View Full Version : What IS the accepted security 'pat down' search pattern?


FWOF
18th Nov 2008, 12:03
A serious request ladies and gentleman, although I'm sure many of you will see the humour in the following!

On Monday, I flew from ABZ to AMS. Going through security to get the interconnecting flight, I set off the alarm. Took of my boots, my jewellery but still set it off. I assumed it was the underwire in my bra, a common 'beeper' for most women. I was asked if I minded being searched, of course I said not at all. The female officer then started the usual pattern of checking down my arms, the two sides of her hands under my arms, under my boobs, down the centre of my chest between my boobs, but then she ALSO put both hands full on my boobs and squeezed them. Then carried on down my front, sides etc. But when she came to do the behind section she again clearly grabbed my bottom with both hands and gave that a squeeze.

I was sent on my way and it was only abou 10 mins later (it was a very early morning!) and after I'd thought about it, that I realised I'd never ever been checked like that before, and if I were of a different mind set, then I could have been left feeling very uncomfortable!

SO I ask the question of those in the know, what IS the correct and accepted search pattern and does it include copping a feel of people?



Beer_n_Tabs
18th Nov 2008, 15:43
No idea to be honest, but where doI apply?
Getting paid to fondle boobies, blimey !! :ok:

On the flip side I was going through security in BHX just a couple of weeks ago....set the beep off....now I am not sure if Mr Security man seemed to think I had b0llocks made out of metal or something but he searched more than comfortably close to the old Tally-Whacker.

I think I actually went on tip toes at one point..kind of a silent "WOAHHHH steady there fella"

lexxity
18th Nov 2008, 17:30
That was groping there FWOF. I get beeped most everyday at work and have only had a pat down like that once, which was reported. Seems the employee in question made a habit of it.

strake
18th Nov 2008, 18:35
Normally, you only get to watch the "pat down" if you are behind a "pattee". However, last week when flying from T5, I was able to wander over to the rather big windows in the BA lounge, with a nice cafe latte, and look down on the security entrance and watch the incoming traffic.
There was a male and female "patter" and, I have to say, I was most impressed with the uniformed young girl. She stood straight, no talking (unlike the bored, yawning, male) watched carefully and when the arch beeped, she courteously but firmly moved the "pattee" to one side where she spoke briefly and then started the procedeure. I watched two or three subjects and she followed the same method which, I noticed, included hands through the cleavage, the inner leg and a great deal of attention to every part of the body. Whilst it seemed intrusive, it was carried out quickly and efficiently. At the end, she put her hand on the elbow of the subject spoke some words and pointed to the end of the x-ray machine. All subjects smiled at her and I realised I was watching someone who was very good at her job.
However, to answer your question, whilst it was obviously very personal, I don't recall seeing any undue groping...:O

stevef
18th Nov 2008, 19:43
I had a similar experience at Stansted a couple of years ago. The security person (male, as I am) started taking inside leg measurements despite me passing the X-ray machine with no squawks. I saw a similar complaint on Pprune a little later about the same airport and quite possibly the same person, going by his description (non indigenous). In another environment, he would have become punched.

Skipness One Echo
18th Nov 2008, 19:54
There was an older gentleman at Prestwick last year who enjoyed sliding his fingers inside my waist band and checked for weapons. Clearly he enjoyed finding the one at the front. I have worn loose boxers since. I couldn't quite believe it.

LH2
19th Nov 2008, 01:27
Hi, FWIW it's been over two years since I last let a civilian put their hands on me or my stuff. If myself or my bag needs to be searched, I get the police to come and do it, since none else has legal authority to do so.

It works and only takes five minutes extra. You also suddenly get treated with proper respect, funnily enough. Give it a try next time.

SNS3Guppy
19th Nov 2008, 02:30
Who has the authority, is a relative thing.

I'm a crewmember, but under certain circumstances we are also charged with wanding and patting down a passenger or jumpseater. In a former life in law enforcement, and also in charter, the same thing was required.

Ordinarily, we request a female to pat down a female. I'm not, so it's not ordinarily something I do now.

