Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

So Much For The Effectiveness Of TSA & SPOT/Woman Nearly Raped At DCA

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

So Much For The Effectiveness Of TSA & SPOT/Woman Nearly Raped At DCA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 1, 2019, 12:38 pm
  #61  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,504
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
....I would expect a 6-figure-earning on duty armed law enforcement officer to help them when they are screaming.
It might come as a shock to you (and the rest of our gentle readers), as it shocked my conscience to learn that, absent very unusual and specific conditions, law enforcement officers have NO legal duty to protect a particular person, even a person the LEO is observing being the victim of a crime.

Seriously, google "law enforcement duty to protect" and see how you feel after reading. Of course, it depends upon the type of LEO and the jurisdiction in which the crime takes place, but it is quite disturbing to learn the truth behind the details of what we think our LEOs must do and what the law requires they do.

One egregious case in particular: "Subway stabbing victim cannot sue city over cops not preventing attack: judge " The guy told the cops the slasher was on the train, pleaded with them to help him, and then they waited until after he subdued the criminal before coming out of hiding in the driver's cage to arrest the guy. Disgusting. More disgusting is the law in NY.... but even the Supreme Court has ruled cops have no duty to protect - see Warren v District of Columbia.
Section 107 is offline  
Old Apr 6, 2019, 5:40 pm
  #62  
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,602
Moderator's Note: Topic Drift

A post discussing the recent firing again of of FAM Robert MacLean was moved to the relevant thread:
TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator
MacLeanBarrier likes this.
TWA884 is offline  
Old Apr 7, 2019, 12:26 pm
  #63  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Charles K. Edwards was the U.S. Department Homeland Security Deputy Inspector General during this incident in Reagan National Airport 10 days before the 2009 Presidential Inauguration. He then became the Acting Inspector General and left in December 2013 after a bipartisan congressional investigation outing him for wrongdoing such as whitewashing probes into TSA senior executives.

The Washington Post 3 days ago:

"A federal technology manager admitted Thursday to conspiring with a former acting inspector general of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to steal a data.base managing more than 150,000 internal investigations and containing personal data [worth $3.1M] of nearly 250,000 DHS employees, court filings show.
[...]
Court filings also show that Co-Conspirator 1 [Charles K. Edwards] worked at DHS from February 2008 until 2013, including as acting inspector general, and before that at the Transportation Security Administration and the Postal Service, where he supervised Patel.
[...]
As part of a plea deal, Collyer agreed to delay sentencing while Patel cooperates with prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia and the Justice Department’s public integrity section. Under the deal, prosecutors agreed not to charge Patel with any other offenses.
[...]
[Charles K. Edwards] did not return telephone messages Thursday seeking an interview."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6df_story.html

Charles K. Edwards's Linkedin biography:

"Acting Inspector General / Deputy Inspector General Company Name US Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General
Dates Employed Feb 2008 – Dec 2013 Employment Duration; 5 yrs 11 mos"
https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardsrr/
MacLeanBarrier is offline  
Old Apr 7, 2019, 4:01 pm
  #64  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,082
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
Charles K. Edwards was the U.S. Department Homeland Security Deputy Inspector General during this incident in Reagan National Airport 10 days before the 2009 Presidential Inauguration. He then became the Acting Inspector General and left in December 2013 after a bipartisan congressional investigation outing him for wrongdoing such as whitewashing probes into TSA senior executives.

The Washington Post 3 days ago:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6df_story.html

Charles K. Edwards's Linkedin biography:



https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardsrr/

So? What does this have to do with anything?
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 6:44 pm
  #65  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Issued today by Government Executive Magazine:

[MacLean] said he also believes TSA was “extremely upset about uploading their November 19, 2009 'TSA HEROISM AWARDS' document I found buried in the TSA iShare intranet database,” which provided details about the agency’s alleged misrepresentation of a witnessed rape of a woman in the restroom at Reagan National Airport [10 days] before the [2009] inauguration of President Obama.
https://www.govexec.com/management/2...d-time/156198/

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
So? What does this have to do with anything?
Charles K. Edwards was U.S. Department of Homeland Security Deputy/Acting Inspector General during the cover-up of an on-duty TSA air marshals boss (Kevin Pitman) "too scared" to help a "screaming" woman in a doorless Reagan National Airpot bathroom being bloody-beaten and almost choked to death "for at least five minutes". Instead, Pitman stood outside and phoned his boss (David Kohl) who later arrived. Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police crime scene detectives asserted that the "restroom had already been cleaned" before they could gather evidence. Pitman and his FBI manager spouse (Suni Pitman) were later relocated to the Island of Guam. Pitman and Kohl were subsequently promoted. Pitman is the Seattle Field Office Assistant Supervisory Air Marshal in Charge and Kohl is the current Director of the TSA Federal Air Marshal Service.

