Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
An Infuriating Search At PHL  
User currently offlineTUNisia From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1844 posts, RR: 5
Posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10708 times:

Daniel Rubin: An infuriating search at Philadelphia International Airport

By Daniel Rubin
Inquirer Columnist

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20...ernational_Airport.html?page=1&c=y

At what point does an airport search step over the line?

How about when they start going through your checks, and the police call your husband, suspicious you were clearing out the bank account?

That's the complaint leveled by Kathy Parker, a 43-year-old Elkton, Md., woman, who was flying out of Philadelphia International Airport on Aug. 8.


Someday the sun will shine down on me in some faraway place - Mahalia Jackson
83 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePlainplane From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 844 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10663 times:

Yes, that is definitely well over the line. I can just sense that a lawsuit will be pending soon.

User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10658 times:

If this story is basically true, TSA and the police have got to out of their minds to do this to anyone.

TSA needs to be concerned about making passengers safe on airplanes, not this B.S.

Departmental action needs to be taken with all of the officers involved in this.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23022 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10617 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 2):
Departmental action needs to be taken with all of the officers involved in this.

What did the police do wrong? They answered the call, determined nothing was amiss, and permitted her to board her flight.

I can certainly see your point with respect to the involved TSA screeners, but not with respect to the police.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4990 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10595 times:

Quoting Plainplane (Reply 1):
I can just sense that a lawsuit will be pending soon.


And ... in this case, it would actually be justified.
TSA needs to be accountable for their actions.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10530 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
What did the police do wrong? They answered the call, determined nothing was amiss, and permitted her to board her flight.

Hmmmmm?

Two Philadelphia police officers joined at least four TSA officers who had gathered around her. After conferring with the TSA screeners, one of the Philadelphia officers told her he was there because her checks were numbered sequentially, which she says they were not.....

She protested when the officer started to walk away with the checks. "That's my money," she remembers saying. The officer's reply? "It's not your money.".....

"The police officer said if you don't tell me, you can tell the D.A."....


Kind of an illegal search and seizure maybe?


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3704 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10429 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This kind of crap is why I have as much respect for the TSA as I do for the carnie running the Tilt-A-Whirl. They need to focus on security, not trying to earn their junior detective badge from Inspector Gadget.


Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7613 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10329 times:

The cheques in my book are sequential, so what?.

Perhaps she should have spoken to the DA.


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10311 times:

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 7):
Perhaps she should have spoken to the DA.

Oh yes, and there she could get implicated in the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa as well.....  


User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10194 times:

If I may play devil's advocate for a second:

Frankly, I don't see the problem with this incident, based on the limited information we have.

It seems to me that the TSA pulls passengers aside not only based on preliminary screening, but sometimes also without any motivation beyond giving thourough searches to random individials as part of their protocol to create a disincentive to those who might be up to no good. It's very much part of their protocol that all passengers are subject to search, and some WILL be searched, regardless or racial profiling, or how old they are, or whether they are pushing a stroller, or how busy the TSA is, or how late the passenger is, or anything else.

I recall that I was boarding an A/C in France, flying business class, but since I was first to the jet way I was pulled aside by one of two security personnel who were set up there with little tables, and my carry-on was subjected to a very thorough search right there in front of everyone, as they breezed past me to board, and I was questioned. It was VERY annoying and a little embarrassing, but I had to accept that the randomness of the search, long after I had been through security, is part or their overall protocol - and frankly I like it that way.

I've also witnessed in YYZ a very belligerent and rather frightened older Quebecois woman demand why she was being "harassed," and asked "Why are you upsetting me like this?" when subjected to a more through search by extremely patient and professional Canadian security agent. Passengers may assume that they are being persecuted or that something has aroused the screener's suspicion, but that is not necessarily the case, nor should it be. If, on the other hand, the screeners were to do reverse profiling by being more lenient on any particular type of traveler - then THAT'S the type of person who would be recruited by the bad guys... Also, if they actively screen anyone more thoroughly without obvious cause, then they can't be accused of racial profiling no matter WHO they search without obvious cause.

