Originally Posted by Schmurrr (Post 24750436)

Here's the document filed with the court against the hospital: http://www.aclutx.org/download/169 (auto download). Among other details, it indicates that she was originally randomly selected for secondary screening and her vagina and anus were examined at the border crossing (pre-hospital) and found to be clear of drugs. Assuming there was justification for the vaginal/anal exam at the border crossing in the first place, escalation of the search thereafter was heinous mistreatment of a human being (though I doubt CBP saw her as a human being) and an unconscionable abuse of power.

Did CBP have an alternative to abusing this woman? Yes. They didn't have to let her enter the U.S. They could even have held her without abuse for the hours needed to ensure that any ingested drugs passed her system. Maybe the latter would have resulted in charges of unlawful detention, but it wouldn't have scarred her for life.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 24750826)

My reading of the news article suggest that the lady was a U.S. citizen who had traveled to Mexico and was returning.

How could CBP deny her entry?

Originally Posted by Section 107 (Post 24750460)

For some more denouement and otherwise enlightening reading look up "public duty doctrine" and "police duty to protect".

Originally Posted by NewportGuy (Post 24751238)

CBP is not Canadian Border Patrol. It is Customs and Border Protection.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 24751324)

I also don't understand why the Doctors, Nurses, and other technicians of that medical facility were not named individually in the case. How did any of them have any right to do the procedures that were carried out.

Originally Posted by cestmoi123 (Post 24751421)

Did you read the complaint? At least some of them were.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 24751324)

Don't believe I have ever said this involved Canadian Customs. The United States Customs and Border Patrol is typically indicated by CBP. Even their website uses this format.

http://www.cbp.gov/


In the case of the lady that was taken to the El Paso University Medical Center I would like to know exactly how CBP randomly selects a person for secondary screening. Is it really random or is it just picking a person that strikes the interest of the screening officer. Even from a random pick I don't see how this could possibly suggest probable cause without some other significant piece of information.

I also don't understand why the Doctors, Nurses, and other technicians of that medical facility were not named individually in the case. How did any of them have any right to do the procedures that were carried out.

Originally Posted by NewportGuy (Post 24751779)

Sorry. The form of your question seemed to be that she was going from Mexico to the US so how were the Canadians involved. :)

And I seriously doubt there is anything "random" about searches, any more than I believe police don't "profile" based on race.

What I don't understand is why doctors and nurses go along with this crap in the first place. You would think that at some point ethics would kick in.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 24751828)

No problem but I don't see how you got anything Canadian from my post.

In the court document it states that a drug dog jumped on the complaintant.




I would be interested in knowing "if jumping on people" is how that dog is trained to alert. If not, can the jumping on someone be used as probable cause? Could it be something as simple as a dog that is poorly trained or perhaps a poorly trained handler?

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 24751828)

I would be interested in knowing "if jumping on people" is how that dog is trained to alert. If not, can the jumping on someone be used as probable cause? Could it be something as simple as a dog that is poorly trained or perhaps a poorly trained handler?

Originally Posted by cestmoi123 (Post 24751954)

The complaint strongly implies (although doesn't explicitly make the claim) that the dog was induced to alert on her. It says that she was in a row of people, and the dog was walked along the row. It claims that, when passing her, the trainer stomped (but not when passing anyone else), and the dog jumped on her.

Originally Posted by tanja (Post 24752220)

If a female is not "ready/old enough/developed ' to have "something incerted in her. It will by force. There will be damage and pain. Most likely bleeding.
So what they did over and over was very sadistic and painful.

Originally Posted by DeafBlonde (Post 24750531)

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that she is a U.S. Citizen. If so, they could not deny her entry back into her own country.