FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)
-   -   Newark TSO steals cash from wheelchair bound woman. (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/1086619-newark-tso-steals-cash-wheelchair-bound-woman.html)

AngryMiller May 18, 2010 12:21 pm

Newark TSO steals cash from wheelchair bound woman.
 

A federal security officer at Newark Liberty International Airport has been charged with stealing cash out of the purse of a wheel-chair bound woman after it passed through an X-ray screening device in February, authorities said today.

Leroy Ray, 44, of Newark has been suspended by the Transportation Security Administration, which employed him as a passenger screener since August 2002.

Ray’s search of the purse was caught on video cameras, according to a criminal complaint. When the woman returned to the security checkpoint to complain that $300 in a white envelope was missing from her purse, as well as $195 from an inside zippered pocket, Ray abruptly walked over to a supervisor’s office and placed a white object from his back pocket into the “lost and found” tray, the complaint said..

He then returned to the checkpoint and volunteered that he had found the missing envelope on the floor.

Ray was charged with theft and making false statements to investigators. He is expected to make an initial appearance before a federal judge in Newark this afternoon.
LINK

And another one bites the dust. Must be something in the water.

TSA under Fire for Rising Theft by Baggage Screeners

coachrowsey May 18, 2010 12:26 pm

Good riddance. another TSA thief gone.

Spiff May 18, 2010 12:29 pm

Yet another isolated incident. Thankfully, theft is certainly no predictor for the predisposition to commit more serious crimes like smuggling drugs or explosives.

It's a good thing those background checks exempt TSA employees from being screened before, during, and after work.

You're doing a heckva job, Nappy.

clrankin May 18, 2010 12:39 pm

So why was this person only suspended? If there's video evidence and reason enough to charge him, he should be fired from his job.

Stories like this should cause the flying public to start asking themselves and their legislators why they should trust the TSA with their safety, when the organization apparently can't even find people who are honest enough to not steal a few hundred dollars. If someone is willing to risk their job and reputation to illegally obtain this amount of money, what makes TSA (or anybody else) think that the person can't be bribed with a few thousand dollars to allow a weapon or other prohibited item into the "sterile" area?

This is yet another example of why all people entering the "sterile" area-- passengers, delivery people, employees, TSOs, police, and even the FSD him/herself-- need to be screened without exceptions to the policy. This is also another example of why TSA needs to conduct a more thorough background check on the people it hires, and why a thorough psychological exam needs to be conducted as part of TSA's hiring interview process. People who are prone to commit crimes or deceive others should not be placed in positions of authority with the guise of power at airport checkpoints.

AngryMiller May 18, 2010 12:45 pm


Originally Posted by clrankin (Post 13979887)
Stories like this should cause the flying public to start asking themselves and their legislators why they should trust the TSA with their safety, when the organization apparently can't even find people who are honest enough to not steal a few hundred dollars. If someone is willing to risk their job and reputation to illegally obtain this amount of money, what makes TSA (or anybody else) think that the person can't be bribed with a few thousand dollars to allow a weapon or other prohibited item into the "sterile" area?

Funny thing is that it probably has already happened where a TSA employee sold out for some tax-free cash by just looking the other way. They just haven't been caught at it yet. When they do catch them the usual suspects will claim that that TSO was a statistical aberration, a bad apple, (fill in the blank) and not representative of TSA as a whole.

reamworks May 18, 2010 12:50 pm


Originally Posted by AngryMiller (Post 13979917)
Funny thing is that it probably has already happened where a TSA employee sold out for some tax-free cash by just looking the other way. They just haven't been caught at it yet. When they do catch them the usual suspects will claim that that TSO was a statistical aberration, a bad apple, (fill in the blank) and not representative of TSA as a whole.

That has already happened! TSA agents have already helped people smuggle guns on.

Here's a link to a case in Philadelphia: http://www.baytzim.com/blog/2009/jun...an_islami-158/

AngryMiller May 18, 2010 12:53 pm


Originally Posted by reamworks (Post 13979943)
That has already happened! TSA agents have already helped people smuggle guns on.

Here's a link to a case in Philadelphia: http://www.baytzim.com/blog/2009/jun...an_islami-158/

One shoe bomber = war on shoes.
One threat of a binary explosive = war on liquids

Many, many thefts from personal effects/luggage.

When will TSA declare war on thieving TSOs?

Boggie Dog May 18, 2010 12:54 pm


Originally Posted by clrankin (Post 13979887)
So why was this person only suspended? If there's video evidence and reason enough to charge him, he should be fired from his job.

Stories like this should cause the flying public to start asking themselves and their legislators why they should trust the TSA with their safety, when the organization apparently can't even find people who are honest enough to not steal a few hundred dollars. If someone is willing to risk their job and reputation to illegally obtain this amount of money, what makes TSA (or anybody else) think that the person can't be bribed with a few thousand dollars to allow a weapon or other prohibited item into the "sterile" area?