Mr. Edwards's Linkedin biography:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardsrr/

The contemporaneous media articles (dead links), and all of the evidentiary documents are all in this prior FlyerTalk post:

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/30761782-post54.html

Last edited by TWA884; Apr 9, 2019 at 8:02 pm Reason: Merge consecutive posts by the same member
MacLeanBarrier is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2019, 7:23 am
  #66  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,082
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
Issued today by Government Executive Magazine:



https://www.govexec.com/management/2...d-time/156198/



Charles K. Edwards was U.S. Department of Homeland Security Deputy/Acting Inspector General during the cover-up of an on-duty TSA air marshals boss (Kevin Pitman) "too scared" to help a "screaming" woman in a doorless Reagan National Airpot bathroom being bloody-beaten and almost choked to death "for at least five minutes". Instead, Pitman stood outside and phoned his boss (David Kohl) who later arrived. Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police crime scene detectives asserted that the "restroom had already been cleaned" before they could gather evidence. Pitman and his FBI manager spouse (Suni Pitman) were later relocated to the Island of Guam. Pitman and Kohl were subsequently promoted. Pitman is the Seattle Field Office Assistant Supervisory Air Marshal in Charge and Kohl is the current Director of the TSA Federal Air Marshal Service.

Mr. Edwards's Linkedin biography:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardsrr/

The contemporaneous media articles (dead links), and all of the evidentiary documents are all in this prior FlyerTalk post:

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/30761782-post54.html
Did the FAM have an absolute legal requirement or obligation to expose him/herself and aide the screaming woman? Could he possibly have been waiting for local police to respond first?

Is the TSA iShare intranet database a privilege resource? Is it something that the general public can access? Does it have a warning before logging in that contents are not for public dissemination or some other similar warning?

Did you take it upon yourself to determine that dissemination of certain information did not violate any cautions or warnings?
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Apr 10, 2019, 8:15 am
  #67  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,504
As I have posted above, the FAM most certainly did not have a legal duty to intervene in this case. But I believe most folks would agree he surely had a moral obligation to assist the woman.

Most LEAs have polices (general (standing) orders and/or protocols/procedures) on how to respond to criminal situations. MacLean says FAMs do not; I am not sure that is correct. But it is not uncommon that a LEO does the morally right thing but is later disciplined for not following departmental policies.
Section 107 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2019, 9:39 am
  #68  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,082
Originally Posted by Section 107
As I have posted above, the FAM most certainly did not have a legal duty to intervene in this case. But I believe most folks would agree he surely had a moral obligation to assist the woman.

Most LEAs have polices (general (standing) orders and/or protocols/procedures) on how to respond to criminal situations. MacLean says FAMs do not; I am not sure that is correct. But it is not uncommon that a LEO does the morally right thing but is later disciplined for not following departmental policies.
​​​​​​
I was curious of MacLean's view on what is or what is not required. I agree 100% that morally a person should go to the aid of a person in distressed.

What we don't know is what was in the mind of the person who did not respond, Something we will never know.
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2019, 6:25 pm
  #69  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Did the FAM have an absolute legal requirement or obligation to expose him/herself and aide the screaming woman? Could he possibly have been waiting for local police to respond first?
That does not matter. Why was there an elaborate concealment--in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001--afterward that prevented the cleaning lady--a poor immigrant who spoke limited English--from obtaining information about a federal law enforcement officer's inaction causing her to be tortured and almost killed "for at least five minutes"?