We don't know whether the checks written to this woman to her were sequential. We don't know how belligerent she was or what her body language was. We don't know if the police officer said it was "not her money," or what he may have meant by that. The police officer may very well have been obnoxious, and some of the TSA agents at that station may need more training; but it's hard to really know what happened based on that article. We don't know if this woman is a publicity hound and is looking for her "15 minutes."

I realize that in these pages there is a lot of contempt for TSA and other security organizations around the world. The debate rages on how effective they are. But I think a great deal of our animosity stems from the fact that at security, we lose some of our autonomy and dignity; we lose our domain over our bodies and our property to a certain extent. We lose authority over ourselves and we often see no rhyme or reason to the process. "OH, we HAVE to take our shoes off this time?," or "Oh, we DON'T have to take our shoes off?" "What, this bottle of creme can't go in my carry on? But they accepted it the last 3 times I flew!" I think the rules and protocols SHOULD keep us guessing, because then they keep the bad guys guessing as well.

What I hate is the long line for security - and that they need more staff (it's a money thing, I'm sure) - but once I get to the screeners, I'm glad they are there, in this day and age. As imperfect as the system may be, it's better than if they were NOT there.

So - I'm not jumping to any conclusions on this one.

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 7):
The cheques in my book are sequential, so what?.

No, the cheques WRITTEN TO her were alleged to be sequential. That could point to those checks being forgeries, also called "embezzlement." Certain crimes are worse when you cross state lines.

[Edited 2010-08-21 09:11:24]

[Edited 2010-08-21 09:12:48]


I come in peace
User currently offlineyvphx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10176 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):

The police called her husband and suspected she was going to file for divorce. That is not for the police officer to determine. If she was going to drain the bank account and run away to North Carolina, thats her business and not for the police officers, who are there to protect people for wrong doings. Last I checked, divorce was legal and so was carrying checks.

This kind of crap with the TSA stops. The TSA are there to protect the safe travel of others, not to ask if a diet pill works or not.


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7613 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10108 times:

I am a little surprised that the cheques were sequential, but given that many people only rarely use a cheque then this is probably more common than you think.

Personally, I am surprised that she did not bank them locally.

I am not clear why her having these cheques is a TSA issue anyway. Surely they should be concentrating on Security rather than wider Police issues.

As for the apparently random selection, I would like to think that this is deliberate. However, having read numerous responses from "across the pond" from those more aquainted with the TSA, I have my doubts.


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10100 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):
I realize that in these pages there is a lot of contempt for TSA and other security organizations around the world.

I am going to be pleasantly disagreeable with you here and state that it is only the willingly incompetent or corrupt of those that we have contempt for, the majority of them are wonderful, hard working professional individuals and do their best each and every day to do a difficult job. At least that's my outlook.

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):

No, the cheques WRITTEN TO her were alleged to be sequential. That could point to those checks being forgeries, also called "embezzlement." Certain crimes are worse when you cross state lines.

It doesn't matter. If the checks pose no harm to transportation, the checks are no concern to the TSA officers. End of story.

[Edited 2010-08-21 09:43:57]

User currently offlineMacsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10091 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting yvphx (Reply 10):
This kind of crap with the TSA stops. The TSA are there to protect the safe travel of others, not to ask if a diet pill works or not.

The TSA needs to be taught what the phrase "Unreasonable search and seizure" means and that, at least in the USA, we are supposed to be protected against such actions being conducted by the government.

The TSA is there to ensure the safety of the air transport system, not to be a junior detective.

This incident is cleraly WAY over the line of reasonableness IMHO.



Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6664 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10062 times:

She works at a bank and was traveling for work, so either it was quicker/easier for her to bank them after the trip, or banking them at the HQ would "make the money move quicker". Or maybe be cheaper if there's a fee on that.

Now about the whole issue, my take is that security before boarding is necessary, even if that means my bags are checked every time (they are, because I'm always traveling with cables and electronics and computer stuff), however it should only be about A/C security and obvious grave crimes (packs of drugs, guns, etc.). There was no reason for that woman's wallet to be checked, and the TSA agent who asked about the diet pills shouldn't have, either.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9992 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 12):
I am going to be pleasantly disagreeable with you here and state that it is only the willingly incompetent or corrupt of those that we have contempt for, the majority of them are wonderful, hard working professional individuals and do their best each and every day to do a difficult job. At least that's my outlook.

