OK...I guess CA law is different. In Florida, you can file a lien against anyone for anything, although if you're doing it just to be a jerk, the victim can certainly sue.

How can they prove the lien was filed to harass vs. filing to secure value against a future potential civil judgement?

Totally. All of these liberal pansies are living in a post-1787 America.

Ah yes. Just do anything to toe the party line and not act up. We must obey authority.

How many times has that line of thinking been used to justify criminal harassment or abuse of a person at the hands of his government? "If you only cooperated with us, none of this would have happened."

I respect authority that respects my rights and respects me. It's a two-way street. We don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship or police state.

On the part of the LEO and TSA officials involved? The OP did nothing immature from my reading of the events.

Again, from my reading, the OP did everything to cooporate. Could you provide examples of where you think he did otherwise or could have done something different that would not have resulted in the LEO claiming he was under drugs and arresting him?

You have far more faith in the system than I do.


Yeah? And when that test showed that the reason he was arrested was invalid, why did they continue to hold him?

Because California law requires a lis pendens or a lien against property be filed only in relation to an action in connection with the property in question such as a quiet title action (unless done pursuant to a completed judgment). Otherwise it is Slander of Title and a civil action may be brought. So because of the lack of legal justification for the filing, because the action is outside the law, a reasonable trier of fact could easily conclude it was done for harassment. In other words, there are no alternative legal reasons to file a lien not related to the property.

But peace officer protection is California has been weakened. The statute allowing officers to sue those who file false complaints against them has been consistently found to be unconstitutional in federal and state courts.

Not to defend the TSA, but this is not a TSA problem - it is a police harassment problem. This kind of crap happens every day in almost every major metro area. Here in SF a few years ago we had a couple of young guys who got beat up because one wouldn't share his fajitas with a cop (who happened to be the son of the assistant chief).

The remedy is a nice lawsuit for false arrest and false imprisonment. You can thank the cop for insisting on a drug test, as that will be further evidence in support of your case. :) I hope you collect big.

The cop asked for drugs. Not the screener. This kind of enraged attitude you present over whether or not the core is metal or a dense rubber object, or whether or not flammable residue is a valid indicator for a TSA agent to probe into is the reason why so many FTers find their way into trouble. You're right, looking at it from a lawyerly perspective, it's really stupid, but the reality is, this is the way it is. You can relax and play into their stupid line of reasoning (saying nothing other than YES or NO to their questions tends to help), make your flight and get on with your life or you can make a scene, get really offended when someone asks you whether or not there are drugs in a freakin' elastic ball as you'd see such a question as "somebody stating a fact about me that is completely wrong", then get fired up and act like socrates towards euthyphro, resulting in a wasted afternoon pleading guilty to a ridiculous century-old municipal ordinance and paying the fine of 3 squirrel tails.

And don't even attempt to call me a complacent GOP organic mass with undying support for the government and their security organizations. There are things we should be pissed about (wiretapping without evidence, for example) and things that are so stupid, we should just not bother wasting energy over because it will just result in more needless hassle (TSA freaking out over a rubber ball, for example).

don't hate the player, hate the bloody game.

So I guess the shoe fits but it's just a little tight?

Why does the cop need drugs? Doesn't his PD have psychologists available who can direct him to substance abuse professionals to get the help needed? Glad to hear that this screener wasn't asking for drugs. Drugs and work don't mix well. Given the LEO's actions, perhaps it's the LEO who needs to be subjected to the same as the OP. ;)

... typical "blame the victim". Never gets old, eh? :rolleyes:

Furthermore, not that many FTers find their way into trouble. Given that DHS/TSA is looking for trouble, it's actually surprising that there are not more FT reports of trouble here. I, unlike some government apologists, am looking forward to DHS/TSA having to disclose complaint information to Congress and the American people or face budget cuts and other accountability measures.

The stories on FT don't even come close to touching a fraction of the amount of nonsense incidents I've seen or heard about this year at US airports. The plastic bag-related nonsense is really taking the cake.

Let me try this again.

The blood test showed beyond a doubt that the man was NOT "under the influence" yet he was imprisoned nonetheless.

Do you think this is legal?

I like to think I live in a country where it is not.

Welcome to FlyerTalk :)


Tom in London not squirming

From Today's TSA Press Release (Posted Separately)
 

"Belligerent behavior, inappropriate jokes and threats will not be tolerated. Such incidents will result in delays and possibly missing your flight. Local law enforcement may be called as necessary."

You! That's right, you! You are under arrest. Inappropriate Joking in the First Degree.

Agreed - the cop was totally out of line. Especially with the "drug rubber band ball" fantasy which resulted in an unecessary (illegal?) detainment and forced blood test, and then more unecessary (illegal?) detainment after the blood test cleared the guy 100%.

This was your prior post upon which I was commenting:Nowhere within your post do you mention a cop; you only mention a screener. So I will reiterate that for a TSO to ask such a question is to go off mission. And for a cop to ask it given the only evidence he has is a "ball that shows a hard metal object in the centre" is not something that a reasonable person "understands that he will be asked questions like . . . 'are you smuggling drugs.'"

Enraged attitude? That is quite a stretch and far from the truth. However, if my post constitutes "enraged attitude," then many of us will find our "way into trouble." It is easy to blame the victim when the TSA and the LEO were not able to follow proper procedures.
"Relax and play into their stupid line of reasoning" is unfortunately reminiscent of Clayton Williams' observation to lay back and enjoy it. That remark cost him the Texas governorship.

Asking a question about whether there are drugs in the ball is not a fact. The TSO stating that the ball contained metal at its core is a statement of fact that was wrong. There is a significant and large difference.

I'm not sure at what point that the TSA crosses the line and you will question it. What we have generally seen is the TSA making the screening process more intrusive and burdensome upon passengers without any noticeable benefit in increased security. So now we are at the point where we always have to take off our shoes and we always have to show our personal toiletries. And that is just since August 10th.

My point is proven. Rather than just let stupid issues just slide, (ie, standing around with your hands in your pocket while skippy with the TSA thinks he has his first real big bust) you have to extrapolate, question, and draw lines between TSA screening and the Texas governorship. Two different things guy. The process is stupid, and when you deal with stupid people in a stupid process, the best thing to do is to withdraw your emotions and thought complex, not stoop to their bored level. Rather than protesting the TSA by analyzing who said what or whether or not it's right for someone to say this, spend your energy coaching little-league or something. Or better yet, fight for something that really matters, like individual privacy and the upholding of civil rights for all persons. Not how the TSA screener's communications skills could have been sharper and how the cop read the arrest rights and cautions ten seconds after he should have.

I'm done. I'm convinced that these things can be avoided by restraining the urge to make some stupid point. C-yah on the next "OMG TSA ARRESTED ME! I'M THE VICTIM!" thread.