Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14302360)

Why couldn't it become a LEO matter? We can hand over a "search" the the LEOs any time we want. Now if they agree to take over the search is another matter ;)

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14303249)

I wouldn't.


You bring up something interesting: if I open an bag and see a pic that is child pornography, and then as a TSO I continue to search the bag for more child pornography, I have violated the administrative search directives TSA was task to do, and the case against the person would most likely be thrown out of court.

At the same time, if conducting a search and I open a bag and see a picture described above, and at that point I look no further but summon a LEO who continues to search, then that would hold up in court.

The same holds true for ANYTHING I suspect of being illegal. I have to stop my search when I either find something I clearly know is illegal or what I BELIEVE is illegal.

As far as a nude child running through a sprinkler, I think that is a common enough picture (or something similar) that many people have of their children that most would NOT believe it was pornographic (ugh...just realized if a TSO did stumble on a pic like that and didn't report it and it turned out later the child was a victim, there would be a thread here bashing that TSO and TSA for not turning that person over to the LEOs and letting a sexual predator escape, assuming he was later caught. You know that it would happen, don't tell me there wouldn't be a thread here like that! ;) ). So if a TSO did nit think they stumbled upon anything illegal they would have no reason to get a LEO.

As for flour, I guess it depends on if there is any doubt in the TSOs mind. One TSO might be suspicious and summon a LEO, who would take over, and another TSO might not think they witness any illegal activity, so why summon a LEO? Is it possible drugs get through this way? You betcha; do I care if drugs can get through our checkpoints? Not really. And for the record I do NOT support drug use; I hope and wish people know better. Except for advil. Those things work wonders on my oh too common head-aches!

As for a LEO searching a bag, once they take over, several things. They are not under the constraints that TSA is under. They can specifically look for narcotics, cash, fake/stolen IDs. And it's do so as an adminstrative search; the passenger at the point, our courts have rule, have given their conscent by submitting their bag for inspection and they themselves progressing into the checkpoint of their own will.

I think it would be a weak argument to claim that the passenger submitted themselves to being searched by TSA but not the police. I do not think any court would buy that.

Also, it could easily be argued the police at the point they take over the search have reasonable suspicion, as they were told by a federal officer (sceener :P ) that they believed they were witness to something illegal. I very much think our courts would agree with that.

Eh, but these are just my opinion. Yours may differ.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14303249)

I wouldn't.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14301746)

Incorrect; SOP in this situation called for all of her property to be searched. Opinion of the TSO does not matter.

And who said anything about counting "bills"? The SOP for searching a selectee is pretty clear, EVERYTHING on the passenger is to be searched, certain items ETD test, the passenger screened again even if no alarm at the WTMD, and so on. I just wonder where it says in the SOP that once a TSO thinks a bag is clear before the search is done then the search has to end. I checked before I post this, and all I found was what supports what I have been saying.

If a TSO were to end a selectee search before everything was checked, that would violate SOP - and so many people here have repeatedly said they just want TSOs to follow their own rules.

Originally Posted by armandov9 (Post 14305674)

Clever straw man there, dude. I never said you should end the search before everything is searched. I said you should STOP once you CLEAR the ENTIRE LUGGAGE of WEI, through visual, ETD, WTMD, and X-Ray.

Reporting a sum of cash to LEO is NOT within the scope of looking for WEI. It doesn't matter that you're "following SOP" - you have gone beyond looking for WEI the second you CLEAR the bag of any dangerous items but decide to inform an LEO about a wad of cash.

Originally Posted by armandov9 (Post 14305674)

Clever straw man there, dude. I never said you should end the search before everything is searched. I said you should STOP once you CLEAR the ENTIRE LUGGAGE of WEI, through visual, ETD, WTMD, and X-Ray.

Reporting a sum of cash to LEO is NOT within the scope of looking for WEI. It doesn't matter that you're "following SOP" - you have gone beyond looking for WEI the second you CLEAR the bag of any dangerous items but decide to inform an LEO about a wad of cash.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14306898)

No, once something that we report to a LEO is found, our search stops until a lEO ask us to continue.

If you want SOP to change, that's one thing; but if you want TSOs to follow SOP then they are required to do just as I stated above.

Unless you want to make the argument a TSO should use their own personal discression on what part of SOP to follow? Oh, wait, isn't that a conplaint about TSOs already?? Yep, it is ;)

Originally Posted by armandov9 (Post 14306933)

Can you please confirm that it is SOP for you to report an envelope full of cash, presumably without counting the bills (you said yourself "who said anything about counting" in an earlier post)?