One cannot avoid areas of the body simply because they may be sensitive, but one must also be sensitive to avoid embarassment or the appearance of something other than a professional search. If you think about it, leaving the breasts or genital area as untouchable would make them certain carriage points for contraband or weapons. In areas where one is subject to search, then the whole body is subject to search. Generally provision must be made for privacy if required, and one who refuses to submit to a patdown may be subject to other methods of search (such as disrobing or revealing undergarments, etc). Under some circumstances, when one has elected to enter security, simply turning and leaving while refusing a search isn't possible...there's such a thing as not simply being able to turn around and walk out.

I've noted a certain amount of indignation among some posters here to this concept. Some feel that they should be free to do as they please where ever they please; this is not the case in a secure area. One may not have the option to simply turn around while in transit through security and leave. One may be able to appreciate that someone attempting to smuggle an item through security, who gets cold feet or becomes afraid of discovery, should not, and cannot, be allowed to simply turn and walk away.

If you feel that the search of your property or person are not in order, you should ask that the process stop, a supervisor be called, and the matter addressed. If you encounter a situation in which you think you have been improperly touched or asked to do something improper, then it's in everybody's attention to request a supervisor and get the matter handled. You should be offered the chance to be searched in private or in the presence of a witness, and in the case of a search of a sensitive area, you should be given an explaination of what is to be done before it is done.

In the event that we are to perform a female search and the female consents (frequently we don't have a female to perform it for us), then sensitive areas are discussed before touching, and we use the back of our hands. No grabbing.

Doobs
19th Nov 2008, 06:41
does it include copping a feel of people?

Absolutely no way should she have 'groped' or squeezed you. Using sweeping movements with your hands including the back of your hands should be sufficient to detect anything untoward.

This should all be done discreetly, quickly and above all with a bit of dignity. It is not a pleasant experience hand searching pax and is equally uncomfortable for the searcher aswell as the passenger especially when it comes to peoples bits. I was never instructed to squeeze anyones bum !

FWOF
19th Nov 2008, 07:28
Thanks for the responses, and it was, as I had thought, not right.

I've never had a problem being patted down before and have never been made to feel uncomfortable, and neither have I had my boobs and bum squeezed before. I've had the ladies feel all around my bra and use the hand wand on me. I've even been taken to a private room (at ABZ) and to the curtained area at AMS and had to remove my top.

I don't see the problem in being patted down at all, and I can well imagine it can be an unpleasant job for the searcher also, especially in the height of summer. However, I do feel that there must be a very small minority if searchers who clearly get their jollies by pushing the boundaries slightly, thinking no-one will notice.

I'm a great believer that people will get away with what they are allowed to get away with. Until they are told not to.

CornishFlyer
19th Nov 2008, 07:31
LH2-security staff DO have a legal right to search you and your belongings. Do you really think they are stopping everyone at the airport illegally? Come on, get a grip. I do agree there can sometimes be rude members of security staff (at EMA we have a couple of real bad eggs but thankfully these are the minority-as will be the case anywhere) but making a big hoohar about who has a legal responsibility? Don't talk pants

bealine
19th Nov 2008, 07:37
This is a difficult area. As a man working at Heathrow, I have been almost "groped" on a few occasions - on one occasion, I did complain to the supervisor.

However, I have seen internal memos from the Department for Transport following their inspections where they accuse the Security Staff of not being thorough enough with the body searches and being too gentle!

"In particular, the boobs and buttocks and genital area have proved popular places for the concealment of prohibited articles and you must be certain that these areas have been checked. If the alarm on the security arch is activated, you must establish beyond any doubt the reason."

.....So, on the one hand, the Security Officers are being told to be firm - on the other, we feel our dignity is being violated. Lose - Lose situation I would say!

Mind you, if you do feel the search is too intrusive to the point of "interference", you are welcome to bring the matter to the attention of the Security Team Leader.

FWOF
19th Nov 2008, 10:59
Surely the least intrusive way is to remove the person being searched (as I have been) and ask them to remove their article/s of clothing, and then use the hand scanner?

