(kl(')

lNCLASSTFIED/IFOR OFFICIAL LSE ONLY (U//FOUO) Tr\ClDt::NT NARRATIVE (2013SPOTilOS154) Al approximately 1046, on January 2 I, 2013, Behavior ~l~ction Officers, Tricia Tonge-Riley and Shanna Kukla observed passenger, Sai ·exhibiting suspicious behaviors while in the queue of the American Airlines Securit Check oint. Passen3Cf Sai was obsened by IlDOs Tonge-Riley and Kukla. CbXJ)49L.s.c.§ ·14 Cb/ BDOs Tonge-Riley and Kukla observed that passenger. a1 wac; wearing a t-shirl with lhe following emblem~ "Department ofHopeland Security" on tl1c front of the shirt and "Citizen'' on the back of the shirt. 'lhc front of the shirt also contained a replica of tbe IJ.S. Department of Homeland Security insignia. Passenger Sai refused to respond to authorjtative commands when instructed to do so by Trnnsnortarion Securit Officers. When coga e:tision of maps of the Massachusetts Tnstitute of Technology College and other unidentifiable areas. Passenger Sai also had loose clecuonic c.ompone:i(s with no valid reason for possessing them. Passenger Sai also had a heavy solid unknown object that was in the shape of a small fin.:ann. Passenger Sai also had loo~e electrical wires that he could not provide an explaruilion for. Passenger Sai also had several receipts from recent travel. Passenger Sai appears tu travel frequently based on the old boarding passes that were found in his possession. Passenger Sai ha:r two different names. The medications were issued in Chicago and San Francisco. [twas later discovered that Passenger Sai was in possession of another Cnited States pa<>sport that :1ad been hole punched and deemed invalid. Jr had a picture of passenger Sai, however, it contained a different name of Passenger Sai also had <:l ·~.forth Carolina Driver' s License containing the name Sai. BDOs Tonge-Riley and Kukla were unable to determine passenger Sai's current place of rcsiden.:e. Based on itinerary that was loca1ed.• passenger Sai's trip had originated in San Francisco and ended in Roston. with a collllCction in New York. Passenger Sai · s return trip was from Hoston to San Fran<:.iscc. with a connection in Chicago. Pai;senger Sai also had a t1 ighl manilest with names of individuals that ha.cl been traveling on a previous flight. On the backside of the manifest, there was a handwritten message that stated, "I nm<>t speak with the pilot to inform him of my medical condition." Passen ~r Sai dis la ed the followino signs of

i

!.["

,..

t-

me

dece tio

Cb)[3):49 u .s.c. § 114(r>

l approximate y

D ongc- cy nohhed the assac usetts tatc o ice ), t e oston . Outy Desk SDD and Security Manager John Ferragamo of tht: need for law enforcement res onsc. At 11 ~3, MSP Trooper responded and incerviewed assen er Sai. Troope CbJ(6).(b)(7)Cc> conducted an NCIC: q Llcry on passenger Sai \\~th negative results. Trooper (bJ(6).Cb}(7)(c> had no further reason to question passenger Sai. Pa.<\Senger Sai completed TSA screening. At approximaldy l 146, the SOD notified the Transpor1ation S~curity Operations Center (TSOC) for situational awareness. .1

•

Location: American Checkpoint Date oflncidcnt: January 21, 2013

Incident Time: 1 106 BOO: ·rongc-Rilcy, Tricia I3DO: Kukla Shanna 0

WA~Nl~G: 'fHIS RECORD IS

FOR OFFIClAL ll5P.0'(LY. IT CONTAINSL..,,-FORMATION THAT MAY RE EXEMPT l-'ROM PUDLIC KELEASE Ul\OER THE FREEDOM OF TNFOR~tAT!ON ACT (5 C.S.C. 552). THIS D
CONTROLU:D,HANULED, TRA\'SM!TTED, DISTRIBCTF.D, AND DJS{'()SEDOF IN AC'CORDA'\""CE WITH DUS POUCY RELATft\G TO FOUO 1Nl'OR\.1ATlON A.\"D rs NOT TO RP. RELEASElJ TO THE PUBLIC OR OTHER PERSONNEL WHO DO NOT HA Vli A VALID "'NEED~T0-1\.NOW" WlTHOOTPRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ORIGINATOR. DfSCT .OSLRE OF THIS INFORMATION lS CONTROLLED BY TIIF PRlVACY ACT AND/OR /\GENCY POLICY

i I

'·;'.:

