TSA jails innocent traveler when he asks to file a complaint(philly.com)
philly.com
TSA jails innocent traveler when he asks to file a complaint
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150204_TSA_jails_innocent_traveler_when_he_asks_to_file_a_complaint.html
8 comments
This is exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted. The goal of terrorism is to push a country towards a police state. Subjected to increased police powers, people will blame the government, and will rise up against that government. So terrorism is an indirect attempt to destabilize a country. I think that was a big part of why the 9/11 attacks were carried out.
Of course, it didn't work. In the USA, George Bush got re-elected, and citizens aren't doing much more than grumbling about abuses of power by the police forces. Of the chain of causation that Qaeda was hoping to trigger, only the first one took place: enormously increased policing. No major government change has followed.
Of course, it didn't work. In the USA, George Bush got re-elected, and citizens aren't doing much more than grumbling about abuses of power by the police forces. Of the chain of causation that Qaeda was hoping to trigger, only the first one took place: enormously increased policing. No major government change has followed.
So the police lied about his actions and what he said in order to fabricate a crime, but forgot there was a camera rolling. And of course after having their dishonesty proven in court they keep their jobs. Business as usual, really.
I think you missed an important detail of the case that was mentioned in the article:
"At trial, Kieser was the first and only witness to testify. Municipal Judge Felice Stack acquitted Vanderklok of all charges within minutes of hearing Kieser's testimony. Vanderklok's lawyer, Thomas Malone, didn't get a chance to question the Philadelphia police officers and detectives who were involved in Vanderklok's arrest. Nor did he get to show the surveillance video that contradicted Kieser."
The video was never shown in court, and thus their dishonesty was never proven. Which might indicate the problem isn't just with the TSA.
"At trial, Kieser was the first and only witness to testify. Municipal Judge Felice Stack acquitted Vanderklok of all charges within minutes of hearing Kieser's testimony. Vanderklok's lawyer, Thomas Malone, didn't get a chance to question the Philadelphia police officers and detectives who were involved in Vanderklok's arrest. Nor did he get to show the surveillance video that contradicted Kieser."
The video was never shown in court, and thus their dishonesty was never proven. Which might indicate the problem isn't just with the TSA.
Sounds like the point of the (presumably criminal) trial was to determine whether Vanderklok was guilty of the charges presented - once he was acquitted, there's no point in continuing. If he wants to present a case against his accusers to show _them_ as being guilty of violating the law, he can, but that's a separate case - which he has indeed filed, very recently - and would be dealt with at a different trial.
The additional case is civil, not criminal.
A criminal case needs to be brought.
A criminal case needs to be brought.
the police lied about his actions
That Kieser guy is just a TSA employee, not a police officer.
That Kieser guy is just a TSA employee, not a police officer.
I'm sorry, potato... errr ya potato. if a person can put you into prison with the authority of their word then they are an officer of the law. However cute way they want to cut that in the political realm is all fine and gravy, but lets not start defending such silliness in a public discussion.
EDIT: I'm aware that the TSA call the police and the police do the actual arresting... that is sort of walking around the point
EDIT: I'm aware that the TSA call the police and the police do the actual arresting... that is sort of walking around the point
All the TSA can do is call the police. It's the police who put people in jail.
Yes, but if you called the police, had them showed up to a bag of cliff bars and fitbit, you think things would have proceeded the same way? There is a special legal status TSA officials hold be it expressed or not.
OP says he was verbally abusive to the police.
If he had calmly showed police his bag of power bars and digital watch, and asked pooice to view the cctv, he would have walked away.
(It's bullshit that being angry towards officers got him arrested; it's part of the police job to deal with people in distress and they should have managed it better).
If he had calmly showed police his bag of power bars and digital watch, and asked pooice to view the cctv, he would have walked away.
(It's bullshit that being angry towards officers got him arrested; it's part of the police job to deal with people in distress and they should have managed it better).
Not the police, the TSA supervisor.
When I first saw these cameras appear at JFK I was alarmed:
http://i.imgur.com/AA8mzMt.jpg
Then I thought about it and felt safer.
Now it seems even with the cameras, the TSA does what they please and aren't held to account.
Then I thought about it and felt safer.
Now it seems even with the cameras, the TSA does what they please and aren't held to account.
> Then I thought about it and felt safer.
It's amazing (and sad) we've reached a point where we see cameras and feel safer - not because it may deter the actions of criminals or terrorists, but rather those who are ostensibly there to protect us.
