Role-reversal: Passenger accused of groping TSA agent

[KansDem]

Source: USA Today

A 61-year-old Colorado woman was arrested in Phoenix on charges she groped a Transportation Security Administration airport security screener.

The woman, Yukari Mihamae, allegedly "refused to be go through passenger screening and became argumentative before she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands," The Associated Press writes.

Police were called to the scene and say Mihamae admitted to grabbing the agent. Authorities say Mihamae continued to argue with officers on the scene, and was eventually arrested. She now faces a felony count of sexual abuse.

MyFoxPhoenix describes Mihamae as a "self-employed businesswoman," adding she was released from custody on Friday.

The incident happened at Phoenix Sky Harbor airport on Thursday, but the story has been picking up steam over the weekend -- perhaps because of the twist on the more usual reports in which passengers are the ones accusing TSA agents.


Read more: http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2011/07/tsa-agent-grope-phoenix/177327/1

---

I wondered how long it would be before something like this happened...

[LibDemAlways]

1. Every day across the US government agents inappropriately

and without justification touch the private parts of people whose only "crime"' is needing to get from point A to point B by aircraft. But apparently it's "sexual abuse" when the tables are turned. Bullshit. I hope Ms. Mihamae establishes a legal defense fund. I'd be happy to contribute.

[SDuderstadt]

7. Maybe you should read your...

airline's Contract of Carriage next time you fly. You consented to the search when you bought your ticket.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Abq_Sarah]

42. I don't have a problem with a contract

Between two private parties. What I object to is government officials using a private contract to get around the 4th amendment. Those TSA agents are government employees and their procedures originate from DHS, not the airlines.

[SDuderstadt]

43. With the approval of....

Congress.

[NYC Liberal]

11. No, her crime is sexual assault. The woman consented to the procedure and security arrangements when

she chose to fly and purchased her ticket.

When I want to go to a game at Yankee Stadium, I have to open my bag for the agent at the gate. If I don't want to do that, I don't go.

[ecstatic]

19. +1 nt

[LibDemAlways]

34. There's a difference between what is reasonable and what is

unreasonable search and seizure. Yankee Stadium reserves the right to inspect purses for weapons and whatever else they don't want the general public carrying into a game. That is not unreasonable. Forcing travelers to undergo intimate pat-downs which including touching of their genitals is in no way comparable to opening a purse for inspection. Very lousy analogy.

[NYC Liberal]

37. It is a perfectly apt analogy. Everyone is aware of the conditions

beforehand in both situations; that was the comparison. If you don't consent, then you can choose not to fly.

[LibDemAlways]

38. Yes, if I want to fly on a commercial airliner in the US I have to surrender

my 4th amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure. I get that. Doesn't make it in any way, shape, or form right, however.

[NYC Liberal]

40. You do realize the 4th Amendment is not so black and white, don't you?

Google "border search exception" and "administrative search" for starters. There are many instances where a warrant is not required for a search (or seizure).

[LibDemAlways]

45. I'm not talking warrants. The people at Yankee Stadium don't need a

warrant to check a purse. What I am talking about is members of the traveling public, who are not under suspicion of any crime, being subjected to a gross invasion of personal privacy without justification or reason.

[NYC Liberal]

47. "without justification or reason" - Except there is justification and reason.

Suspicion of crime is not the standard at the airport. You agree to the terms when you purchase a ticket.

[LibDemAlways]

48. There is no justification or reason for

feeling up the traveling public. None.

[SDuderstadt]

49. The courts disagree with you...

and I have gone through secondary security multiple times and have never been "felt up'.

[NYC Liberal]

51. But what do the courts know about the law anyway? nt

[SDuderstadt]

52. Apparently more than people who just recite...

the 4th amendment word-for-word and think that is legal analysis.

[NYC Liberal]

50. There is a justification for ensuring that bombs or other weapons

are not brought onto planes.

[LibDemAlways]

53. So the US government has to feel up small children, elderly

Alzheimer's patients, college students, businessmen and women, housewives, etc. because so many of them have brought bombs aboard aircraft. That's bullshit. Besides, the airlines themselves provide plenty of potential tools of terror. A determined terrorist could easily pass through our so-called "security" and then go on to cause all sorts of havoc aboard a plane. The next time a plane is targeted, the bomb is most likely to go into the cargo hold anyway. While granny is having some moron's hands shoved down her pants, cargo is going onto the plane unscreened. TSA is meaningless and a huge waste of taxpayer dollars.

[SDuderstadt]

54. "while granny is having some moron's hands shoved down her pants"

No one has had anyone's hands shoved down their pants.

What a silly, baseless (and false) accusation.

[NYC Liberal]

55. So because someone might figure out a way to get past it, there's no sense in having it?

That makes absolutely no sense at all. It is not perfect, no. But no system is. There can always been improvements and improvements should be made where needed. But the idea that there is no reason or justification for the security procedures is simply nonsense, your appeals to emotion notwithstanding.

A determined terrorist could easily pass through our so-called "security" and then go on to cause all sorts of havoc aboard a plane.

