Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID
#1726
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
It is not. The old copy was obtained via a FOIA request and doesn't say it was SSI.
Somebody postulated here that the form may only become SSI after being signed and I've heard a rumor to that effect as well.
Two possibilities: One is that the data on the form (the passenger's information) is what's SSI. That would make sense. The second is that it's the same stupid situation where the pat-down procedure is SSI but disclosed to every person being patted down.
If the completed form is SSI, how can they ask the pax to sign it?
If the process itself is SSI, not the incomplete or completed form, then why are they trying to hide the form under the guise of SSI?
#1727
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 331
It is not. The old copy was obtained via a FOIA request and doesn't say it was SSI.
Somebody postulated here that the form may only become SSI after being signed and I've heard a rumor to that effect as well.
Two possibilities: One is that the data on the form (the passenger's information) is what's SSI. That would make sense. The second is that it's the same stupid situation where the pat-down procedure is SSI but disclosed to every person being patted down.
Somebody postulated here that the form may only become SSI after being signed and I've heard a rumor to that effect as well.
Two possibilities: One is that the data on the form (the passenger's information) is what's SSI. That would make sense. The second is that it's the same stupid situation where the pat-down procedure is SSI but disclosed to every person being patted down.
I still believe the entire process is flawed and that the SSI designation, is their way of puffing up their chests without actually following a proper and recognized set of classifications.
I believe that at some point, early on, some of these "rules" might have been put in place in good faith ie don't disclose passenger's personal information to anyone other than the passenger, don't allow people to take pictures of the monitors because it's noone business what is in someone's bag aside from the owner and the screener, etc. But these common sense rules have now been perverted and are being used against the very people they were put in place to protect.
Sorry for the ramble. It's all more than just a bit frustrating.
#1728
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
I believe that at some point, early on, some of these "rules" might have been put in place in good faith ie don't disclose passenger's personal information to anyone other than the passenger, don't allow people to take pictures of the monitors because it's noone business what is in someone's bag aside from the owner and the screener, etc. But these common sense rules have now been perverted and are being used against the very people they were put in place to protect....
Bruce
#1729
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
Last edited by n4zhg; Feb 1, 2011 at 6:05 pm
#1730
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 331
Your focus on privacy considerations is interesting but not a concern I've ever heard from TSA personnel. Not ever. What they've said to me umpteen times is that SSI designations prevent "the terrorists" from defeating their spiffy safeguards. If the process is "secret" -- notwithstanding that it's shared with 67,000 cretins! -- then those pesky terrorists won't know what to do to get on planes. And we know that they keep trying, day after day. We know that, don't we?
Bruce
Bruce
A blank document is never going to bring down a plane....I know, shocking, isn't it?
#1731
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
Ok, the police officer may have misspoke or misremembered.
But taking all oddities that have come to light such as the officers belt recorder not working, Phil's camera memory being erased certainly would lead me to believe that something is rotten in ABQ.
May never be chargeable, still would watch my back in that place.
But taking all oddities that have come to light such as the officers belt recorder not working, Phil's camera memory being erased certainly would lead me to believe that something is rotten in ABQ.
May never be chargeable, still would watch my back in that place.
#1732
Join Date: Jun 2007
Programs: M&M, AA GLD, FB
Posts: 233
He has subsequently been able to recover them, and if I understood correctly, the video was used at the trial.
#1733
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Is the "unofficial locker" another threat the cops in ABQ use to try to avoid a "John Doe" booking, as in "If you fail to identify yourself, we'll just throw your stuff away instead of cataloging it?"
#1734
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
Probably abusing the "found property" rules to get around having to tag the stuff with "John Doe #501" or some such.
#1735
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
Yes, or actually double yes. According to pmocek's earlier statements, when he retrieved the camera from the "unofficial locker" his things were placed in for the duration of his arrest, the pictures and videos had been erased.
He has subsequently been able to recover them, and if I understood correctly, the video was used at the trial.
He has subsequently been able to recover them, and if I understood correctly, the video was used at the trial.
Why aren't these guys being charged with destruction of evidence?
#1736
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,099
Well that explains the prosecution's behaviour in December: destroy evidence, conspire to commit perjury on a massive scale (put 9 liars on the stand), then when it is discovered (last minute) that the defence has proof of the wrong-doing, ask for a continuance so you have time to back-pedal on the allegations.
Why aren't these guys being charged with destruction of evidence?
Why aren't these guys being charged with destruction of evidence?
Chain of evidence was broken and while we certainly believe we know what happened proving that beyond a reasonable doubt might be difficult and expensive.
#1737
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
Well that explains the prosecution's behaviour in December: destroy evidence, conspire to commit perjury on a massive scale (put 9 liars on the stand), then when it is discovered (last minute) that the defence has proof of the wrong-doing, ask for a continuance so you have time to back-pedal on the allegations.
Why aren't these guys being charged with destruction of evidence?
Why aren't these guys being charged with destruction of evidence?
#1738
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,145
Did Phil ever get a receipt for the items they were holding? Was there really any chain-of-custody in place while they were holding the stuff?? Or did they just take his stuff and put it somewhere...and he was lucky to get it, albeit tampered with, when he came back for it?
#1739
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
The chain of custody was broken when Phil picked up his stuff and walked out of the room. The police could claim -- falsely, of course! -- that Phil himself hit the "delete" button. Without some sort of time-stamp, proving who did what is going to be impossible. Too bad.
Bruce
Bruce
#1740
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,145
The chain of custody was broken when Phil picked up his stuff and walked out of the room. The police could claim -- falsely, of course! -- that Phil himself hit the "delete" button. Without some sort of time-stamp, proving who did what is going to be impossible. Too bad.
Bruce
Bruce