I:

I

Tricia Tonge-Riley: Security Incident Statement

The following incident occurred at approximately 1046 on January 21, 2013, at the American Airline Checkpoint. While on duty BDOs Kuklp and I observed oasseoger Saj exhjbitlne S!ISnicjmis behaviors while in the Queue. Passenger Sai wat

t;~I;

I

Cb XJJ49 us c § 114<•>

At the divesting table I tried to enga e passenger Sai by informing him of the divestin rocess but passenger Sa (bJ<3 >49 u.s.c. § 114<•> I also noticed that passenger Sai (bX3 >49 u _s _c _§ 114(•)

1

I~tb:t ~assenger Sai decided to opt out of AIT but did not respond to authoritative command when

asked several times to wait in the designated waiting area to be screened. Passenger Sai proceeded to walk away from the waiting area towards the glass partition which !ieparated the sterile to the nonsterile area of the checkpoint. Passenger Sai was ushered in for secondary screening by the TSO and was asked to point out his belongings from the x-ray belt; at that time I noticed passenger Sai look up for the position of the security cameras. While in position for secondary screening passenger Sai asked the TSO to change his gloves; the TSO complied. The TSO informed passenger Sai of the pat down procedure and did offer passenger Saia private screening which he declined. The pat down was conducted without incident. Before secondary screening of passenger Sa i's property I greeted him and asked him how he was doing, he did not answer. Passenger Sai was informed by BOO Kukla and I that we will be looking through his belongings and we asked that he do not touch any of the contents until we were finish. We also asked passenger Sai to inform us if he had anything sharp, hazardous or potential dangerous in his bag to which he mouthed he didn't know. Passenger Sai was asked if he had packed his own bag and if he was taking any gifts from anyone for his travel to which he muttered "1 don't know". Because passenger Sai was mouthing words I asked him if he understood what we had explained to him to which he nodded his head yes. I then proceeded to ask passenger Sai for his boarding pass to which he ushered to remove it from his jacket which was on the search table; at that point I told him that I will retrieve the boarding pass since he could not have access to his things until it was searched; at that point I asked passenger Sai for the second time if he understood what we had explained to him to which he answered again nodding yes. I also specifically ask passenger Sai if he had a disability to which he mouthed with his lips "NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS'. I then tried to hold a causal conversation with passenger Sai by asking him a few details about his trip. I asked passenger Sai general Questions like where did he visit, how was his stay, how did he get to the airport to which he mouthed "NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS". Because he made it clear that he was not going to answer any Questions I decided it was best to observe the individual while going through his property. To the best of my recollection passenger Sai had two carry-on bags and several articles of clothin which

I

may have included a winter jacket One of the bags was a huge duffle bag which was (b)(3) 49 US.C § 114(r)

! bX3)49 u .s .c. § 114crJ

r hat appeared to be dirty laundry. There were a lot of loose electronics and

wires in his bag none of which passenger Sai wanted to explain what they were. I made another attempt to engage passenger Sai by asking him if he wanted to communicate through writing. Passenger Sai said yes. I gave him a pad and pen at which time he used it as an opportunity to say how we were violating the law and we had limited jurisdiction to search, and we were infringing on his rights. At no point did passenger Sai use the pad and pen to answer any of the questions that were asked of him or try to convey that he had a medical condition. Passenger Sal was combative by making several inflated hand movements towards officer Kukla and myself and attempted to grab several items from the search table. Through further inspection of his bag it was discovered that Passenger Sai was in possession of another United States passport that had been hole- punched and deemed invalid. It had a picture of passenger Sai; however, it contained a different name of