I agree with your outlook. I find, though, that there are A-Netters who attempt to categorically discredit the entire TSA as incompetent, and allege that their overall mandate to insure security is fatally flawed. Who knows, by the way, if the question about the diet pills was a further investigation into this woman's demeanor, or was the agent simply inappropriate...? We just weren't there.

Quoting point2point (Reply 12):
End of story.

Without knowing why the police became involved, or more details about this incident, I'd like to know more about how/why this escalated before I would consider it a case-closed situation, or not worthy of further discussion.



I come in peace
User currently offlineexFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9991 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
What did the police do wrong? They answered the call, determined nothing was amiss, and permitted her to board her flight.

They looked at the checks. That, in and of itself, is wrong...police officers on the beat at an airport are not charged with prevention of embezzlement, nor are they trained in how to detect it.

The officers should be disciplined, and all TSA employees involved should be terminated.

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):
It's very much part of their protocol that all passengers are subject to search, and some WILL be searched, regardless or racial profiling, or how old they are, or whether they are pushing a stroller, or how busy the TSA is, or how late the passenger is, or anything else.

The search had nothing to do with the security of the plane, the airport, or fellow passengers. TSA's remit - and that of airport police, for that matter - is the security of the airport and the airplanes. These TSA agents, and then the airport police, were on a fishing expedition through her personal papers that had nothing to do with that mission.


User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10431 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9977 times:

The TSA's "behavior specialist" should realize some people get nervous when questioned, even if they've done nothing wrong.

This whole incident is just wrong and what it does is make the public wary of those TSA officers that are out there that do a great job, every day. I'd be willing to bet that they're in the majority, but you never hear about that because most of the times, the screwed up actions of a few officers is all that makes the media.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3299 posts, RR: 44
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9977 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):

We don't know whether the checks written to this woman to her were sequential.

l
l
v

Quoting point2point (Reply 12):

It doesn't matter. If the checks pose no harm to transportation, the checks are no concern to the TSA officers. End of story.

  

TSA continues to show their incompetence.

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10431 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9935 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 15):
Without knowing why the police became involved, or more details about this incident, I'd like to know more about how/why this escalated before I would consider it a case-closed situation, or not worthy of further discussion.

Read page two of the article and it will explain (lame) why the police got involved. Also they called her husband and he set them straight. That should be "end of story, case closed".



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9849 times:

I'm sorry if there may be some misinterpretation here, so if I may clarify.

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 15):
Without knowing why the police became involved, or more details about this incident, I'd like to know more about how/why this escalated before I would consider it a case-closed situation, or not worthy of further discussion.

This is no attempt to put any end of the discussion here about this, only a conclusion of the facts as they are presented to us here.

This is worthy of further discussion and investigation, and I certainly would expect both TSA management and whoever is in charge of the Philadelphia police to investigate this matter, and do an honest and thorough job with that.

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 15):
Who knows, by the way, if the question about the diet pills was a further investigation into this woman's demeanor, or was the agent simply inappropriate...? We just weren't there.

No, none of us were there, and who knows really as to what happened how. I can only comment on the article - whether it's all true, or all false, or somewhere in between. In my mind they are the facts of what we are discussing. And no, I don't take everything that I read as gospel, but this article is all that we have as any fact here.

With that, from the article:

The new TSA directive reads: "Screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security." If evidence of a crime is discovered, then TSA agents are instructed to contact the appropriate law enforcement agency.

Now, I'm going to assume this as fact, and the legalities of it are all in order. This is also pretty consistent with U.S. constitutional search and seizure laws, so nothing is raising any alarm bells for me. If anyone feels any different here, I'm all ears....

Now as I read this, the fact that the TSA officers are even handling this lady's checkbook is already illegal on the part of the TSA officers. I don't think anyone here can honestly argue that this checkbook is any threat to transportation.

Okay, they called the Philadelphia police. The officers who arrived, if properly trained, needed to have asked " Is there a crime being committed?" And the only crime that could be committed in this situation is posing a threat to transportation. Once the TSA mentioned 'checkbook' to the police officers, it needed to have been their job to inform the TSA officers that no crime is being committed, and they cannot get involved. They did not do this, and as such, continued with the illegality of the TSA officers. All the other details, such as how this escalated, or if the lady appeared nervous, or what state laws cover what sequence checks are in, at present I find irrelevant to the facts presented. They may be interesting, and we may all learn something new. but none of them excuse the behavior of the TSA and police officers. And some important information about these may result with an investigation by the proper managers so that this sort of incident doesn't happen again.