Although I've no issue at all with being searched, be it my person or my belongings, I do think that some people take a little bit of power and use it to their own ends. You can bet your bottom dollar that had I said, "Hey! Don't squeeze my boobs/bum", I would have been frog marched off somewhere and received a formal warning.

The legalities of it don't really concern me, I do think there are way too many people turned on by the 'claim culture' and the associated disrespecting of authority. Some people are very precious about what they perceive to be 'their rights'. Security is there for our ... security. You can't moan about it on one hand when it holds you up and then moan about it when something goes wrong.

Anyway, I think the question as to what the proper search pattern is has been covered, and I thank those of you that have given your input :ok:

Skipness One Echo
19th Nov 2008, 16:16
LH2-security staff DO have a legal right to search you

Wrong wrong wrong. It is a condition of entry, not a legal right. If you discover you have left a large hunting knife in your bag, they can't demand to search your person and your bag if you decide not to proceed through security.

It's an IMPORTANT distinction. They can inform the Police but they are warranted officers of the law. Security staff are not permitted to frog march you anywhere, that's a Police matter again. Forcibly doing so without a compelling reason to manhandle someone is assault.

Geez life used to be simpler than this ...

CornishFlyer
19th Nov 2008, 17:38
Of course they have a legal right to search you if you wish to proceed airside. I didn't say anything about being frog-marched to police. They would hold you and prevent you from going airside and the police would be called but they are obviously legally allowed to search your belongings and person if you wish to go airside otherwise people would be putting in claims left right and centre

strake
19th Nov 2008, 17:57
Actually, they do not have the "legal right" to search you nor can they detain you. They are supposed to ask you first before searching your bags or person. However, most of us just stick our arms up or nod at them if our bag is selected. If you refuse, they will offer you the facility of a private search. If you refuse this, they will tell you that you cannot proceed. It is likely that at this point they will call a police officer because you are either a nutter or you have something to hide.

CornishFlyer
19th Nov 2008, 20:28
Indeed. Obviously you can refuse but what they are doing is not illegal as you are giving them permission therefore making it legal surely?

Final 3 Greens
19th Nov 2008, 20:51
Obviously you can refuse but what they are doing is not illegal as you are giving them permission therefore making it legal surely?

Giving permission for a search is not giving permission for a grope.

Mr Quite Happy
19th Nov 2008, 21:37
Hi, FWIW it's been over two years since I last let a civilian put their hands on me or my stuff. If myself or my bag needs to be searched, I get the police to come and do it, since none else has legal authority to do so.

It works and only takes five minutes extra. You also suddenly get treated with proper respect, funnily enough. Give it a try next time.
I’m sorry, my idiot-on-principle meter just went off the scale. For you 5 minutes of protecting your dignity, for everyone else in the queue behind you are a bloody stupid idiot. Is there actually a physical difference between an airport cop searching you or your bag compared to the rent-a-cop by the machine. I mean, something that’s worth five minutes of your time and the man month of the combined people behind you? Incidentally, try your ‘legal authority’ in some countries and you’ll have more than just a pat down..:D


Absolutely no way should she have 'groped' or squeezed you. Using sweeping movements with your hands including the back of your hands should be sufficient to detect anything untoward.

and

Thanks for the responses, and it was, as I had thought, not right.

As somebody that used to pat people down in an environment slightly less civilised than a UK airport I can assure you that your grope and squeeze can be happily justified in certain circumstances. An example of that might be if you are a larger person, rolls of fat and breasts can easily have prosthetic (SP?) bags created for the carrying of items or substances that shouldn’t be airside/allowed. A squeeze is the only way this can be confirmed. Or at least the easiest on-the-spot way.

With regards to some other posters. I always concentrated especially on the junk area of men because, frankly, its where you find the most stuff they don’t want you to. It’s a winner :ok:

Surely the least intrusive way is to remove the person being searched (as I have been) and ask them to remove their article/s of clothing, and then use the hand scanner?

Actually no. Though for reasons that are probably available on the web but shouldn’t be, I’ll not say why in open forum.