Even if it is the case -- as I said, no system is perfect or fail proof -- that still filters out a lot of people.

The next time a plane is targeted, the bomb is most likely to go into the cargo hold anyway.

Unless security is lax at the airport. In which case, why bother with the cargo hold?

While granny is having some moron's hands shoved down her pants, cargo is going onto the plane unscreened.

There is no reason why there cannot be security screening both for cargo and at the airport. None at all.

[LibDemAlways]

59. Where did I say there is no reason for security? I didn't. I said, and I

repeat, there is no need for the TSA. Bunch of losers who couldn't get a job at Wal-Mart are supposed to protect the public? You really think they're capable?

The country would be better off if we scrapped this nonsense of nudie scans and feel-ups, brought in bomb sniffing dogs at a fraction of the cost, profiled (yes, profiled) travelers, and started paying attention to the cargo hold. I realize it would increase the unemployment rolls for the basically unemployable idiots who now are paid to harass the public, but so what? I am all for intelligent security, not the shit-for-brains crap in place now.

[Veronica.Franco]

60. TSA hires GED graduates ...

People who have NEVER had authority over anyone in their life ... they didn't graduate high school until the GED program later in life ... they don't have the life skills to make some of the judgements about people they are making and in some cases they are using their uniform and their badge to abuse ....

I had the experience, as I have tried to share here repeatedly and you may remember, and it was humiliating ... I was STALKED INTO THE ladies room in OAKLAND CALIFORNIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT by a woman TSA officer ... They are abusing their authority and eventually a woman like this frequent flier lashes out when she can't take any more ...

How much are we supposed to take? ... I have a complaint lodged with TSA and I have received several emails and an apology ... The woman who STALKED me was removed from the screening area ...

Is there a special area for women abused, stalked, humiliated, and sexually harassed to post? ... am I missing something? ....

[LibDemAlways]

61. TSA doesn't even require a GED. A year of paid work experience can

substitute for "education." It's a complete joke. They hire morons who are basically unemployable anywhere else and then give them the authority to harass the public. It's a dream job for a loser who wants to take out his or her frustrations on others. And the sad part is it makes no one safer. These idiots are so busy feeling up grandmas, they wouldn't know a terrorist if one bit them in the ass.

[tammywammy]

62. Wow, slamming people with a GED???

I love to bash those that have dropped out of high school trying to back on the right route. Or those damn home schooled children.

Hey, you know there was this GED student in a community college class last semester. I told him he was a fucking loser for not finishing his high school diploma like everyone else I know.

:sarcasm:

[LibDemAlways]

64. I know a young woman who dropped out of high school,

completed a GED, earned community college credits, and is enrolling at UC Berkeley this fall as a junior transfer student. She's 18 and a total go-getter.

The GED isn't the problem. More power to anyone who finishes high school. The problem is TSA's lax requirements for its screeners. These people are supposedly being entrusted with assuring the safety of the traveling public, and the truth is they don't even need a high school diploma or a GED to qualify for the job. The standards are so low it's pathetic and it shows in the caliber of people they hire. My husband recently witnessed a TSA agent rifling through a carry-on and then shouting "I found a weapon. I found a weapon." The "weapon" was a small tire-gauge for the person's bicycle. Ridiculous.

[tammywammy]

66. That's not what the poster I was responding to posted

They posted:
"People who have NEVER had authority over anyone in their life ... they didn't graduate high school until the GED program later in life ... they don't have the life skills to make some of the judgements about people they are making and in some cases they are using their uniform and their badge to abuse ...."

Talking about TSA abuse, the lack of decent training and faux security is one thing. Narrowing that down to the fact they accept people with a GED is another.

[LibDemAlways]

67. I understand your taking exception to what the person posted. I agree

no one should diss anyone for having earned a GED. If you take a look at the requirements for screeners on the TSA web site, you'll see that a high school diploma or GED is not required. All that is required is a year of work experience in some loosely defined "security" position.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KurtNYC]

2. Tit for tat

many threads on this already. The woman wrote a book on Wikileaks, etc. etc.

[HopeHoops]

3. Fair's fair - is this a "tit for tat" situation?

[jwirr]

4. If I were a jury I would refuse to find her guilty.

[seabeyond]

12. yup. but then, they wouldnt have me on the jury, either, lol. agree. nt

[bemildred]

5. TSA might want to think about this, they are more or less admitting what they do is sexual abuse. nt

[Demeter]

6. TSA NEVER lets the facts get in the way

In this modern, reality-free society, we are victims of Calvinball.

[NYC Liberal]

14. A police officer is allowed to handcuff someone and arrest them.

A private citizen cannot; it would be unlawful detention or kidnapping.

[seabeyond]

15. they cannot unless they have probable cause. oh wait.... tsa doesnt need that.

these untrained, uneducated, minimum workers have more power than our police.

[SDuderstadt]

16. It's an administrative search...

you consent to it when you buy your ticket.

[seabeyond]

17. forced consent. ya. i get it. nt

[SDuderstadt]

18. It's not...

"forced consent". It's a condition of your contract of carriage. No one is forcing you to fly.

