Originally Posted by
TSORon
13 years of experience in the field, graduation from a fully accredited Law Enforcement Academy, an Associates Degree in Criminal Justice. THAT qualifies me, but it does not certify me. Since I am no longer a sworn peace officer I am no longer certified. Qualified yes, certified and credentialed, no.
thanks for clearing this up. That wasn't all that hard, was it?
Originally Posted by
TSORon
More word games?
No. We do test them all, within the limits of our capabilities, but not all qualify as being suspicious.
Not word games, Ron, logic games.
A baggie of white powder could be cocaine, an explosive, or baby powder. You cannot tell by looking at them what they are. I'm assuming that you probably test them for WEI at the Ionscan. If they pass that test, you really have no other reason to alert a supervisor, correct?
Originally Posted by
TSORon
Yes, wrong, and no. Happy now, or are we going to play some more word games?
Let's see what we have here, Ron.
You admit that if you do not call a supervisor every time you encounter a suspicious item, you in fact are exercising your discretion.
when you exercise this discretion, you say you aren't conducting an administrative search beyond the scope of your authority. However, since you are only empowered and trained to search for WEI, if an unknown white powder tests negative for WEI, and you either don't let it go every time OR you always refer it to a supervisor, you are conducting a search which may be found to be outside the scope of your authority and expertise.
Remember what the Court said in Fofana, Ron?
“the evidence in this case shows that the extent of the search went beyond the permissible purpose of detecting weapons and explosives and was instead motivated by a desire to uncover contraband evidencing ordinary criminal wrongdoing. From their testimony at the suppression hearing it appeared that both [Transportation Security Agents] Mirow and Stroud considered Fofana to be suspicious based on the fact that he was carrying a large amount of cash, but that the “suspicion” was not based on a concern that he was a security risk.”
“Quite simply the Government failed to produce evidence from which this Court could conclude that the search of Fofana’s luggage was “no more extensive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives;” or that the search was confined in good faith to that purpose. As the Government bears the burden of establishing that a search was constitutional, that failure is outcome determinative and the Court must grant Fofana’s Motion to Suppress.”
Oh, and just because you were once a credentialed LEO, that doesn't mean you are a currently qualified LEO.