TSA Officers Can Be Sued Over Baggage Search
Apr 20, 2014, 10:59 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 360
TSA Officers Can Be Sued Over Baggage Search
Not sure if this has been posted already - I may have missed it in which case my apologies.
Philadelphia PA April 19 2014 Officers of the Transportation Security Administration aren’t immune to Bivens actions, a federal judge has ruled in a case arising from the contentious search of a woman’s baggage at the Philadelphia airport. Although U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decided that the TSA officers who screen and inspect baggage at airports would be covered by sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act, he held that his dismissal of the FTCA claims wouldn’t bar the similar Bivens claims brought by the plaintiffs.
http://privateofficer.org/tsa-office...teofficer-com/
Philadelphia PA April 19 2014 Officers of the Transportation Security Administration aren’t immune to Bivens actions, a federal judge has ruled in a case arising from the contentious search of a woman’s baggage at the Philadelphia airport. Although U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decided that the TSA officers who screen and inspect baggage at airports would be covered by sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act, he held that his dismissal of the FTCA claims wouldn’t bar the similar Bivens claims brought by the plaintiffs.
http://privateofficer.org/tsa-office...teofficer-com/
Apr 20, 2014, 1:54 pm
#2
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
This is in the Pellegrino vs. TSA case. TSA lied in order to have Philadelphia police arrest her for complaining about her luggage being searched. Then they destroyed the video tape.
http://pellegrinovstsa.com/
The following is poorly written by Nadine Hays, the "applesauce lady":
http://tsa-abuse.blogspot.com/2010/0...irport_30.html
~~
Note that in the first link, pellegrinovstsa.com, in the document entitled TSA Destruction of Evidence, the attorney for the TSA states that the TSA is going to proceeds with levying a fine against Ms. Pellegrino regardless of the outcome of the criminal action, which TSA instituted and for which she was found not guilty. Shades of John Brennan. Actually worse, at least with Brennan they had video tape in the Pellegrino action is the TSA's word against Pellegrino's word. And the documents prove the TSA couldn't get their story straight.
“In this case, there is no possibility of duplicative litigation given the court’s lack of jurisdiction over the FTCA claims, nor is there any possibility of dual recovery by Pellegrino,” Joyner said. He referred to Nadine Pellegrino, who brought the suit after she had been the subject of an inspection at the Philadelphia airport that became increasingly combative as it went on. Directly following the incident, Pellegrino was charged with 10 criminal violations, including making terroristic threats, and she was found not guilty by a jury. She then filed these various claims against the TSA and its officers.
The following is poorly written by Nadine Hays, the "applesauce lady":
http://tsa-abuse.blogspot.com/2010/0...irport_30.html
~~
Note that in the first link, pellegrinovstsa.com, in the document entitled TSA Destruction of Evidence, the attorney for the TSA states that the TSA is going to proceeds with levying a fine against Ms. Pellegrino regardless of the outcome of the criminal action, which TSA instituted and for which she was found not guilty. Shades of John Brennan. Actually worse, at least with Brennan they had video tape in the Pellegrino action is the TSA's word against Pellegrino's word. And the documents prove the TSA couldn't get their story straight.
Last edited by petaluma1; Apr 20, 2014 at 2:56 pm
Apr 20, 2014, 2:09 pm
#3
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,952
Good. TSA employees should face both civil and criminal charges for their daily actions. "I was only following orders." is not a valid defense. Exceeding their authority should result in expensive judgments and lengthy prison sentences.