. Passenger Sai also had a

North Carolina Driver's license containing the name Sai. During a search of the bag it was also discovered that passenger Sai had a copy of a fight manifest of a pr~vious flight that contain the names of passengers and a hand written message stating that he needed to speak to the pilot about his medical condition. Passenger Sai had several receipts which would suggest that he travels frequently. Passenger Sai also was in possession of maps of The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and other unlabeled areas. Passen er Sai displayed several signs of deception during secondary screening to includ

CbX3 >49 u.sc.§114

(b)(3):49U.S.C. § 114(r]

Cb){J):49u.sc.§ 114cr>

as a resu t I noti ed t e Massachusetts tate Po Ice at

approximately 1106. At that time I also notified the Boston SPOT Duty Desk the need for law enforcement response. At 1113, MSP Trooper

_.......__

......

responded and interviewed

(b)(6),(b)(7)(C)

passenger Sai. Passenger Sai communicated w ith Trooper

{b)(6 ),{b)

by writing on a pad . Trooper

conducted an NCIC query on passenger ~i with negative results. Trooper <~l{~,(b)

had no

urther reason to question passenger Sai. Passenger Sai completed TSA screening.

At the end of the process I offered to help Passenger Sai repack his bags to which he replied by writing on a note pad something to the effect that TSA is infringing on passengers rights.

Respectfully submitted,

Tricia Tonge-Riley (EBDO)

/ I, Behavior Detection Officer Kukla, am writing this in response to an incident that occurred at approximately 1046, on January 21, 2013. Behavior Detection Officer Tonge-Riley and I observed passenger, Sat (• • • •). exhibiting suspicious behaviors while in the queue of the American Airlines Secur!!Y_Checkpoint.

Passe~er Sai was observed by BOO Tof!ge-Riley and I, exhib1tin behavior4~~It Passenger Sai'

coX3 ):49

I

u.s.c. § 114(r)

(b)(3 ):49 U .S.C. § 1 14(r)

Passenger Sai refused to respond to authoritative instructions when instructed to do so by Transportation Security Officers. The Travel Document Checker (TDC) attempted to ask passenger Sai how he was doing and he did not acknowledge the TDC at all. The TDC attempted to engage passenger Sai again by asking where he was headed and he did not respond. Passenger Sai opted out of the Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) machine and was asked to step off to the side to wait for further assistance. Passenger Sai refused to do so and

..

continued to attempt to bypass the AIT machine but was stopped by BOO Tonge-Riley. BOO Tonge-Riley had to inform passenger Saito step off to the side three times before he finally did so. Passenger Sai completely disregarded any security advisements that were given to him throughout the screening process. BOO Tonge-Riley and I referred passenger Sai for TSA secondary screening. Passenger Sat did complete a Standard Pat-down screening with no incidents to report. Prior to conducting secondary screening, BOO Tonge-Riley and I proceeded to give passenger Sai his advisements before a personal property search is conducted. Immediately passenger Sa1 was uncooperative. When asked if there were any sharp or dangerous objects in his carry-on, he non-verbally replied that he was unsure with a shoulder shrug and mouthing of the words, "I don't know". When asked if he had packed the bag himself, passenger Sai again replied non-verbally that he was unsure, with a shoulder shrug and mouthing of the words, "l don't know". BDO Tonge-Riley then asked passenger Sai if he understood what we were saying to him. Passenger Sai replied with a head nod yes that he did understand us. Passenger Sai opted out of verbally communicating, but rather attempted to communicate via waving of his hands, mouthing words and handwritten messages. The hand gestures that passenger Sai were displaying were aggressive, angry hand movements. BOO Tonge-Riley and I attempted to communicate with passenger Sai, allowing for every reasonable accommodation at our disposal. We tried to decipher the mouthing of his words. We provided paper and a writing utensil so that passenger Sai could have other means of communication. BOO Tonge-Riley and I were extremely patient and compassionate to passenger Sai. At no time did we deny him the use of writing utensils or paper. When provided writing utensils and paper, the only thing that passenger Sai wr-0te was, ''The law limits the TSA's jurisdiction to 'search no more extensive nor intrusive than necessary to detect the presence of weapons or el<.plosives'. You are violating the law. What exactly are you looking for?" BOO Tonge-Riley and I provided reasonable accommodations in order to elicit responses from passenger Sai. Passenger Sai also did not provide any type of medical documentation that informed us of a disability. Passenger Sal was combative in his non-verbal actions with rapid, exaggerated hand movements in close proximity of BOO Tonge-Riley and I. The statements that passenger Sai wrote down only stated that we were violating his rights, asked what we were looking for and if we were finished. Passenger Sai was in>Jading BOO Tonge-Riley and l's personal space and made me extremely uncomfortable. Passenger Sai was instructed prior to the personal property search, not to touch anything until screening had been completed. Passenger Sai disregarded the instruction and attempted to grab items numerous times. BOO Tonge-Riley and I had to cease screening se>Jeral times in order to reiterate that he is not allowed

