Originally Posted by tom911
Well, let's look at the California law on sexual battery. Are the elements all there? Might be a longshot.
Originally Posted by PC
(a) Any person who touches an intimate part of another person while that person is unlawfully restrained by the accused or an accomplice, and if the touching is against the will of the person touched and is for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse, is guilty of sexual battery. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, and by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000); or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, and by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
Bolding Above is Mine
I don't even think it's a long shot -- it just doesn't meet the criteria as defined under CA 243.4 PC, IMHO.
The way I read it four things must occur:
First you need the battery;
Secondly the victim needs to be unlawfully restrained;
Third it must be against the will of the person;
Forth, and last, it must be for sexual gratification of the perp.
During an enhanced pat down, based on accounts of others who have been thru the procedure, it could be said the touching occurs -- it could also be said it is against the will of the person, but the passenger is not unlawfully restrained and last, I sincerely doubt your average TSO is doing it for sexual gratification.
I do believe the enhanced patdown using the front of the hand goes too for passenger screening. IMHO, it goes beyond the scope of a minimally invasive Administrative Search for WEI when other, less invasive technologies exist -- specifically ETD.
The TSA is a bloated, make-work government agency; it's time to reign in big government. After the first of the year I'll be able to write my new senator on the issue (Rand Paul, R-KY) -- I can't say that I see eye to eye with the new Senator from Kentucky, but it'll certainly be interesting to see where Paul stands on this.