You seem to be saying you are required to report to an LEO if you see an envelope full of cash, EVEN IF THE ENVELOPE HAS BEEN CLEARED OF WEI. Is this correct?

Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much (Post 14307235)

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8830/4.5.0.138 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)

When I remember to do it, I've been known to throw a big plastic container of bath powder in my carry-on. A while back, a screener on FT quoted the size threshold above which a screener is required to declare the powder "suspicious.". My bottle is above the threshold. So far, nobody has taken the bait. My goal is to have a screener take the bait and for me to elicit from him/her that they really do look for drugs. I don't know what I would do with the information other than to talk about it here. It would be good if I could have help recording the conversation.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14307547)

I can not confirm what you are saying, as what you are saying is incorrect. I think that maybe some of the reason for the confusion here is that you are reading one or two of my post out of context. So I will ask this: what would I see that I believe indicates possible illegal activity that I would report an envelope to a LEO?

And let me ask one more question: why would you assume the envelope has been cleared of WEI?

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14307630)

There is a test we do on certain powders that test for explosives. It's a rare test to do; it is not ETD. The powder has to meet certain requirements on x-ray, size being one. If his test was conducted on drugs, it would not alarm. You would not want to put into our body what we look for (not that drugs are any better for our body, in my opinion).

As to size, on x-ray it's sort of a guess. The x-ray does not measure the item. However, and as you point out, most powders are not test, as they do not meet te requirements.

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog (Post 14307805)

Can you tell us which TSA idiot signed the current Operational Directive that classifies $10,000 cash as contraband?

Edit to add:

What's the matter SATTSO, surely the signer of the current directive would not mind having such information in the public arena. You have already told us that the OD has not really changed from the previous one, parts of which have been provided by BB himself.

Jonathan Flemming put United States currency in the same category as illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia. I call a person doing such stupid! So who signed the latest document?

And note, none of these items are WEI. Not a one and reporting these items exceeds TSA's mandate of a limited administrative search only permitted to uncover items that threaten air commerce safety. Not only is TSA out of control they do not abide by the laws of this nation.

Discovery of Contraband During the Screening Process OD-400-54-2 May 9, 2005

Expiration – Indefinite

Summary - This directive provides guidance to ensure nationwide consistency in the appropriate referral or initiation of civil enforcement actions for incidents involving discovery of contraband during TSA screening procedures.

Procedures - When TSA discovers contraband during the screening process that is not a TSA Prohibited Item, the matter should be referred to the local Law Enforcement Officers as appropriate. An Enforcement Investigative Report should not be initiated.

Examples of such contraband include:

- Illegal Drugs
- Drug Paraphernalia
- Large Amounts of Cash(10,000.00)

The OD was signed by TSAs Chief Operating Officer at the time, Jonathan J. Fleming

For the rest of the document, (contact numbers and e-mails) please use the FOIA process for OD-400-54-2

Thanks,

Bob

EoS Blog Team

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14308970)

Hmmm our courts disagree with you. They have specifically rule we can report anything we find that is illegal to the LEOs. We can NOT specifically look for anything but WEI, but our system of courts have ruled reporting other things we find is perfectly legal.

And what exactly do you mean "what's the matter SATTSO"? Are you trying to make this personal?

Originally Posted by armandov9 (Post 14309269)

Hmm. Very strange. So my statement was:

"Can you please confirm that it is SOP for you to report an envelope full of cash, presumably without counting the bills (you said yourself "who said anything about counting" in an earlier post)?"

To which you replied, that my statement was incorrect.

Does this mean that it is NOT SOP for you to report an envelope full of cash that has been CLEARED of having any WEI in it? If you are not going to count it, and my statement that you must report it per SOP is incorrect, the only option left is to let it go through. If this is still incorrect, please tell me which part.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14308970)

Hmmm our courts disagree with you. They have specifically rule we can report anything we find that is illegal to the LEOs. We can NOT specifically look for anything but WEI, but our system of courts have ruled reporting other things we find is perfectly legal.

And what exactly do you mean "what's the matter SATTSO"? Are you trying to make this personal?

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 14309311)

I'm not going to tell you SOP, and your misunderstanding of SOP makes you draw incorrect conclusions. Which I honestly understand.

But using the example you give, cash in an envelope, there are certain searches I would not go into it, and there are certain searches I have to go into it. And when I have to go into an envelope and there are large sums of cash, based upon other conditions require me to either report it to a LEO or not report it and finish the bag check so the passenger can make their flight.