[seabeyond]

20. it absolutely forced. to argue.... you dont have to fly is crap. some people HAVE to fly, for

their job. they could refuse and be fired. we are talking about food on their table. some people HAVE to get somewhere for all kinds of reasons.

it is forced consent.

you know all this but we play pretty word games to allow an invasion that a decade ago would never have been acceptable, but because we have allowed more rights to be taken, and more laws to be broke, we are too desensitized to stand up for our rights because we are so cowardly afraid.

guns dont kill people, people kill people
freedom isnt free

trite

[SDuderstadt]

22. You consent to comply with FAA regulations when you...

purchase your ticket. You don't have a right to opt out of the screening process, when EVERY other passenger has to comply. The right of the other passengers to an assurance that every precaution has been taken to ensure their safety trumps your inconvenience. Again, no one is forcing you to fly.

I don't know how to say it any plainer.

[seabeyond]

23. i guess i can say the same "I don't know how to say it any plainer."

Again, no one is forcing you to fly.


cop out

because of fear

[SDuderstadt]

24. If you want to fly...

you have to comply with the same safety regulations as everyone else.

What is so hard to understand about that?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Veronica.Franco]

44. Fear is a big seller ...

around here today ....

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

28. No, I see the necessity of...

the safety regulations. I'd love to see your detailed design for a better system.

[Veronica.Franco]

30. Would you?

Seems to me you want to act like this is 1956 and somehow THESE current "safety regulations" are as benign as a peanut butter and jelly sandwich ... instead of the actual intrusive and abusive system we are fighting to end now ...

A better system would screen 100% of the luggage and all the cargo at our ports instead of wasting the billions of dollars on the body screening machines which have done nothing but enrich the few who developed and sold them as ANOTHER unnecessary overpriced government contract ...

[SDuderstadt]

31. Tell that to the people who lost their lives when...

the "Chechen widows" brought down two planes in one day with explosives they had hidden on their bodies.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NYC Liberal]

25. Should customs agents not be allowed to search the baggage

of people entering the country because some people travel as part of their job?

Go to Google and type in "administrative search."

[Veronica.Franco]

29. they don't ...

I've been through customs and they barely notice if you're breathing .... when I flew between Amsterdam and London the screening area was VACANT ... nobody around ...

[NYC Liberal]

33. They certainly can. I just took a trip to Canada and

both Canadian and US customs looked in my bag (and others' bags).

[Veronica.Franco]

36. oh, I know they can ...

the surprising thing to me was to find the area completely vacant ... we walked through a maze of screening area with the tables still there that must have been used once upon a time ... no more ...

We're the only only country that seems to be gearing up our TSA for some imagined Armageddon? ... it's bizarre to see the differences ...

[NYC Liberal]

21. Right. That is because you consent to the security arrangements when you purchase

your ticket.

And the agents at the security checkpoints do not arrest people. From the http://www.tsa.gov/join/benefits/soar/tsa/tso_full.shtm">TSA's description of the job: "alerts superiors and/or law enforcement officers (LEOs) when suspicious behaviors are observed"

[LibDemAlways]

39. You can call it "security arrangements," but that's a complete joke since TSA

does not and cannot keep you secure. Do you think a determined terrorist is going to be stopped at a TSA checkpoint by an underpaid, poorly trained person whose only other job possibility involves asking "Do you want me to supersize that?" What a farce.

[bemildred]

63. That's nice, but we are talking about routine feeling up of women and little girls here.

http://www.americablog.com/2011/07/mother-arrested-for-blocking-tsa-from.html

[LibDemAlways]

65. TSA apologists have no problem with the feeling up of women, little

girls, infants, the elderly, and anyone else who is breathing. They are so scared shitless of bogeymen terrorists they'd allow an anal cavity search of their own grandmother under the guise of "security." It's pathetic.

[truthisfreedom]

8. Reminds me of a million monkeys with a million typewriters...

Wait around long enough and almost everything will happen.

[seabeyond]

13. or on the other hand, the sheep that readily and submissively say... baaaaaah. nt

[Fire Walk With Me]

10. I'm so lonely I don't actually fly; I just go through screening every saturday night.

:hide:

[Forkboy]

35. I so want to serve on this jury.

[Veronica.Franco]

41. I will support Mihamae every way I can ...

even if the DU deleted the incident that happened to me ... very odd, people ... if it happened to your wife, your daughter, your friends, somebody YOU knew you'd have left it up? ... how far we've fallen ... this is a sad moment for me ...

[Bonobo]

46. Miyamae is a Japanese translator who did a book on Wikileaks

and she is also a producer at KGNU, the community free-radio station in Boulder.

Sounds like she is one of us.

Targeted?

I am also told that she was on a project that took her to Phoenix 2x/week, so she was taking that airplane flight many, many, many times and most likely KNEW the TSA agent that she had an altercation with.

Did they begin to have a bad relationship and she was getting harrassed?

It is hard for me to imagine a Japanese woman of her age doing such a thing without a lot of provocation.

Remember, we are hearing only one side of the story.