Mid-Air Intercept by ICE

  • Thread starter Thread starter GX
  • Start date Start date
(Continued from above post)

Here is some background info. that might better help us understand who these Agencies are and what their mission(s) are. It seems their missions overlap, but I can't tell where the authority of one agency stops and where another takes over. I know that MikeD understands all of this, but for me it's still confusing. Does anybody have an organzational chart to show how the CBP, it's Air Interdiction wing, the FAA, ICE, EPIC, local sherriffs and all these other players are supposed to operate?

Video
http://nemo.cbp.gov/opa/videos/2010/amoc/amoc.wmv
Video
http://nemo.cbp.gov/opa/videos/2010/uas_texas.wmv

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/air_marine/

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/arizona/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_CBP_Air_and_Marine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement

http://www.justice.gov/dea/programs/epic.htm

ICE_Agents.jpg

Caption reads "HSI Special Agents seizing narcotics during an arrest." HSI? (Stands for Homeland Security Investigations)

.
I'm still confused. When they bring in the guns and the dogs, who sent them and why?
.
 
Here's a product I'd like to share with you guys:

51nQk2FPzIL._SL500_AA300_.jpg


You can pick it up for about $20 or less on eBay. They also have a iPhone app that does the same thing for $9.99 I highly encourage anybody that wants to know their rights, and also the rights of the police and the rulings of the Supreme Court when it comes to encounters, vehicle searches, foot pursuits, traffic checkpoints, arrests, interrogations, and just about anything else the police will encounter while on patrol. It's worth every cent IMHO.
 
Qutch said:
View attachment 19798 .
(Continued from above post)

Here is some background info. that might better help us understand who these Agencies are and what their mission(s) are. It seems their missions overlap, but I can't tell where the authority of one agency stops and where another takes over. I know that MikeD understands all of this, but for me it's still confusing. Does anybody have an organzational chart to show how the CBP, it's Air Interdiction wing, the FAA, ICE, EPIC, local sherriffs and all these other players are supposed to operate?

Caption reads "HSI Special Agents seizing narcotics during an arrest." HSI? (Stands for Homeland Security Investigations)
.
Click to expand...

HSI is the investigation part of ICE.

EPIC is an intel gathering center located in El Paso.

DHS is the cabinet level agency. Within DHS, you have the CBP, ICE, USCG, USSS, etc....agencies that used to be under different cabinet level agencies, but were brought under DHS when it was stood up (USCG used to be DOT, etc).

Within CBP, you have an Air and Marine office, US Border Patrol (green uniforms), Office of Field Ops (port of entry folks, blue uniforms), among a number of others. Their jobs are similar, but do overlap just due to the nature of things, but the primary mission is as the name says, Customs and Border Protection. Namely because the former US Customs was combined in with these agencies. So customs work, border patrol work, immigration work, etc, all kind of overlap; and all the agencies have a drug enforcement job too as they all enforce federal law.

Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Customs_and_Border_Protection
 
I think it very interesting that John King, when solicited for advice to other pilots, mentions complete compliance. In the context of his arrest and other similar scenarios that makes sense since being held at gunpoint is hardly a time to exercise your constitionally protected rights.

I mention this specific point because given the rapid escalation of force by officers, how would one conduct themselves in accordance with their rights. When I had a shotgun in my back and when I had two officers draw their sidearms on me from about a 20 foot distance, I felt I had zero rights.

Qutch, MikeD, Fox, and others, I very much appreciate your participation here. Okie Pilot thanks for posting that. I'll be looking to buy that manual.
 
RICHARD5 said:
...Qutch, MikeD, Fox, and others, I very much appreciate your participation here. Okie Pilot thanks for posting that. I'll be looking to buy that manual.
Click to expand...

I happen to know that Okie Pilot get's all his information from his bartender, so I'd be careful of that.

bartender.jpg


Just kidding. I love Okie Pilot's posts. :biggrin:
 
BillErvin said:
Really!! How exactly would you prevent that? Just asking.....
Click to expand...