Again, I base all of this on the article, and in my mind, the TSA officers and the Philadelphia police officers acted illegally, and without any attempt to squelch this conversation, this in my mind is a case closed situation, the end of the story. As new facts come to light with this and they are different, then I may revise my thinking. But as such, the TSA officers, at present, if these are the facts, need to be disciplined, as do the police. And this lady has a strong basis for a lawsuit, as her search and seizure rights were violated.

Personally, I am interested in furthering this discussion, and anyone obviously is free to post as they think.  

[Edited 2010-08-21 11:14:16]

User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9774 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
What did the police do wrong?

There was absolutely no probable cause for the cop to seize her checkbook. The TSA agents had no legal right to look in it, and they are not trained to detect "embezzlement". The minute they opened it up, and saw there was no threat on it to aviation security, their jurisdiction ended. Reading the checks was a violation of the 4th Amendment, and any evidence gleaned from them is considered "fruit of a poisonous tree".

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):
The debate rages on how effective they are.

There is no debate. Countless studies and tests have shown a 25% hit on contraband.

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 11):
I am not clear why her having these cheques is a TSA issue anyway.

It's not.

Quoting point2point (Reply 12):
the majority of them are wonderful, hard working professional individuals and do their best each and every day to do a difficult job.

The majority of them are Average Joes. They're not better or worse than anyone else.

But the system itself is just plain bad.

Quoting mayor (Reply 17):
The TSA's "behavior specialist" should realize some people get nervous when questioned, even if they've done nothing wrong.

There's different types of nervous. The best way to tell which kind is to be upfront: "Why are you so nervous?", and then watch their body language as they respond.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offline777way From Pakistan, joined Dec 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9751 times:

Hope to find she walks as a millionairess out of this.

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9737 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 9):
No, the cheques WRITTEN TO her were alleged to be sequential. That could point to those checks being forgeries, also called "embezzlement."

It can equally point to nothing of the sort as there could be various reasons why. Can you enlighten me as to why, in your opinion, such could point to forgery (and which, btw, is not also called embezzlement) as opposed to any other reason?


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9689 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 21):

There was absolutely no probable cause for the cop to seize her checkbook. The TSA agents had no legal right to look in it, and they are not trained to detect "embezzlement". The minute they opened it up, and saw there was no threat on it to aviation security, their jurisdiction ended. Reading the checks was a violation of the 4th Amendment, and any evidence gleaned from them is considered "fruit of a poisonous tree".

Good point!

Let's throw out a HYPOTHETICAL here and assume that this lady was an embezzler, and she just committed the biggest crime of the century, and she embezzled a gazzilion dollars from everyone in sight.

You think that the TSA are heroes because they broke this case? Think again, because she gets a good attorney, the attorney gets this evidence suppressed because of an illegal search and seizure, and more than likely in this case this lady would walk free.

So all TSA would have done is bungle up everything.

[Edited 2010-08-21 12:21:35]

