I understand your skepticism. In our society today, it's not unheard of that the people who work under the public trust will abuse that trust by covering up mistakes or even abuses. While it's naive to assume that everyone is trustworthy, even those who have undergone the scrutiny of a background investigation, it's just as naive to assume that no one has the integrity and strength of moral character to do the right thing.

In this specific situation, a good leader will evaluate the circumstances to determine whether or not the screener acted in good faith even though significantly deviating from screening protocol or if the screener deliberately intended to humiliate the passenger. Also have to consider any history of similar complaints or documented trends which will influence whether or not this was simply a well-intentioned but poorly executed mistake or if this particular screener is deliberately abusing the public trust. I'm sure you would agree that due process, credible evidence and even-tempered justice applies to screeners just as it would anyone else.

No doubt there's a serious problem here that needs the FSD's full attention. I hope that the passenger initiates the complaint process to at least correct whatever misperception exists at that particular checkpoint and at most, if there is an abusive screener there, to either discipline or terminate that screener, depending on what the evidence reveals. I would hope that you're wrong that there would be a cover-up, but we've already experienced such things in our lifetimes in the White House, so it's an ugly reality that we're forced to deal with.