Thats a good question. Lets say you lock up the doors and then the ice agents shows up with a k-9. The dog hits giving the officers PC to search the vehicle and asks you to unlock it. Are you required to comply then? What if you dont? I'm guessing they will then break open the vehicle. Lets assume they dont find anything but damaged the vehicle. Whos responsible for the damages? What if you are not even present like a parked car (or parked plane for that matter), can they just break in to search? If they damage anything then what?
 
dbrault17 said:
Thats a good question. Lets say you lock up the doors and then the ice agents shows up with a k-9. The dog hits giving the officers PC to search the vehicle and asks you to unlock it. Are you required to comply then? What if you dont? I'm guessing they will then break open the vehicle. Lets assume they dont find anything but damaged the vehicle. Whos responsible for the damages? What if you are not even present like a parked car (or parked plane for that matter), can they just break in to search? If they damage anything then what?
Click to expand...

I imagine there's a claims process of some sort. I saw this because these kinds of secondary searches are common at ports of entry. If you've ever seen an episode of the NatGeo show Border Wars, you see this in action. Generally speaking, once a vehicle is taken into secondary inspection, it's taken apart in a neat way, depending on the kind of access needed. Gas tanks, for example, are unbolted, etc. Mind you, these types of tear-aparts aren't only done on the hit of a dog. The dog hit is PC for the further inspection. Like shown on the NatGeo documentary, this further inspection will usually consist of mini-cameras, x-rays, etc. Something to show that there is something there before it's damaged and torn apart.

In terms of parked car or plane, there aren't any random roving dog patrols that I know of around airport parking areas, but if we take it a step further to an airport terminal, you do have dogs that work the baggage area. If they detect something in a bag, they will access it as necessary. Granted, there's more of a public safety risk with bags at an airport, than with a car parked in a mall parking lot, but as I said, there aren't generally roving patrols inspecting vehicles with dogs in parking lots. Plus, even if drugs are found in plain sight inside a vehicle, if no one is around, its not really known who the drugs would belong to. There are vehicles found all the time in the middle of the AZ desert, granted they are considered abandonded, and access is made into them to determine the owner (usually stolen), and either drugs or drug residue is found.
 
Fair enough. Lets assume a driver is pulled over, locks his car and a dog hits on the car for whatever reason. Is the driver required to unlock the vehicle? What happens if the driver refuses? Will the officer forcibly open the vehicle? Is there also a claims report for any damage done by a regular officer?
 
dbrault17 said:
Fair enough. Lets assume a driver is pulled over, locks his car and a dog hits on the car for whatever reason. Is the driver required to unlock the vehicle? What happens if the driver refuses? Will the officer forcibly open the vehicle? Is there also a claims report for any damage done by a regular officer?
Click to expand...

Well since a dog hit is considered PC for a search, now you would be impeding an investigation by an LE official. If one refuses to open the vehicle, it will likely be opened for them.

I figure individual jurdisdictions have claims processes administered by their respective levels of government they work for.
 
I guess what im getting at is locking access to the vehicle (car, plane, train whatever) and refusing any further searches enough to stop law enforcement from searching further without say a search warrant? And if there is damages (like scratches on the plane etc) is there a way to collect damages? Even if its small claims court?
 
MikeD said:
Well since a dog hit is considered PC for a search, now you would be impeding an investigation by an LE official. .
Click to expand...

Well what if you didnt resist in anyway like just stand there silently? Its not like they couldnt or wouldnt pat you down and take the keys themselves. In this situation I was locking the door before the dog was there to search.
 
I guess we kinda had something like this already. The person who was held in contempt for not giving up a password to a computer. Interesting.
 
.

Open Letter to Janet Napolitano, Director of Homeland Security:

I was driving, with a friend, back from San Luis, Mexico on 5/4/2009 around 7p.m., when I came across a permanent Border Patrol check point located north of Yuma and south of Quartsite on US 95. I had passed through this check point on numerous occasions before, so it came as no surprise to me that it was there. Since I know that the border patrol officers manning it are just “doing their jobs”, I like to make things easy on them, so I had my passport and my friend’s identification ready for the officer to inspect.

