Oddly enough what you post supports what eyecue said.

Do I upset you? Awwww. I'm sure you will get over it. And you know very well I can not say certain things. All i can say is there must be cause to do the more invasive pat-down. :)

How can informed consent be obtained when the procedure is secret?

You think that's the only profession - qualified medical - where the genitalia have to be patted down? Really? I have mnow many others - none TSA employees - who have had to do as such in their profession, including federal LEOs. But I guess FBI agents, military personal, etc., are all perverts?

Bolding Above is Mine

I don't even think it's a long shot -- it just doesn't meet the criteria as defined under CA 243.4 PC, IMHO.

The way I read it four things must occur:

First you need the battery;
Secondly the victim needs to be unlawfully restrained;
Third it must be against the will of the person;
Forth, and last, it must be for sexual gratification of the perp.

During an enhanced pat down, based on accounts of others who have been thru the procedure, it could be said the touching occurs -- it could also be said it is against the will of the person, but the passenger is not unlawfully restrained and last, I sincerely doubt your average TSO is doing it for sexual gratification.

I do believe the enhanced patdown using the front of the hand goes too for passenger screening. IMHO, it goes beyond the scope of a minimally invasive Administrative Search for WEI when other, less invasive technologies exist -- specifically ETD.

The TSA is a bloated, make-work government agency; it's time to reign in big government. After the first of the year I'll be able to write my new senator on the issue (Rand Paul, R-KY) -- I can't say that I see eye to eye with the new Senator from Kentucky, but it'll certainly be interesting to see where Paul stands on this.

No, intent can't be presumed by the victim's perception (consider a nude sunbather being reported by a religious zealot). Most cases just assume away intent and view it as "proven" if the other elements of the crime are present. But, to the extent that it is considered, I think it's purely for the jury to determine based on the totality of the facts.

Perhaps some of the resident attorneys can comment on this, but this is a tricky issue. On the one hand, the required standard for conviction is that every element of the crime needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but on the other, "intent" is purely in somebody's head and can't be proven to any standard.

When you say "more invasive", do you mean here the procedure you've spoken about which cannot be performed by a TSO and must be performed in public or one of the more common pat-downs, but the more invasive of the set? I think the lack of specificity here is causing a lot of confusion.

The regular pat-down is performed in public, and can be performed by a TSO.

The one I mention - performed only for cause - can not be performed by a TSO, nor are TSOs trained in that procedure - and is to be performed in private. This is the one that has people up in arms, though it is very very rare. Almost all of you will neve experience this, or if so it will take years, I would guess.

There are only 2 pat-downs, both I just mentioned, obviously.

After all, they will invoke the Nuremberg defense.

No actually it's not.

It's the one everybody has seen countless times on the news that's done in front of anybody that you get if you refuse the scanner that has people up in arms.

If anything but a very few of the people up in arms even knew of the other procedure, they would be rioting.

As far as i can tell, actually it is. I've seen news clips on it, I've read numerous print stories, all either showing the front of the hand being used, or writing about the front of the hand being used. And all incorrect. On fact, some people on this site have specifically said they saw news stories showing the front of the hand being used. So I will stand by what I said.

Since you claim to have information and seem willing to share it:

What is this s3kr3t, in private only procedure?

If TSOs can not administer it then who can?

What is the procedure that the TSA is calling enhanced patdowns?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Just to be 100% clear, are you saying that there is only one pat-down that can be performed by TSOs and one (the "very very rare" one) that can only be done in private and not by a TSO or are you saying that there are two pat-downs that can be done by TSOs and one additional?

It sounds like you're saying the former, but I thought the situation was the latter, that there were still different pat-downs in the more routine alarm and non-alarm cases.

From what I'm reading, I don't think there is a procedure known internally as an "enhanced pat-down". I think that's a PR thing: they're saying that they "enhance the pat-downs" and some started calling it an "enhanced pat-down" even though there's no procedure by that name.

The overwhelming majority of law-abiding citizens will never be strip-searched in a federal or state prison, never be booked into their local lockup, never be arrested, and arguably, never even subjected to a stop-and-frisk Terry Stop by a LEO. (though the increasing erosion of freedoms in this country may eventually change at least the last point.) And while a lot of things go on in the military, for a lot of good reasons, I don't think aggressive patdowns are routine affairs for most soldiers/sailors/airmen.

In fact, prior to TSA, I suspect that a substantial plurality. if not a majority, of citizens never came face-to-face with an on-duty federal employee over the course of the average year. Like it or not, TSA is *the* visible face of the federal government. (The IRS on the other hand, is more of a disembodied impersonal entity to most folks.

What TSA is doing is subjecting large numbers of law-abiding citizens to a non-trivial portion of the treatment normally given to criminal suspects or convicts. So, yes, I think that the only "professional" contact with that part of the body that most citizens experience is from a physician.

BTW, re: the "super secret uber patdown/search with cause not performed by an officer and required to be in private:" how long before you think a full account of one of these searches gets posted here, or worse (for TSA), in the mainstream media? While individual TSOs are bound to not release SSI, that only delays the inevitable egg on TSA's face. Secrets can only be kept if the secret activity is either private or extremely rare, and TSA contacts so many passengers that even if only 1 in each million gets this treatment, it will be public knowledge before Christmas.

More Sexual Harassment Stuff
 

OK -- had a meeting canceled, so, here's some background materials:

Current TSA Sexual Harassment Directive. It links to a handbook which is behind the internal TSA firewall (for now...;))

TSA Office of Civil Rights and Liberties. A house of cards, I know, but, there is info about how to file a complaint. This is internal to the TSA, so, I would still copy the DHS IG.

DHS IG Hotline Information

Here are official DHS statistics of sexual harassment cases from Oct 1, 2004 (beginning of FY2005 through June 2010. FY 2010 is on track to be a banner year for sexual harassment cases in the TSA.

IME, the extra special search is an actual strip search and we have heard of one woman who was forced into a private room and forced to remove her blouse so TSA could inspect her bra straps.

A distinction is being made between TSO, LTSO and STSO.