This is yet another example of why all people entering the "sterile" area-- passengers, delivery people, employees, TSOs, police, and even the FSD him/herself-- need to be screened without exceptions to the policy. This is also another example of why TSA needs to conduct a more thorough background check on the people it hires, and why a thorough psychological exam needs to be conducted as part of TSA's hiring interview process. People who are prone to commit crimes or deceive others should not be placed in positions of authority with the guise of power at airport checkpoints.

What..., you want TSA to provide Security and not Theater, surely you jest kind sir!

And it must be Comedy Theater because TSA is the biggest joke around!

nbs2 May 18, 2010 1:30 pm

He wasn't stealing the money, he was performing an undercover ETD. Clearly this was a poorly planned idea, much like the Puffers, and thus the TSA takes this seriously and will dump billions of dollars into finding a more secure solution. Currently, the plan is to allow passengers the opportunity to voluntarily surrender their currency before entering the sterile area. Failure to do so will result in confiscation and arrest for failing to respect Special Smurf. Once they are able to find a less invasive model, the TSA will implement it. Unless they decide not to, just for the sake of unpredictability in order to apprehend the future Wallet Bomber.

This woman was nothing more than an anti-American terrorist lover, choosing to seek her own convenience under the guise of "freedom" over the security that we all need. Ever since 9/11, it is impossible for us to be too careful or take too many precautions to ensure our security. I would even suspect that she didn't even really need the wheelchair - that was a ruse to create sympathy from the uninformed public. In the same vein, the judge who is presiding over this case should be impeached on treason charges, for interfering with the security needs of the TSA.

9/11, 9/11, 9/11.

jkhuggins May 18, 2010 2:35 pm


Originally Posted by clrankin (Post 13979887)
So why was this person only suspended? If there's video evidence and reason enough to charge him, he should be fired from his job.

Innocent until proven guilty, right? Being charged and being convicted aren't the same thing.

Hey, don't get me wrong ... if he's proven guilty, then fire him. But the minute we start firing people based on allegations of crimes, we're going to have a whole mess of trouble on our hands. There are, occasionally, passengers who make deliberately false accusations ... or, more often, make mistaken accusations when they misremember what they had in their possession --- or later discover that the item wasn't lost after all.

Boggie Dog May 18, 2010 2:41 pm


Originally Posted by jkhuggins (Post 13980608)
Innocent until proven guilty, right? Being charged and being convicted aren't the same thing.

Hey, don't get me wrong ... if he's proven guilty, then fire him. But the minute we start firing people based on allegations of crimes, we're going to have a whole mess of trouble on our hands. There are, occasionally, passengers who make deliberately false accusations ... or, more often, make mistaken accusations when they misremember what they had in their possession --- or later discover that the item wasn't lost after all.

Agree but a person in this position should be taken out of screening duties until an investigation is completed. Let them guard an exit or something.

Spiff May 18, 2010 2:44 pm


Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 13980651)
Agree but a person in this position should be taken out of screening duties until an investigation is completed. Let them guard an exit or something.

Someone who would steal is someone who might let anyone pass for say, a $20 tip. This person should be assigned to used glove collection or some other detail where their potential/probable dishonesty cannot cause any further damage. It's not like there are any checks already in place to prevent serious malfeasance by TSA employees.

SirFlysALot May 18, 2010 2:55 pm


Originally Posted by jkhuggins (Post 13980608)
Innocent until proven guilty, right? Being charged and being convicted aren't the same thing.

Hey, don't get me wrong ... if he's proven guilty, then fire him. But the minute we start firing people based on allegations of crimes, we're going to have a whole mess of trouble on our hands. There are, occasionally, passengers who make deliberately false accusations ... or, more often, make mistaken accusations when they misremember what they had in their possession --- or later discover that the item wasn't lost after all.

In almost all states employment is at will. Employees may be let go for any reason or no reason as long as the reason is not illegal (discrimination).

I am not sure if the TSA can be fired easily but this guy should go!

iluv2fly May 18, 2010 2:59 pm

But have no fear people. Things will have to get better when they make you go through the Nude-o-Scope and make you take EVERYTHING out of your pockets out of your control and sight. :td: :( :rolleyes: :mad:

jkhuggins May 18, 2010 3:02 pm


Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 13980651)
Agree but a person in this position should be taken out of screening duties until an investigation is completed. Let them guard an exit or something.

The original article states that the defendant has been suspended by TSA.


Originally Posted by SirFlysALot (Post 13980759)
In almost all states employment is at will. Employees may be let go for any reason or no reason as long as the reason is not illegal (discrimination).

And all you need is some allegation from the defendant that the "real" reason for the firing was, in fact, a prohibited basis (race, gender, etc.), and now you've got a donnybrook on your hands. ("Why'd you fire me? All the [insert color] guys who do this just get a warning!")


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:03 am.


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.