the way.”

The charge of leaving a copycat explosive device in an area of ​​the airport with reinforced security carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

Maid will request bail tomorrow before sentencing next year.