All of the civil damages attorneys, who the cleaning lady approached, relied on the prosecutor's charging document that "two air marshals" (Kevin Pitman and Russell Coleman) did everything right: Attempted Rape in Airport Bathroom Worries Travelers|ABC 7 News

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Is the TSA iShare intranet database a privilege resource? Is it something that the general public can access? Does it have a warning before logging in that contents are not for public dissemination or some other similar warning?
There is nothing classified in the November 19, 2009 TSA iShare "HEROISM AWARDS" document that states the polar opposite of the prosecutor's charging document disseminated to the media. The 2009 TSA awards ceremony was held in a public venue in which TSA employees' families attended. The TSA iShare document states that only ONE TSA employee saved the cleaning lady's life, an unarmed uniformed supervisory TSA screener: Supervisory Transportation Security Officer (STSO) Samuel Zermeno. Therefore my disclosure is protected under 5 U.S.C. § 2302 and 18 U.S.C. § 1513(e).

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Did you take it upon yourself to determine that dissemination of certain information did not violate any cautions or warnings?
I was my duty as a law enforcement officer. Again, there is nothing classified in this TSA iShare document that contradicts the prosecutor's public assertion that "two air marshals" saved the cleaning lady's life (PAGE 21): http://bit.ly/tsaaward1stso

Originally Posted by Section 107
As I have posted above, the FAM most certainly did not have a legal duty to intervene in this case. But I believe most folks would agree he surely had a moral obligation to assist the woman.

Most LEAs have polices (general (standing) orders and/or protocols/procedures) on how to respond to criminal situations. MacLean says FAMs do not; I am not sure that is correct. But it is not uncommon that a LEO does the morally right thing but is later disciplined for not following departmental policies.
We task and commend Federal Air Marshals for breaking cover and physically restraining verbally abusive passengers and then emergency landing:

U.S. Attorney Trent Shores: “More importantly, defiant and belligerent behavior potentially places lives at risk. The crew and Federal Air Marshals are to be applauded for swiftly handling the situation and ensuring the safety of those aboard Delta flight 1156.”
https://kfor.com/2018/10/10/man-who-...-to-probation/

Regardless, even if TSA has an unwritten policy that its male law enforcement officers are not allowed to enter doorless airport female restrooms where a woman is "screaming in agony", the flagrant concealment violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and the cleaning lady's due process--under the 5th Amendment--to seek civil redress.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
What we don't know is what was in the mind of the person who did not respond, Something we will never know.
The popular belief is that then-Supervisory Federal Air Marshal (J Band) Kevin Pitman did not like that his firearm and handcuffs wrinkled his suit, so he often left them behind. The rumor is that he was concerned that his next promotion could be jeopardized if he restrained the rapist without his handcuffs. If this is all true, he was successful in that he was eventually rewarded with a promotion to Assistant Supervisory Air Marshal in Charge (K Band) of the Seattle Field Office.

Last edited by TWA884; Apr 11, 2019 at 8:30 pm Reason: Merge consecutive posts by the same member; please use the multi-quote function. Thank you.
MacLeanBarrier is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2019, 11:51 am
  #70  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,082
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier

There is nothing classified in the November 19, 2009 TSA iShare "HEROISM AWARDS" document that states the polar opposite of the prosecutor's charging document disseminated to the media. The 2009 TSA awards ceremony was held in a public venue in which TSA employees' families attended. The TSA iShare document states that only ONE TSA employee saved the cleaning lady's life, an unarmed uniformed supervisory TSA screener: Supervisory Transportation Security Officer (STSO) Samuel Zermeno. Therefore my disclosure is protected under 5 U.S.C. § 2302 and 18 U.S.C. § 1513(e).
Ok, nothing was classified. But did that website have a disclaimer that accessing or dissemination information from the site was protected? I see such disclaimers on sites like FINCEN, Military Retired Pay sites, and others. I'm not asking if it was classified, just asking if the site had any such disclosure whee you log in at?
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Apr 12, 2019, 12:48 pm
  #71  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Ok, nothing was classified. But did that website have a disclaimer that accessing or dissemination information from the site was protected? I see such disclaimers on sites like FINCEN, Military Retired Pay sites, and others. I'm not asking if it was classified, just asking if the site had any such disclosure whee you log in at?
Yes, there are TSA policy nondisclosure disclaimers, but none of them supersede the law, 5 U.S.C. § 2302. Again, that's why TSA was unable to charge me for violating any of the dozens of nondisclosure agreements it mandates TSA employees to sign:

the implementation or enforcement of any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement
[...]
implement or enforce any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement, if such policy, form, or agreement does not contain the following statement: 'These provisions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2) communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or (4) any other whistleblower protection. The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions are incorporated into this agreement and are controlling."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/2302
MacLeanBarrier is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.