Originally Posted by
T-the-B
I tend to agree with SATTSO that some of the proposals here sound a little harsh.
I'd like to try another tack if SATTSO is willing.
Assuming that the OP gave an accurate account of the events we have the following:
1. TSA screeners approach person on the non-sterile part of the airport while said person is engaged in perfectly legal activity. The screener questions the person about his activity and requests him to present identification.
2. Upon being rebuffed, screeners call LEOs. We don't know exactly what they report but it is sufficient to make the LEOs decide a response is necessary.
3. LEOs detain, question and search the person, seizing his property, despite his having broken no law and in the absence of any reasonable, articulable suspicion that he had or was about to commit a crime.
4. TSA screeners remain in the area and coordinate with the LEOs during the detention, search, questioning and seizure.
SATTSO has argued, quite persuasively, that much of the proposed punishments for this behavior is extreme and disproportional. I would appreciate hearing from SATTSO as to what punishment would be appropriate for both the TSA screeners and the LEOs.
There seems to be some confusion about what I have post - I think. I have not yet resonded to what punishment such BDOs and LEO's should receive, if they have indeed violated any laws or codes of ethics. I have ONLY responded that the families of such LEOs should NEVER be punished, as that is not what a democracy is about, to put bluntly.
But I will address you question, and first note the following. Your points:
2. Upon being rebuffed, screeners call LEOs. We don't know exactly what they report but it is sufficient to make the LEOs decide a response is necessary.
3. LEOs detain, question and search the person, seizing his property, despite his having broken no law and in the absence of any reasonable, articulable suspicion that he had or was about to commit a crime.
What did the BDO's in your story tell the LEOs? Did they present to the LEO's "articulable suspicion" as to why the person should be questioned? And, honestly, what exactly is "articulable suspicion"? Is it one standard that everyone must apply, with no room for subjective interpertation, or is is a fluid concept?
Now to answer you question:
If the BDO's lied, they should be fired, and brought up on charges of giving false statements. And if that is true, I am sure the BDO's are then targets for civil suits, which they deserve, if they lied.
If the LEO's were lied to by the BDO's, did they fulfil their job in "good faith"? This would not be the first time that LEO's have been lied to by someone so that another person is arrested and put through that misery.
If the BDO's did not lie, and the LEOs conducted the interrogation of their own will - I really do not have an answer. You may not like it, but honestly, I do not know what authority LEO's have and do not have to conduct such an "interview" (to put the term mildly). And if the BDO's did not lie, I do not think they should be punished.
However, if the LEOs did violate clear law, they should be charged with whatever crime that is, and dismissed from the force. And of course, be the subject of civil action as well. But no, their children should not be "castrated", as one fool suggest, nor should their families be ostracized, as another person suggest.
Hope that answers your questions.