There were no cars ahead of me as I slowed and approached the check point. As I did so, I turned off my headlights, leaving my running lights on, and turned on the dome lights inside the vehicle, so that the officers could see more clearly inside. I also rolled the front windows down all the way, as they are tinted, so that the officer could see inside the vehicle. As I moved closer, I noticed there were about 9 or 10 officers standing around. One officer was on the left, to check papers. Another one, with a big German Shepard dog, was in the middle of the road, presumably to block further travel, and the rest of the group was on the right. When I pulled up and stopped, I handed our identification documents to the officer. He asked a few questions about our travels that day, and he directed me to roll down the rear windows all the way so they could see inside the rear of the vehicle, which I complied with.

In the mean time, the officer with the dog moved around to the passenger side of the vehicle. The window on that side was down all the way, and the front passenger seat was occupied by my friend. The officer with the dog commanded it to jump up on the side of the car and stick its head into the vehicle. My friend, who had been attacked by a dog as a child, was very startled and extremely frightened. I shouted at the officer to get the dog off the car, that the dog probably damaged the vehicle with its toe nails. The officer responded, with out inspection, that the dog didn’t do anything. I had heard scratching on the side of the car when the dog jumped up. The agent on my side of the car said I could proceed. I did so immediately. I felt that it would be in my best interest to just drive on and inspect the vehicle at home.

Once at home and in the garage, I inspected the vehicle more closely in proper lighting. The dog had indeed marred the finish on the vehicle and had also damaged the molding around the window, which I took photos of. I also have a friend who’s nice day, visiting with family, is shattered because a Border Patrol officer stuck his German Shepard in her face. I shudder to think what would have happened if we had had one of our own pets in the car, unleashed, when that officer commanded his dog to stick his head into the vehicle. I am sure our pet would have defended its territory, and its owners, and rightfully so.

I think that this incident has brought to light a situation that has the potential to become very dangerous. I would encourage a change in policy, that in the future, Border Patrol agents are only authorized to walk their dogs around the outside of a vehicle, unless the dog indicates a more in depth inspection is warranted. Taking this proactive measure will protect private property from damage, it will prevent any unnecessary distress to citizens, and it will reduce the risk of any unforeseen, preventable incidents in the future. I would like to be kept informed of any decisions, actions, or policy changes regarding this matter.

Thanking you at this time

Mervin G. Fried
Republican Precinct Committeeman
Kingman, Arizona

http://www.dailypaul.com/92141/border-patrol-damages-my-car-at-check-point
.
 
dbrault17 said:
I guess what im getting at is locking access to the vehicle (car, plane, train whatever) and refusing any further searches enough to stop law enforcement from searching further without say a search warrant? And if there is damages (like scratches on the plane etc) is there a way to collect damages? Even if its small claims court?
Click to expand...

LE needs one of three things to do a search of a vehicle:

1. Probable Cause
2. a Warrant
3. Consent

Now these are part and parcel to things such as Plain View doctrine (contraband seen in plain view through a window of a vehicle, is legal to seize and isn't a search, and can be instant PC for a further search), or of a "vehicle frisk" of the passenger section only (those parts reachable by the driver, under Terry vs Ohio, and the passenger(s) or the pax themselves, under Arizona vs Johnson) for weapons IF there is specific RS that a weapon could be present that could be used by the person(s) in the vehicle.
 
dbrault17 said:
...... And if there is damages (like scratches on the plane etc) is there a way to collect damages? Even if its small claims court?
Click to expand...


"If you would like to make a claim for property damage or loss, or personal injury, or death resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of an employee of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), you may file an administrative tort claim against the agency.......Claimants who wish to file an administrative tort claim against CBP may complete a Standard Form 95, Claim for Damage....CBP's decision will then be forwarded to the claimant by mail. This process may take several months."

https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/178/~/tort-claims---claim-for-property-damage-or-loss,-or-personal-injury,-or-death

.
 
dbrault17 said:
Well what if you didnt resist in anyway like just stand there silently? Its not like they couldnt or wouldnt pat you down and take the keys themselves. In this situation I was locking the door before the dog was there to search.
Click to expand...

If you didn't have the keys or didn't want to open the vehicle following a hit by a dog and subsequent PC to search, it would likely be opened by slim jim, if not by the keys themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top