I do believe in civic duty. The point that I was trying to make is that I don't think TSA has any special privileges in that regard, other than that there are a lot of vague and not-so vague requirements based on federal employment. For example, I am forbidden from engaging in conduct, even off-duty, that brings discredit to the service (I am not TSA, but another government division).

By duty, I am referring to a moral civic duty, not a concrete law, although some states and localities do require citizens to lend assitance rather than do nothing. There has been a lot of constitutional banter in this forum lately, and if we should have learned anything by now, it is that the citizens run this country. The police and other authorities are just a tool. It's because we've forgotten this that there is so much grief here.

I am not commenting on a specific instance. Something like adult porn can be a large gray area. I don't know for sure how legal it is in my area. Ditto for marijuana, and I would probably just ignore it. But what if that waiter sees a gun in that coat, and hears the guy bragging how he's the serial killer who's been killing the people at night just around the corner? What if it is child porn that he sees, and he even knows the kids -- local kids? What kind of business do you think your restaurant would have if it later came out that you ordered the waiter to not report that, and more people were killed or more kids abused?

The point I am making is that the TSA probably has an obligation as a federal employee, and a moral one, if he thinks he has witnessed evidence of a crime, especially a very serious one. And I would certainly think that such evidence would be admissable in court (as long as it would otherwise be admissable).

So to sum up, my comment was regarding the legality of such "found" evidence, and not a comment on any particular alleged crime.

SR