The resaon I asked if anyone knew about trhis was because I wanted to forward this to Chaffetz, if I could have found more detail. Seems to be some reason the woman doesn't want to go public. On the other hand, if it happened to my wife, she would not want anyone to know.

Off topic but funny in a wierd way. In looking through sites about the NH TSA I found several complaints from people that traveled with copies of the U.S. Constitution in their pocket. Seems that was an automatic reason to be pulled aside and given a pat down. I know I feel safer already.

He was found guilty on all charges
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2010...link=mirelated

And was sentenced to two year less a day:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...x-assault.html

And yet I can imagine the skepticism that greeted these women when they reported the incidents.

The same skepticism that Cartoon Peril and bzbdewd expressed earlier in this thread about the woman who has reported to close friends that she was assaulted by TSA.

Go to the news? You've got to be kidding me! One other poster simultaneously doubts that the story is real because she won't come forward and let her face be splattered all over the media while simultaneously admitting that his own wife probably wouldn't do so.

And you notice - the woman herself did not choose to go public. No tape, no proof, TSA's reputation - all she would have accomplished would have been to be publicly attacked and humiliated. As I posted earlier, even if she had emerged from the assault and demanded an LEO and reported what happened, do you think they would have taken it seriously enough to immediately detain the guy, swab his hands or confiscate his gloves, and follow up? Or let him get rid of the gloves/wash his hands and say there was no proof, he's had a background check, bla-bla?

And as I posted earlier, if they had gotten DNA proof of intimate contact off the guy, he undoubtedly would have said he'd behaved unprofessionally but that it was 'consensual'.

"Cleanup on checkpoint 4. Retraining needed."

I expressed skepticism but have never said it didn't happen; in fact, I stated:

Exactly, victims of sexual assault rarely come forth to report the crime for many combination of reasons including but not limited to humiliation, fear, trauma, and social, cultural and/or religious stigmas.

Just out of curiousity, for those who wonder why this woman might hesitate to come forward and get her name splattered all over the media:

To the men on this forum: if this happened to you (taken into a back room and mishandled), would you report it?

Never mind if you lost it and physically attacked the TSO (we're assuming here that he is not bigger than you). Would you come forward knowing that folks are going to be skeptical, it's your word against his, and everyone is going to want to know in intimate detail what happened. And why you didn't resist when he started going there.

I don't think anyone is saying it has to be reported to be believed. That's especially true in this context, and I wish somebody from TSA would actually acknowledge this.

Good Lord, report abuse to whom? The perp's best friend who steered you his way? Make a scene and be arrested yourself, maybe in a distant city from your home?

TSA puts passengers in a terrible situation. There is an extreme degree of compulsion here. One has to be thinking -- "Will I be arrested? Will I be tazed?" when they "offer" (= "force") the "private" room on someone. What could happen there? Who the hell knows?

Most people don't make a habit of going off into private rooms under threat of force with strangers, and for good reasons. Yet TSA tells us this is what must happen.

Agree, not many would welcome the public scrutiny. But I would never go to the private room to start with. People have to be educated on this. DON'T GO. This is no different than any other situation where some criminal wants to exert power over you and move you to a private location by force. Your best chance for survival is not to go. and these TSA scum who are moving you to the private room are no better than the rapists, IMO.

Do all law enforcement abuses make the news? They should, but I'm doubtful our news media is that good.

First of all I don't believe Fox news. Second, since there is no report of this woman's incident I have to call BS on it. If it happened then there had to be a reason that this woman was searched and more than likely it probably wasn't the TSA but Customs or LEO's that did the search. Since there is no source on the incident other than Fox News, then I am declined to believe in it.

As far as I know this Rep could have been making the story up. Sorry but that's how I view things.

If this did happen then I do feel bad for the woman, but like I said I seriously doubt that it was the TSA and there is not enough information to make a determination on what happened.

you have no grounds for saying it's BS, other than you have an axe to grind. the most you can say is that it is unsubstantiated.

This wasn't reported by fox news. It was mentioned by one of the sponsors of the New Hampshire legislation making TSA sex assaults criminal acts in NH. There were two NH State Reps interviewed by one of the Fox talking heads. In discussing the legislation one Rep. told what happened to the woman and said the woman was a NH resident and was staying at his house. The person doing the interview didn't ask anything about it, just moved on. It was just told in passing as a reason why this law was needed. Don't know if Fox has clips on its website, it was on about 11:30 am CT.

Since there has been report after report of passengers being told that they have no choice but to go to the private screening rooms for their secondary screening even after they say they have no problem with it being done in public.

That makes it seem like 1. That private room is not there just for the passengers to choose for their own privacy concerns and 2. That more than just a patdown can happen during that secondary screening.

Because there have been hints from certain TSA Agents that make it sound like that secondary search can turn really bad for a passenger if they get another positive hit during that secondary search.

So based on the sinister hints. I'm thinking that in TSA's secret rules somewhere there is a rule where a passenger will be given no choice but to remove their clothing so a more invasive search of their body can be done if a passenger gets another positive reading on that secondary search.

I'm not saying that a regular TSA Agent has the authority to do that, but I do think there is some higher up agent who has a ranking that TSA/DHS has given to them that has the authority to order that be done.

Now whether that particular ordered type of search is done by real law enforcement or TSA is the big question and I guess it is just to bad for the passenger if that type of search is done and it turns out to be just another false positive.

A woman has potentially undergone a body cavity search by a non-LEO government actor in a private room and you "feel bad for the woman."

Thank goodness she wasn't severely injured or you might have to feel really bad for her.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Yet another reason to refuse to go. Just leave. Others have suggested being prepared by purchasing refundable tickets, have alternate travel plans etc.