25 Cubsrule : I'd like to see some law to back up that assertion - it is quite a lot more difficult to violate the 4th Amendment in an airport than on the street.
26 Post contains images stasisLAX : Illegal search and seizure. Taxpayers will pay millions to this woman to settle this case. The Philadelphia policemen and TSA "screeners" and supervis
27 point2point : Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unrea
28 Cubsrule : We can agree, I think, that the search was reasonable. TSA obviously has the right to search anyone in the secure area at any time for any reason. Th
29 us330 : The numbers aren't a threat--but the potential paper cuts sure are. What's up with Philly's tsa? Isn't that where someone planted a bag of cocaine on
30 LTC8K6 : I bet a dollar that the checks were not numbered sequentially, as she said, and that the TSA agent simply couldn't read or count.
31 EASTERN : I've had some very annoying encounters with the TSA at PHL, even as an airline employee. It seems like it can be quite a trying experience there at ti
32 Maverick623 : Not necessarily. But because TSA agents are agents of the government, their search and seizure powers are absolutely limited by the 4th. The law allo
33 chrisair : Wasn't PHL the airport where a TSO planted a bag of white powder in a college student's bag as a "joke?" Wasn't PHL where a student was arrested for h
34 point2point : You again? I think you like to bust my chops, Cubsrule. That's okay, I like you too, so... Anyway, I was going to start this big whole thing for you,
35 SSTsomeday : A fair, articulate and well balanced post. Thanks for the clarification. I have a few questions: 1) Regarding the checkbook, what about the "looking
36 BlueFlyer : I for one sees no fault in the TSA agent here. If they are indeed looking for razor blades, opening her checkbook seems reasonable enough, you could h
37 checksixx : Reasonable Suspicion - No Probable Cause - Of course not, see above The minute the legal search went into her checkbook, it became illegal as no crime
38 AFGMEL : Unbelievable the justifications people have for allowing themselves to live in a police state. If somebody clears out a joint account it's a civil mat
39 United_fan : I would be seriously pissed too. TSA's job does not have anything to do with checkbooks or embezling or divorces. They are there to make sure people d
40 Kaiarahi : I beg to differ. 4th amendment case law is complex and very nuanced. (BTW, I used to be a constitutional law professor) I have a couple of residentia
41 Aesma : And that's legal ?
42 mayor : IIRC, later in the article, the police stated that the check were numbered "almost" sequentially. That does seem to change things, doesn't it?
43 Kaiarahi : I wouldn't be doing it otherwise. It's not unusual for residential properties - saves you having to go and collect the rent each month. No real risk
44 usa330300 : If you are too outraged by the actions of the Philadelphia PD, please call the PHL airport police and let them know your disgust with this situation.
45 Cubsrule : They didn't need probable cause to look at the checks (there could have been razor blades in the checkbook). The checks themselves created the probab
46 Maverick623 : Indeed it is. The amount of cases that have given rise to the current definitions is staggering. I learn new things all the time about it. However, I
47 Cubsrule : No she didn't - nor did they have to let her fly. TSA has leverage that other agencies do not. It's distasteful, but the fact that something is dista
48 Crewchief : A man with bloody women's jewelry and blood-soaked clothing can reasonably be expected to pose a physical threat. Someone with sequentially numbered
49 Cubsrule : OK - deny him boarding. But calling the police on him is the same as calling the police on this woman, in my estimation. No, because they'd be asking
50 Maverick623 : For having sequentially numbered checks? Wow. Which I had previously stated... but it still doesn't make it right (or even Constitutional). Comparing
51 LTC8K6 : I would think that if the TSA agent thought he'd find razor blades when the metal detector didn't, then they need a new metal detector...
52 Cubsrule : For purposes of constitutional analysis, what's the difference? Neither one is TSA's business. As far as the Constituttion is concerned, TSA can reje
53 nwadeicer : Just a couple of questions. How long did the search last? I would assume that the search had to last at least a couple of hours. If they were searchin
54 Cubsrule : In a lot of states, when a party files for divorce, an automatic injunction against (among other things) wrongful depletion of marital property issue
55 jerseyguy : Sure, they can. FOR A FEE. Why would I write a years worth of rent checks/cheques? So I don't have to walk over to the management office or super's a
56 Crewchief : Actually, they would not be investigating a crime, because no crime is reported and they have no basis to believe a crime occurred. Just the same as
57 nwadeicer : Your post may be absolutely on mark, but again, the numerical checks have absolutely no relation to aviation security. Again, why was the TSA agent l