Of course they have a legal right to search you if you wish to proceed airside.

And

Actually, they do not have the "legal right" to search you nor can they detain you. They are supposed to ask you first before searching your bags or person.

Actually UK law is very interesting on that. I can detain you in the street if I have reason to believe that you are being a bad person, its not a citizens arrest either. Likewise, IIRC, searches of private bags etc are perfectly legal. The bit I cannot remember, is if civilians can do it. However on private/corporate property I’m pretty sure that its 100% fine anyone.

Too many people watch too much American telly and then think UK laws are the same as the US… :mad:

radeng
20th Nov 2008, 16:20
So if you feel that the search was inappropriate, can one not call for a police officer and make a formal complaint of indecent assault? Of course you might miss a flight, but if the circumstances appear to justify it, it could be the right thing to do. If the police refuse to do anything, then it's case for the IPCC. That at least gives them enough paperwork to do that they will take the matter seriously......

Incidentally, what about a someone wearing an insulin pump? What do they do then?

philbky
20th Nov 2008, 17:15
The other problem in this area is the use of jewelery in intimate areas. Anyone with sense would remove it before travelling but, as we know, people seem to lose their common sense when they travel.

clareprop
20th Nov 2008, 18:32
If a potential passenger wishes to transit from landside to airside at a UK airport, they must reasonably expect to be have their belongings and person searched. If, when they arrive at the security area, the potential passenger decides not to be searched, then that is their right. Security staff at arches and x-ray machines have NO legal right to demand to search them or their baggage or to detain, arrest or anything else that has been suggested in this thread. Of course, if the potential passenger refuses to be searched, then security staff are absolutely correct to refuse entry airside. They presumably would then ask the potential passenger why they have tried to travel in the first place and if the security staff have grounds to suspect that the potential passenger has something to hide, they could, if they wish, call a police officer.
At the moment, (subject to proposed imminent change) Police officers at aiports have no rights to " stop and search" on suspicion. Of course, someone who has arrived at an airport and refuses to be searched and still tries to gain airside entry would probably give a UK police officer strong grounds to believe an offence is likely to be committed so in reality, they would be dealt with quite firmly.
To the question about insulin pumps or any that may arise about false legs, pacemakers etc, most owners of such devices know exactly how to present themselves to staff and invariably do so.
As an aside, these security staff, both visible to passengers and at aiport worker security stations, are subject to constant checking by independent organisations which pass themselves off as bona fide travellers or airport workers. They are tested on their search and examination techniques and have a pass rate of over 98%.
The role security staff carry out is mandated by government and abhored by passengers and flight crew alike. Despite this, they do the best they can under difficult circumstances to protect all of us who fly.
If they get it right, nothing is said, if they get it wrong, they will live with it for the rest of their lives.
I think we owe them a debt of gratitude.

The Real Slim Shady
20th Nov 2008, 18:47
I've been random searched ( quota as they call it every morning this week going to work.

What really ticks me off is that on 2 occasions there have been police going through in front of me and they just walk through the scanner unimpeded even though their body armor etc sets off the archway.

What gives them the right to do this when we, drivers airframe, get a going over?

RYR738_driver
20th Nov 2008, 19:56
Real Slim Shady, I was just going to vent my frustration at the exact same thing. Despite holding exactly the same airside pass as the 2 police officers, when I went through crew security today, it beeped (due to me forgetting to remove my torch from pocket), so it was shoes off and I was thoroughly searched by hand and then by a handheld detector whereas the officers behind me just flashed their ID and walked through, even with a beeping scanner.

It hurts that i've paid for the privilege to be treated like this :ugh:

738_driver

SNS3Guppy
20th Nov 2008, 20:34
In uniform a few days ago, presenting my crew badge, my luggage was opened, my underwear layed out in the open, and my belongings scattered, after my bag passed through X-ray. I was in view of hundreds of passengers. My contraband? The same approved pack of flashlight batteries in my rollaway bag that's been there for years.

