N965VJ

I suppose it's possible if someone is not a survivor of sexual abuse, they may feel that way.

Boggie Dog

Even better the complainant's lawyer stated SOP was correctly followed. That opens the door for discovery of the TSA SOP and pat down procedures. I'm betting TSA HQ isn't going to like that one little bit.

This TSA employee has brought a suit that could very well open up TSA procedures to public scrutiny.

mahohmei

This is what we call the Streisand Effect, from when Barbra Streisand wanted aerial pictures of her beach house off the Internet, and it backfired, generating far more publicity than if she had just kept her mouth shut.

bdschobel

Far, far more likely would be the judge throwing the case out because essential evidence cannot be obtained. The TSA isn't going to cooperate with this rogue employee's lawsuit. Not in a million years.

Bruce

JumboD

Maybe today that something new will be how to spell "every". Maybe it's enough that, from this thread, you learned that you and any of your colleagues that do what happened to this poor woman are rapists.

Fredd

If you're not a certified Freudian-trained psychiatrist, I'll ask you to kindly stop practicing without a license.

doober

What you apparently cannot (or do not want to) understand is that if this rub down happened the way Ms. Alkon states, penetration occurred and penetration is rape.

We are waiting for you to say that Ms. Alkon was lying.

Boggie Dog

I realize that but one can only hope. I think the defendent would prevail if this case was heard by a jury.

GoingAway

Is the TSO still employed by TSA?

gsoltso

The last I heard, yes, but don't quote me, I have been wrong already today.

loops

best answer yet thanks for your reply gsoltso! Any idea if your employee would encourage or discourage such an action ? Regarding the threat to sue of course...

gojirasan

Is there some measure of how deep penetration has to be to be considered rape? Would one angry inch be enough? Here are some arguments that I might use if I were a defense lawyer defending the rapist thedala magee.

1. It was done through clothes. If this were a defense then I would think that condoms would be a valid defense against rape. Or if the material matters then cotton condoms could be worn.

2. The depth of penetration was too shallow to qualify as rape. Well, where do we draw the line? 1 cm? 1 inch? 3 inches? Should only a full 10 inches qualify? Are only porn star sized men capable of rape? Should it depend on the size of the vulva? Maybe it should be measured by distance past the pubic bone and anything less should be considered mere sexual assault.

3. There was implicit consent. By arriving at the airport or at the checkpoint you have implicitly consented to sexual activity of some kind with the TSOs. By submitting to any kind of "patdown" you have doubly consented to have some form of sex with the TSO in order to get on the flight. Since the TSO will typically tell you that they are going to touch your 'resistance' or some other euphemism for your vagina it is even informed consent. Unless you want to argue that you don't know what the euphemisms meant (an excellent argument imo). Of course in this case I highly doubt the TSO specifically mentioned penetration of any depth was going to occur. Nevertheless, I suspect that if a DA did decide to prosecute a TSO for rape or sexual assault, this kind of defense would almost certainly be used.

4. TSASOP allows for penetration and TSASOP is the law. TSASOP carries the same weight as any government regulation. Rape is a state crime and TSASOP is federal law. Since federal law trumps state law even if it is rape it is legalized rape. Any state case would be thrown out by the feds because the TSO was just doing her job.

5. It is rape, but it is acceptable to protect us from terrorists and bad people in general. So it is allowed in the same way that 4th amendment exceptions are allowed by balancing the 'public good' with individual rights violations. It is finally brought before the supreme court and they rule that, although it meets the statutory definition of rape, it is constitutional because terrorists are very scary. So scary that the supreme court justices themselves have trouble sleeping at night.

6. Thedala is not a lesbian and even if she were she didn't find Amy attractive. Because she was not sexually aroused during the act of penetration it was not rape. As long as the TSO is not sexually aroused by the act nothing that they do can be interpreted as rape or sexual assault of any kind. She disliked the procedure as much as or perhaps more than Amy. She was just doing her job and was motivated solely by the desire to keep Amy and the rest of the passengers safe. She is a patriot who should be pitied and admired in equal measure for her willingness to undergo the extreme humiliation and revulsion of having to search another woman's vagina with her fingers. She hated every second of the procedure and was only motivated by love for her country. She should be given an award for bravery and sacrifice. Perhaps a purple heart?

RichardKenner

That gets nowhere. SOP is nothing more than a policy and procedures manual: it has no status as law or regulation.

bdschobel

I agree. A properly promulgated regulation has the force of law, but TSA policies are anything but properly promulgated! It's essentially the opposite. Already, one Federal circuit court of appeals has directed TSA to follow the Administrative Procedure Act when it issues rules.

Bruce

n4zhg

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/09/0...ou-pay-for-it/