DEN TSA screener arrested on child sex charges
Apr 7, 2019, 8:15 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
DEN TSA screener arrested on child sex charges
A Transportation Security Administration agent has been arrested at Denver International Airport on charges of sexual assault on a child.
The Denver Post reports 33-year-old Matthew Paul Barnett was arrested Friday on 12 felony counts.
The Denver Post reports 33-year-old Matthew Paul Barnett was arrested Friday on 12 felony counts.
Apr 7, 2019, 9:25 am
#2
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
Apr 7, 2019, 10:39 am
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
This obviously is upsetting on many levels. We have, and should have, I think higher expectations of Federal officials who are in what I'd call "positions of trust". At the same time I'm a retired Federal civil servant with 42 years of service with over half of that being in supervisor or senior management positions with as high as top secret clearance. Over the years I went through all the fingerprinting, credit checks, arrest records checks, etc., etc., to get my initial clearance and maintain it for probably 30+ years of my career. My record is clear and it should be but more than once I was shocked or surprised when subordinates or co-workers all of a sudden went from "clean as a whistle" to suspect and even removal for everything from shoplifting to spousal abuse to child porn. It happens. I can say it shouldn't but it does.
Apr 7, 2019, 10:56 am
#4
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
If this guy was at a checkpoint frisking children, that's sickening. Even a very watchful LTSO or STSO would likely have trouble distinguishing between 'legitimate' genital contact and opportunistic sexual assault.
This isn't a problem outside the US, because outside the US, screeners aren't frisking children.
This isn't a problem outside the US, because outside the US, screeners aren't frisking children.
Apr 7, 2019, 1:16 pm
#5
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
If this guy was at a checkpoint frisking children, that's sickening. Even a very watchful LTSO or STSO would likely have trouble distinguishing between 'legitimate' genital contact and opportunistic sexual assault.
This isn't a problem outside the US, because outside the US, screeners aren't frisking children.
This isn't a problem outside the US, because outside the US, screeners aren't frisking children.
Passengers’ flights were generally safe long before there was a TSA groping children’s private parts, so banning the TSA from touching up children and other passengers’ private parts wouldn’t be the result of making the TSA to follow the rule of “don’t touch my privates!”
Last edited by GUWonder; Apr 7, 2019 at 1:22 pm
Apr 7, 2019, 3:57 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
The story doesn't indicate where the offenses were committed by the accused. If at the airport this will be the second known case of sexual assault (first was against adult males) at Denver. Of course TSA took no legal action the first time.
Apr 7, 2019, 4:07 pm
#7
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
Boggie, I believe I saw a news report that emphasized that the offenses he is charged with did not take place on the job. No mention as to whether or not he was off-duty but still in uniform.
Apr 7, 2019, 4:15 pm
#8
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 245
three counts of sexual assault on a child, three counts of sexual assault on a child by a person in a position of trust, two counts of sexual assault on a child as a pattern of abuse and four counts of committing an aggravated sex offense, which is a sentence enhancer.
Apr 7, 2019, 4:54 pm
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
Apr 7, 2019, 6:38 pm
#10
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
Not sure why but I had an HR guy arrested at work on an Army installation for child porn. Total surprise with no indication there was an issue or problem. No evidence that he had used his government computer to view or save porn. FBI, CID, and local police descended on our offices. It was quick, surprising, and shocking. They took or boxed up everything but the furniture in 10 minutes with kind of a “none of your business” attitude. I never saw him again and as far as I know he pleaded out to some charge.
Last edited by Randyk47; Apr 8, 2019 at 5:05 am
Apr 7, 2019, 9:47 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
Not sure why but I had an HR guy arrested at work on an Army installation for child porn. Total surprise with no indication there was an issue or problem. No evidence that he had used his government computer to view or save porn. FBI, CID, and local police descended on our offices. It as quick, surprising, and shocking. They took or boxed up everything but the furniture in 10 minutes with kind of a “none of your business” attitude. I never saw him again and as far as I know he pleaded out to some charge.
Apr 8, 2019, 5:14 am
#12
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
I guess it was safer than storming his house. We did hear later that they had simultaneously served a search warrant at his house so maybe they were prepared to catch him one place or the other. As I said we never heard another word about the charges or what eventually happened to him. He never came back to work but he also was not and is not listed on either the state or Federal sexual offenders registries.
Apr 8, 2019, 6:53 am
#13
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I guess it was safer than storming his house. We did hear later that they had simultaneously served a search warrant at his house so maybe they were prepared to catch him one place or the other. As I said we never heard another word about the charges or what eventually happened to him. He never came back to work but he also was not and is not listed on either the state or Federal sexual offenders registries.
In some places, offenders listed in the register accessible online is not as complete as the set of offenders listed in the register when calling up. But IIRC that would be in relation to some state registers.
Last edited by GUWonder; Apr 8, 2019 at 7:22 am
Apr 8, 2019, 8:59 am
#14
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,507
Apr 8, 2019, 9:53 am
#15
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
He's charged with offenses that did not take place at the airport.
This is not the same thing as saying he never did anything wrong while on the job. Sadly, children in particular aren't going to be listened to if the screener takes liberties. I don't think kids are taught the difference between 'acceptable' touching and unacceptable touching. They're generally taught no one should be touching their privates.
I doubt any of the kids have been shown a diagram in school and told where their 'resistance' is. I wonder what language TSOs use when they explain the touching to the kids. When the TSO says "I'm going to touch your resistance", what do they answer if the child asks what 'resistance' is?
Because we know that protocol says they are supposed to explain everything they are going to do to you and we know that for security reasons, TSOs don't allow parents to comfort or touch their children during a blue-glove full-body examination.
This is not the same thing as saying he never did anything wrong while on the job. Sadly, children in particular aren't going to be listened to if the screener takes liberties. I don't think kids are taught the difference between 'acceptable' touching and unacceptable touching. They're generally taught no one should be touching their privates.
I doubt any of the kids have been shown a diagram in school and told where their 'resistance' is. I wonder what language TSOs use when they explain the touching to the kids. When the TSO says "I'm going to touch your resistance", what do they answer if the child asks what 'resistance' is?
Because we know that protocol says they are supposed to explain everything they are going to do to you and we know that for security reasons, TSOs don't allow parents to comfort or touch their children during a blue-glove full-body examination.
Last edited by chollie; Apr 8, 2019 at 9:59 am