Final 3 Greens
20th Nov 2008, 20:36
I think we owe them a debt of gratitude.

What a ridiculous comment.

I think we owe a debt of gratitude to front line armed forces, who lay their lives on the line to protect society.

Security staff are paid to do a nice, safe, job near to home.

Final 3 Greens
20th Nov 2008, 20:42
Guppy

I'm disgusted at you.

If those batteries have been there for year, they probably wouldn't work when you really needed them :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

clareprop
20th Nov 2008, 20:54
F3G

I think we owe a debt of gratitude to front line armed forces, who lay their lives on the line to protect society.


I completely agree but I thought we were writing about security staff.

PAXboy
21st Nov 2008, 00:43
philbkyThe other problem in this area is the use of jewellery in intimate areas
A male friend of mine says that the airport scanners do not react to his intimate jewellery on his (ahem) jewels and he has an eye-watering collection of metal down there. :uhoh:

And for those male members (Phnarr) of PPRuNe wanting to know how PaxBoy (Gender = Male) knows just how much intimate jewellery his male friends have ... then you ought to visit my naturist club. :ok:

RYR738_driver
21st Nov 2008, 00:56
Just been speaking to a colleague of mine who told me that today he went through security with change in his pocket, his metal watch on his wrist, ring on finger, and metal pen in his front shirt pocket - not really that interesting until he mentioned that the metal detector did not beep and he was ushered through without a problem?
How does that work???

Final 3 Greens
21st Nov 2008, 04:49
I completely agree but I thought we were writing about security staff.

We were and I don't feel I owe them any more of a debt of gratitude than the local traffic warden, who also performs a job that many wouldn't like.

A fair days pay for a fair days work in an environment that doesn't begin to compare with the front line.

SNS3Guppy
21st Nov 2008, 06:16
I used to use a safety pin to secure my tie from behind, and even that would set off the detector in some locations. It can be subjective, depending on where you go. Some are more sensitive than others.

philbky
21st Nov 2008, 07:15
PAXboy - it all depends on the type and sensitivity /settings of the equipment. Some do, some don't as quite a few women have found out.

Mr Quite Happy
21st Nov 2008, 07:58
Machines are variable. They'll beep for shoes one day, not another. Hence you'll be asked at certain times to take off your belts and shoes (and even once something with a lot of zip). I've even seen a conveyor belt full of chunky rolex's because the staff wanted the heavy watches off. It's about speeding the pax through.

Machines will also randomly beep for a check. Which is annoying for me as I'm a really quick security check-thru guy. I never set off the alarms me!

Unfortunately, some machines will inform the security staff that it is a random check (AMS for example). This could be bad from a security point of view as you don't want the security staff to know why they are searching someone, only that they should be. It's to be expectations. There's another school of thought on the subject but its not one I agree with that says the security staff should expect to find something on every search otherwise they lose faith in their machines. DISCUSS....

clareprop
21st Nov 2008, 08:18
I don't feel I owe them any more of a debt of gratitude than the local traffic warden


Given you fly "...120 sectors per year...", I would have thought you might have slightly more reason to thank security screeners than traffic wardens..but of course you are entitled to your view.

Seems to me these people get a very hard time. What are they supposed to do? They are instructed to check crews, staff and passengers alike. I think one has to accept that armed, badged and uniformed police officers have to be an obvious exception.

I suppose the other way of looking at it is to try and understand how we would all feel about flying if tomorrow, the government said "OK, no more security checks necessary and we'll save £30m a year"

Final 3 Greens
21st Nov 2008, 17:21
Given you fly "...120 sectors per year...", I would have thought you might have slightly more reason to thank security screeners than traffic wardens..but of course you are entitled to your view.

I also drive a lot and without traffic wardens that wouldn't work either.

Traffic wardens also operate out in the field, often without quick assistance if required.

Also, what about firemen, who risk their lives to help us and doctors/nurses who put themselves in harm's way, both physically and mentally?

My conclusion is that your argument is nonsense, screeners are not owed a debt of gratitude, they receive fair pay for fair work.

clareprop
21st Nov 2008, 17:33
Very well, F3G, I understand the point you are making from your view.

