Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Denver woman's sexual assault complaint over ETD-alarm patdown being investigated

Denver woman's sexual assault complaint over ETD-alarm patdown being investigated

Old Jan 17, 2014, 10:48 am
  #31  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
It would appear that the 1,000+ comments to the linked article have been removed from the website. Could it be the hand of the TSA at work because opinions were running against them?
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 11:21 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 729
Originally Posted by studentff
Woman was accompanying 13-year-old daughter to gate and apparently alarmed ETD. Denver police claim to be treating it as an active investigation...
I am guessing the daughter was the only witness.
Schmurrr is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 11:42 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: DEN, or so it says...
Programs: UA1K/RCC, Avis CHM, NWA Plat, SPG Plat
Posts: 2,885
Let's add another data point...
How many terrorists or people with evil intentions have been caught by this procedure?
dimramon is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 4:33 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
There is no way that the TSA can prove he/she not got aroused. Like they are going to confess to that.
Sick world. No wonder the tourist board in USA have problems getting tourists here.
To me is a sexual insult if I dont say it is ok.so a lot of perverts to me. I am pretty sure that they dont their kids or mothers and so on to be touched.
tanja is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 7:54 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
Originally Posted by Spiff
If someone walks down the street and gropes someone else, it's still sexual assault even if there is no intent on arousal. In fact, arousal is often absent in sexual assault cases - it's frequently about criminally exercising dominance over the other party - prisons are unfortunately an excellent example.

"I am going to be sexually assaulting you or you will not fly." Real nice. Consent under duress is not consent.
(4) "Sexual contact" means the knowing touching of the victim's intimate parts by the actor, or of the actor's intimate parts by the victim, or the knowing touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's or actor's intimate parts if that sexual contact is for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.

(5) "Sexual intrusion" means any intrusion, however slight, by any object or any part of a person's body, except the mouth, tongue, or penis, into the genital or anal opening of another person's body if that sexual intrusion can reasonably be construed as being for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.
eyecue is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 8:05 pm
  #36  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,952
Originally Posted by eyecue
(4) "Sexual contact" means the knowing touching of the victim's intimate parts by the actor, or of the actor's intimate parts by the victim, or the knowing touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's or actor's intimate parts if that sexual contact is for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.

(5) "Sexual intrusion" means any intrusion, however slight, by any object or any part of a person's body, except the mouth, tongue, or penis, into the genital or anal opening of another person's body if that sexual intrusion can reasonably be construed as being for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.
Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

- US DOJ

Consent under duress is not consent.
Spiff is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 8:07 pm
  #37  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
Originally Posted by eyecue
(4) "Sexual contact" means the knowing touching of the victim's intimate parts by the actor, or of the actor's intimate parts by the victim, or the knowing touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's or actor's intimate parts if that sexual contact is for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.

(5) "Sexual intrusion" means any intrusion, however slight, by any object or any part of a person's body, except the mouth, tongue, or penis, into the genital or anal opening of another person's body if that sexual intrusion can reasonably be construed as being for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.
Do you want to take a guess at how many of the people here commenting on your inaccurate statements of law are, unlike you, lawyers?
SeriouslyLost is offline  
Old Jan 17, 2014, 8:21 pm
  #38  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,401
Originally Posted by tanja
There is no way that the TSA can prove he/she not got aroused. Like they are going to confess to that.
Sick world. No wonder the tourist board in USA have problems getting tourists here.
To me is a sexual insult if I dont say it is ok.so a lot of perverts to me. I am pretty sure that they dont their kids or mothers and so on to be touched.
Besides, sexual assault is far more about power than sex.

Retaliatory screenings are about power. Thus a retaliatory screening that touches the genitals is sexual assault in my book.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 5:03 am
  #39  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by SeriouslyLost
How does what you did sit with the body of law around administrative searches? You explained to them that you have no real powers of search or detention and that you are limited to looking for WEI? You were able to clearly articulate the reasons you felt the 14 year old was an actual risk to aviation? You were able to explain that despite the abject failure rate of TSA to detect explosives from terrorists (100% failure so far) that you thought you actually had a lawful reason that you could articulate to conduct that search? Because unless you covered all those points you committed assault, unlawful detention/kidnapping, and sexual violation.

"I was just following procedure/orders" is not an excuse. "He failed the swab" is also arguably not in and of itself a viable reason: TSA would have to demonstrate that they have an identifiable & tangible risk because the history of previous swabs and subsequent searches demonstrates no risk.
Further, aren't airport administrative searches to be done in public for all the world to see?

~~

"Moreover, the possibility for abuse is minimized
by the public nature of the search. Unlike searches conducted on dark and lonely streets at night where often the officer and the subject are the only witnesses, these searches are made under supervision and not far from the scrutiny of the traveling public."

See United States v. Skipwith, 482 F.2d 1272, 1275 (5th Cir. 1973).

Last edited by petaluma1; Jan 18, 2014 at 6:09 am Reason: to add citation
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 5:17 am
  #40  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,504
Originally Posted by eyecue
I have said this several times in here, In order for it to be a crime, there has to be INTENT to arouse either the victim or the suspect.
Care to cite a statute or case that supports the above interpretation?
halls120 is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 5:43 am
  #41  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
Originally Posted by SeriouslyLost
Do you want to take a guess at how many of the people here commenting on your inaccurate statements of law are, unlike you, lawyers?
Yep. It's why I decided to just pop some popcorn and enjoy the show.
InkUnderNails is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 10:25 am
  #42  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: LGA, JFK
Posts: 1,018
Originally Posted by eyecue
(4) "Sexual contact" means the knowing touching of the victim's intimate parts by the actor, or of the actor's intimate parts by the victim, or the knowing touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's or actor's intimate parts if that sexual contact is for the purposes of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse.

...
No, as Caradoc already pointed out and quoted, from 10 USC 920(g):

(2) Sexual contact.— The term “sexual contact” means—
(A) touching, or causing another person to touch, either directly or through the clothing, the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, or degrade any person; or
(B) any touching, or causing another person to touch, either directly or through the clothing, any body part of any person, if done with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.
Where did your "(4)" come from? Your inner thigh?
GaryD is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 11:07 am
  #43  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by GaryD
Where did your "(4)" come from? Your inner thigh?
A brief Internet search suggests that the definitions eyecue cite come from Colorado state law (C.R.S. 18-3-401 (2012)).
jkhuggins is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 2:53 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
Originally Posted by halls120
Care to cite a statute or case that supports the above interpretation?
Damn halls you're right on him ^ he just doesn't get it.

Last edited by coachrowsey; Jan 18, 2014 at 2:53 pm Reason: typo
coachrowsey is offline  
Old Jan 18, 2014, 5:22 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SEA
Programs: Delta TDK(or care)WIA, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,869
Originally Posted by coachrowsey
Damn halls you're right on him ^ he just doesn't get it.
He cited a statute, but it undermines his interpretation.
Carl Johnson is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.