Boggie Dog

I was wondering why it should take so long to come to a decision. Would bet a dollar to a doughnut that he has already made up his mind.

fairviewroad

My favorite part:

Narrating your patdown is already a special kind of awesome.

Wally Bird

Long since.

buylowsellhigh

Random question, what if he walked thru wearing just a man thong, would that be indecent exposure or it that only when others see private parts? haha

Boggie Dog

Nudity is not a crime in that jurisdiction so there was no indecent exposure. The guy violated no law, he just made TSA look like the dysfunctional incompetents they are.

redtigeriii

I'd be curious to know how much the taxpayers are paying to pursue this $1,000 fine against Mr. Brennan. The attorney for TSA, port of Portland officer, four TSA officials, the judge, among other courtroom employees all being paid for appearances. Not only is this pursuit against Mr. Brennan an injustice from a moral standpoint, its also a waste of our money.

If I realized when this was going to court a little sooner, I would of attended it myself and given an extended report back to FT!

WilcoRoger

Can the TSA enforce city and state laws, bylaws, statutes and decrees? Wow! Why stop there? What about school rules? "Kid caught having a fag in the boys' loo - TSA caught the perp! Good catch!"

Boggie Dog

Way more than a $1,000 dollar fine would justify. This is just TSA trying to cause unnecessary pain for a person who put TSA in its place.

FliesWay2Much

....and an all-day Kangaroo Court hearing to boot.

The TSA clearly wants their pound of flesh and to obtain a legal opinion, such as it is, that "interfering with the screening process" is anything a clerk says it is.

From the short part I read (Is a transcript available anywhere?), it sounds as if it was the TSA clerks themselves who disrupted the screening process -- swarming around the guy, closing down multiple lines, piling up bin, etc. I hope his lawyers made this point and made the lead clerks justify this level of response.

One lead clerk even asserted that his stripped to cause a distraction so bad guys could slip through the checkpoint. I hope his lawyers ripped the clerk a new one over that assertion.

Boggie Dog

In my mind the only thing that matters is that this person alarmed the TSA ETD test and immediately took steps to prove he was not a security threat.

His method might have been unconventional but it was effective and actually should have made the screening process faster. TSA should have commended this person for being proactive and assisting TSA in clearing him through the checkpoint.

sbagdon

This one has me confused, how is taking someone's clothes off a measurably distruptive activity?

“No, not until he took his clothes off,” Van Gordon said. “That is a disruptive activity.”

So acting in a way to attract attention is disruptive to the screening process? I've seen people that were more distruptive dressed then undressed.

TSA officials testified that Brennan’s nudity disrupted the screening process. They closed three lanes at the checkpoint as passengers pulled out their cell phones, some snapping videos that went viral. TSA officials quickly pushed over carts stacked with gray tubs and surrounded Brennan to hide him from view.

The cynic in me suspects that this will fly through the adminstrative court system. Then it'll start through the Article III process. If the TSA wants to claim he violated the SOP, they'll probaly claim SSI and a closed court, which I'd prefer the judge deny.

WilcoRoger

So it was the TSA itself disrupting the process - they closed 3 lanes, etc, etc, instead of saying: "OK, man, you're good, you don't carry, please proceed" Case closed in 30 seconds.

Wally Bird

Proximate cause (TSA) vs ultimate cause (Brennan).

WilcoRoger

So what stopped the TSA employees to follow "my procedure" as above and forced them to disrupt the "process"? You know along the lines of minimizing damage?

Boggie Dog

Professionalism. You figure out what kind.