58 Maverick623 : I'd like for you to show me anything that even remotely comes close to allowing TSA to do that. During an administrative search, if TSA comes across
59 Cubsrule : I don't think that's what a court would say about it. A court would probably say that a denial has to pass rational basis. But almost everything pass
60 ltbewr : Perhaps they were told to look out for a person of her description who may be subject to a criminial investigation involving transfers of money, fraud
61 Maverick623 : That's not what I asked. I asked you to provide evidence that TSA has the right to refuse travel at any time for any reason. (Hint: You won't find it
62 babybus : Obviously we have to take her account with a good pinch of salt. That's not to say it didn't happen as she reported. I personally know that UK immigra
63 frmrCapCadet : This is called in logic, "begging the question". And in a way one can not argue, you think it was reasonable. Most of us suspect that courts will fin
64 Cubsrule : No one is going to say that. But has a court ever told TSA that they wrongfully refused to let someone travel? I think you missed the other half of m
65 Maverick623 : Never gonna happen. So I don't even consider it a possibility that I could be for or against. Irrelevant. The checks were seized, without permission
66 BlueFlyer : To turn the question around, is there a finite list of reasons TSA is entitled to deny travel for? How is that sick? Isn't it how El Al security oper
67 Cubsrule : The length of the seizure is absolutely relevant to any constitutional analysis. You don't need probable cause to do a Terry stop, for instance. I di
68 exFATboy : And the TSA agent was on the wrong side of that line the moment he even looked at the checks. A piece of paper is not dangerous to air travel, period
69 Cubsrule : Based on the circumstantial evidence we have here (e.g. the diet pills comment), I think the TSA agent was probably in the wrong, but I can't agree w
70 SSTsomeday : That would be non-nonsensical. EVERYBODY has a checkbook with their own sequential checks. I think it's understood that these were checks written to
71 Maverick623 : 10 bucks says her wallet was in her purse, which would've had to go through the x-ray. And razor blades are among the hardest of items to spot, espec
72 SSTsomeday : I can't believe you actually wrote this... Forgive me - but now I have to assume that you are coming from a very dug-in, subjective point of view, ob
73 exFATboy : An embezzler is no danger to the airplane or its passengers. You could be flying with any number of "criminals" on a given flight - embezzlers, tax e
74 Crewchief : I think we're all missing the point by talking about the checks and who did what. The bottom line for me, and many others, is that when you combine th
75 Cubsrule : We're on the same page here, though it's hard for me to articulate a line between "looking at" and "reading." Putting it a different way, I know that
76 Maverick623 : Um, excuse me. You are totally taking my words out of context. Given the option of someone bringing a razor or two onto an aircraft; or having my per
77 Cubsrule : When did I do that? Right - but you are seemingly arguing not only that the police should not have been called but that it was unconstitutional to do
78 exFATboy : I'll give it a shot - "looking at" is recognizing that it's a piece of paper, and thus harmless. The moment the TSA agent focuses on the paper enough
79 Maverick623 : I'll admit my anti-TSA bias got in the way in my initial posts. Hell, if I saw a bunch of checks in sequential order I wouldn't bat an eye. Maybe thi
80 Aesma : About the TSA agent spotting the sequential numbers without looking, I find that hard to believe. Spotting that they're checks, yeah, sure, and maybe
81 Kaiarahi : Even if they're post-dated?
82 Cubsrule : A Terry stop is a seizure (of a person) that does not require probable cause, isn't it? For most people, I'd buy that. But I know people (I'm one of
83 exFATboy : I agree - I'm an accountant (well, an unemployed one) and if I looked at pieces of paper shaped like checks, I'd probably notice the payee and the se
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Bomb Scare On US Airways Express At PHL Now posted Thu Jan 21 2010 06:23:04 by PHLJJS
Delays At PHL For Tommorrow posted Fri Nov 13 2009 15:11:44 by JerseyGuy
Congestion At PHL - What Can Be Done? posted Sat Oct 17 2009 07:54:48 by CODCA09
Why Was 23L Used For An Emergency Landing At MAN posted Tue Sep 29 2009 06:45:43 by ADB1
Airtran Changing Terminals At PHL? posted Wed Aug 19 2009 21:26:49 by PHLJJS
Aborted Takeoff At PHL 6/20 posted Sat Jun 20 2009 19:43:04 by Canyonblue17
Interesting Aircraft At PHL Today 17 Jun 09 posted Wed Jun 17 2009 14:46:08 by Sancho99504
AA At PHL Baggage Theft - "Hive Of Scum" posted Fri Apr 3 2009 11:18:40 by PlateMan
WestJet Emergency Landing At PHL posted Wed Mar 25 2009 21:13:54 by PHLJJS
Crew Of 5 Perishes In AN-12 Fire At Luxor posted Fri Feb 20 2009 01:13:07 by JohnKrist