to touch his property until screening is completed. Due to the Jack of verbal communication and displaying several signs of deception, BDOs Tonge-Riley and I were unable to obtain general information pertaining to the reason for his trip or the contents of his carry-on luggage. It was discovered during the property search, that passenger Sai was in possession of maps of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology College and other unidentifiable areas. When asked about the items, passenger Sai mouthed the word, " why" and that "we didn't need te> know anything". Passenger Sai also had loose electronic components with no valid reason for possessing them. Passenger Sai also had a heavy solid ceramic orange object. It was an extremely dense unidentifiable object that resembled a small firearm. Passenger Sai did not explain what the item was, although he was provided reasonable accommodations to do so. It was later discovered that Passenger Sai was in possession of another United States passport that had been hole punched and deemed invalid. It had a picture of passenger Sai, however it contained a different name of· · · · · · · Passenger Sai also had a N~rth Carolina Driver's License containing the name Sai. BDO Tonge-Riley and I were iUnable to determine passenger Sa i's current place of residence due to his lack of cooperation. Based on the itinerary that was located, passenger Sai's trip had originated in San Francisco and ended in Boston, with a connection in New York. Passenger Sai's return trip was from Boston to San Francisco, with a connection in Chicago. Passenger Sai also had a flight manifest with names of individuals that had been traveling on a previous flight which is suspicious because passengers do not have access to that information. BOO Tonge-Riley and I attempted to obtain an explanation for passenger Sai possessing the manifest but passenger Sai did not even attempt to respond. On the backside of the manifest, there was l!l handwritten message that stated, "I must speak with the pilot to inform him of my medical condition." Passenger Sai was very knowledgeable in regards to the TSA procedures and protocols and was able to identify our rank based on our uniform Epaulettes. Passenger Sai was also in possession of sever~I printed TSA mandates which he did not have a valid reason having. Passenger Sai displayed signs of Heception and his behaviors escalated throughout secondary screening. Passenger Sai had two overly filled carry-on bags which were extremely difficult and time consuming to search. Once BOO Tonge-Riley and I gathered enough information to present to law enforcement, BOO Tonge-Riley proceeded to make photo copies of passenger Sai's boarding passes and identifications. At approximately 1106, BDO Tonge-Riley notified the Massachusetts State Police {MSP), the Boston SPOT Duty Desk (SOD) and Security Manager John Ferragamo of the need for law enforcement response. At approximately 1113, Trooperl)~~~~j{b) !responded and attempted to communicate with passenger Sai verbally but was unable t o decipher the mouthing of passenger Sai' s words. Trooper (b){6).(b)

rovided passenger Sai with a notepad and pen in order to write down his 5

responses. Trooper (b)( ).(b)

conducted an NCIC query on passenger Sai that was negative. Passenger

Sai obtained our name and badge numbers which were visible the entire time throughout the incident as stand r; 1 "f rm policy. Passenger Sai folded the piece of paper containing the conversation with 6 Troope ~~{ ).(b)(7) nd our name and badge numbers and placed it in his pants pocket. Trooped)~.»<5).{b)(7) had no further reason t o question passenger Sai and passenger Sai proceeded into the sterile area. BDO Tonge-Riley and I were not comfortable with passenger Sai and the incident was unresolved. We conveyed our concerns to the manager on duty, John Ferragamo who forwarded the incident to our AFSD-LE, Peter Towner for situational awareness.

l