Perhaps you would also allow me to make a point from my view without attacking it to harshly:ok:

PAXboy
21st Nov 2008, 18:40
RYR738_driverHow does that work???
The sensitivity of metal detection units in the UK seems to vary greatly. When visiting my mother in the Isle of Man, my clothing would not trip the detector at Luton but the same boots on the return journey - would. This was before removing shoes was standard.

I used to comment to the operator that their scanner was set to a lower threshold than the one at Luton. They replied (emphatically) that was not the case and that all arches were set the same in the UK. I made a point of asking about the scanner settings once a year and always got the same reply. Across the 25 years that my mother lived in the island, that was plainly not true and the IOM set theirs more 'sharply'.

Final 3 Greens
22nd Nov 2008, 07:40
For the sake of balance and fairness, I was searched last night at Heathrow, no idea why the arch alarm went off.

The young man who did the search was courteous and professional.

I told him so afterwards and he seemed pleased to get some positive feedback.

If only his colleagues were uniformly the same - it is because of the generally poor experience that a competent search stands out.

E.g. last week, same airport, same terminal I was "pulled" after the scanner and a very stern faced guard asked me what was the problem with my bag, making quite a big deal of it and askng me to show and explain something they had seen on the scanner.

It seemed that the person operating the scanner could not recognise the hanger built into the suit carrier and thought is was an offensive weapon :ugh:

No apology for the intimidating attitude, but I was gratified to see a distinct reddening of the facial region when I explained, as requested, what a coat hanger is, what it does and why it isn't an offensive weapon.

To be clear, I have no problem with them checking something out, but the manner was unnecessary.

Boss Raptor
4th Dec 2008, 11:02
also just posted on a R&N thread
I work (landside usually) at an EU Eastern European capital city airport - I have just come back from seeing the head of security of the national border guard directorate who do passenger security at the terminal

Why?

Well I am (pax) security wise and security friendly I dont even wear a belt when going thru as a passenger and take my watch off and put it in my hand luggage etc. etc. - I am clean at LGW, LHR, PRG and on and on...

Consequently I almost never 'bleep/ and set the security machine off at any airport (as I have no metal on me) - the numb nuts at this particular airport have a policy of searching you quite rightly if the machine does 'beep'...and wait for it...also search you deliberately if you dont make it 'beep' as of course it must be wrong! (and associated long lines waiting to pass security as they end up searching everyone)

What the f!!k!?

Yes I regularly point out what a load of w!nkers they are and have finally vented/expressed my displeasure at the highest level!

radeng
4th Dec 2008, 15:21
The best security I've seen in 67 flights this year has to be Phoenix. Don't put your bag down - you'll be moving so fast you hardly have time to pick it up! Friendly, and efficient and not the miseries that Heathrow and Frankfurt have. I rate Arlanda and Nice too. At the bottom of the list, Heathrow, Frankfurt and Copenhagen.

LH2
10th Dec 2008, 09:07
Interesting, while searching for something totally unrelated, I found the following reaction to an earlier comment of mine regarding the illegality of pat-down and bag searches by civilians, as implemented at many airports across the EU: (please excuse the grammar, I'm quoting verbatim)

For you 5 minutes of protecting your dignity, for everyone else in the queue behind

I take that to mean that by refusing an illegal search, everyone in the queue gets delayed. That's an interesting point of view: let's all agree to have our hard-earned rights violated blatantly and systematically, and be treated in a derogatory manner so that we can get to the duty free with five minutes to spare. Is it possible that there might be something just not quite right here? :cool:

Is there actually a physical difference between an airport cop searching you or your bag compared to the rent-a-cop by the machine.