It's amazing (and sad) we've reached a point where we see cameras and feel safer - not because it may deter the actions of criminals or terrorists, but rather those who are ostensibly there to protect us.
I love the symbolism, where the mountain of cameras obscures the original purpose of having a clearly visible exit sign for safety.
Beautiful.
Beautiful.
I accidentally left some throwing knives (I am a martial artist and have an interesting these types of things) in my backpack and ran into a similar situation. I was appalled when TSA found the knives, as this was just a few years after 9/11, and pretty earnest in my rapid apology. Well, unfortunately for me, not only was the TSA having a "bad day", but the police officer they called over was having a worse one.
I could waste a lot of space with details, ultimately he made threats my way and I responded poorly as I do not care much for authority of any kind. The end result was me spending thousands of dollars on a lawyer and travel fees only to have the judge immediately dismiss the case when it went to court, as the whole situation was ludicrous when looked at from the outside. It seriously hurt my finances to defend myself, I was no architect and I was pretty much outraged over the entire ordeal.
My point is these TSA / LE type positions know they can wreck your world with essentially the wave of a wand. Stories like this poor guy sicken me. I would personally like to see private agencies running the show again, the TSA has too much power and situations like mine and this poor guy are really just inexcusable.
I could waste a lot of space with details, ultimately he made threats my way and I responded poorly as I do not care much for authority of any kind. The end result was me spending thousands of dollars on a lawyer and travel fees only to have the judge immediately dismiss the case when it went to court, as the whole situation was ludicrous when looked at from the outside. It seriously hurt my finances to defend myself, I was no architect and I was pretty much outraged over the entire ordeal.
My point is these TSA / LE type positions know they can wreck your world with essentially the wave of a wand. Stories like this poor guy sicken me. I would personally like to see private agencies running the show again, the TSA has too much power and situations like mine and this poor guy are really just inexcusable.
The difference is that guy did nothing while you ignored many different big warnings telling you not to take knives on a plane.
OP didn't ignore warnings - he was unaware that he was in possession of knives. Under civilized legal systems, either intent or harm is required for a crime to have been committed. Neither is present here.
The proper solution to the larger moral hazard issue is, as always, to appropriately assign liability. Civil recompense for the victim's time, emotional distress, and other damages (including all legal fees). And in extreme cases like the article, put the criminals (TSA goons and "blue shield" cops) in jail.
The proper solution to the larger moral hazard issue is, as always, to appropriately assign liability. Civil recompense for the victim's time, emotional distress, and other damages (including all legal fees). And in extreme cases like the article, put the criminals (TSA goons and "blue shield" cops) in jail.
So apparently Keiser was caught committing perjury and walked away scott free? Forget about keeping his job, how is he not going to prison?
> So apparently Keiser was caught committing perjury and walked away scott free?
Also, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242
Also, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242
Rather.
As I've already argued, kidnapping applies here.
As I've already argued, kidnapping applies here.
Interesting that this is a Philadelphia story; the ACLU recently drove Philadelphia PD to admit wrongdoing over a similar wrongful arrest involving TSA.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8943109
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8943109
The perjury seems pretty clear cut. What's the process of reporting that crime in the US, and has anyone made those reports?
I had a similar experience - but never said anything about "bombs" and thus wasn't taken to jail.
I just tried to complain about one of the inspectors making a smartassed remark to me when I went through was forced to wait for an hour for enhanced interrogation while I missed my flight.
I just tried to complain about one of the inspectors making a smartassed remark to me when I went through was forced to wait for an hour for enhanced interrogation while I missed my flight.
The man in this case says he never said anything about "bombs" either. It appears that the TSA supervisor entirely invented that.
The victim/plaintiff in this suit claims he never made any remark about bombs.
The TSA agent made an original claim about a statement mentioning "bomb". And then later changed it something more sinister, but the plaintiff denies both.
The TSA agent made an original claim about a statement mentioning "bomb". And then later changed it something more sinister, but the plaintiff denies both.
http://kidnapping.uslegal.com/kidnapping-v-false-imprisonmen...
Kidnapping occurs when a person, without lawful authority, physically moves another person without that other person’s consent, with the intent to use the abduction in connection with some other nefarious objective....
False imprisonment, on the other hand, gives rise to a civil claim for damages. False imprisonment means the illegal confinement of one individual without his or her consent by another individual in such a manner as to violate the confined individual’s right to be free from restraint of movement.
dragonwriter below brings up 18 USC 242, "Deprivation of rights under color of law"
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights ... and ... if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9000692