Apart from the difference between dealing with a trained professional acting within the limits of his authority for a well-defined and objectively beneficial purpose, and being confronted by an untrained, uneducated yob who is directed to do something under false pretenses? Yes, there is an "actual physical difference" (and congratulations on the spelling this time)

Lastly:

Incidentally, try your ‘legal authority’ in some countries and you’ll have more than just a pat down

Such as? Would that be anywhere in Europe, Latin America, the Mediterranean basin, or perhaps one of the Middle Eastern countries I haven't visited this year (which leaves out Iran, the UAE, Egypt and Israel) in the about 90 sectors I have flown commercially so far since January? That's obviously not counting private or chartered flights.

As a matter of fact, I've found only two places where airport contractors made a deal out of it, one a small regional airport in Norway (I got an apology from the airport manager), the other CDG (where the employee in question initially thought I was racially motivated).

The most pleasant and reassuring security (not "security") check? Flying LY inbound TLV, as usual :ok: I note that in certain countries outside Israel, if extended questioning or any physical search is deemed necessary, this is always done in the presence of the local police, who are summoned by LY "for your own protection". The plod will ask you if you are being treated correctly and will witness the entire interaction between you and LY's agents (whose level of training and professionalism is way beyond anything you will ever see anywhere else).

And that's all for now. I found the post entertaining enough, in all its blissful naïveté, that I had to respond. I do apologise to its author that I will no longer be able to read his reactions, amusing as they might be, but he has made it to my rather large killfile due to the quality of his discourse, poor expression, and lack of thoughtful opinions. :uhoh:

FWOF
10th Dec 2008, 10:20
I do have to ask the question (being the post creator) of what is so different about you that you feel above the security requirements of the airports? Does this mean you also argue that your human rights have been violated with retail security guards, traffic wardens, lollipop ladies/men, car park attendants etc. etc.?

When we travel by air we have to accept that each airport has it's own set of rules that we know we have to abide to (whether it suits us or not).

And as the post author, it's always interesting to see how quite often the point raised get's pushed aside for a bit of a slanging match, I assume (but will stand corrected) mostly between grown men.

Rwy in Sight
10th Dec 2008, 17:43
FWOF,

There is something magic about PPRuNe because I was looking to contribute to this thread and suddenly it re-appeared on the top of the page.


I was in Berlin last Saturday and I did witnessed a similar pattern of search on a lady just this time it has her backside that was grabbed (sp?). I paid special attention because of your thread. I think the way security people behave in the airports is: "my way or the highway". So there are no limits on what how close the search might be.

No regarding prvate security in other areas, I would argue that a rent-a-cop in a mall or any other permises can be ignored with very little consequences. In the airport they can call the police give their version of the story and you are on your way to Cuba in no time.

Rwy in Sight

DrG
3rd Feb 2009, 13:44
Just wanting to seek clarification.

I recently flew out of FRA.
I beeped due to my shoes and was directed for a pat search.
During the pat down the male staff member cupped his open hand onto my penis and testicles and lifted both up with a squeezing motion.

I complained that I felt this was not appropriate and asked for the manager.
Sadly this made the male staff member annoyed in which he leaned over me and asked if I want a cocktail in a sarcastic fashion as he got the supervisor.

Now rude behaviour aside, the staff there report that this "control" of my body was part of a normal search.

Here in Australia a direct cupped hand and squeeze to the penis and scrotum is considered beyond a standard search.

Is anyone able to direct me to documents or even just explain if this could be considered excessive?

My phone calls to Frankfurt Airport Security have been with little result and I am now wondering if I will have to go to a higher level to see if this was beyond the call of duty.

Any help is gratefully appreciated.

Regards

Dr George - Australia

craigbell
4th Feb 2009, 02:38
asked if I want a cocktail in a sarcastic fashion as he got the supervisor.Cheeky bugger.


During the pat down the male staff member cupped his open hand onto my penis and testicles and lifted both up with a squeezing motion.
I suppose he had cocks on the brain. A cock in a cup is not quite the same as a cocktail. Mind you both could have squeezed lemons.:rolleyes:

DrG
4th Feb 2009, 04:36
Seriously tho is anyone able to help define what a normal search consists of and when it has crossed the line?

montag
4th Feb 2009, 08:41
What is acceptable may well vary from country to country. Certainly the most thorough pat downs I've experienced have been at German airports.