United States Loretta Van Beek Strip-Searched & Molested by CBP

Discussion in 'Border Controls, Customs and Immigration' started by Mike, Jun 3, 2012.

  1. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    Why is it that EVERY article I've read about this case has some variation of "Canadian Woman Strip Searched and Molested Due to Attempt to Smuggle Raspberries Into the US."? Even the beginning of this thread has the title "Canadian Woman, Loretta Van Beek, Strip-Searched at U.S. Border for Smuggling Raspberries"
    1. She was never strip searched, she was asked to remove her outer top and she had another top on underneath.
    2. She was not brought in and patted down due to the raspberries, she was patted down because she threw some type of flag that she might be living in the US illegally, possibly due to the number of border crossing she made or the length of time she had stayed in the US before crossing back into Canada.
    3. Of the thousands of individuals who cross into the US at this border crossing on a daily basis, why was Ms. Van Beek singled out for further scrutiny? Don't go back to the raspberries because that old excuse holds no validity.

    I guess sensationalism helps to sell newspapers or it gets someone to read a particular article.

    I know when I crossed several times into Canada due to a sick relative Canadian Customs asked me to bring proof of ties to the US on my next visit or I would not be allowed to cross back into Canada. I know US Customs has a similar rule:
    Read the last paragraph of the document referred to by the above link.
    Now I'm totally convinced that Ms. Van Beek is a less than honest person and her method of revenge was to accuse innocent CBP officers of molestation. It didn't work for her and I doubt if it will work for many of the other women who go forward with their claims.
  2. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    It doesn't really matter what you think "will work" because you can't cite any actual evidence, issues or testimony from her trial. The bottom line is that you don't know diddly squat what went down in that courtroom.

    Seven other people stepped forward with similar complaints.

    From my perspective I see an endless stream of complaints about the Border Patrol. There is nothing surprising about her complaint when it come to Border Patrol abuses. Perhaps Ms. Van Beek should just be thankful that she's still alive?
  3. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Moderate interesting -- or uninteresting (your mileage may vary) -- haggling over the inclusion of other plaintiffs & persons unknown in the wittness list for Loretta Van Beeks trial.

    Because they could not show that the other witness were searched by Crystal Robininson & Toni Seenstra (in part because CBP appeared to be less than cooperative in supply their border crossing records), those witnesses were dropped by court order.

    Attached Files:

  4. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    The bottom line is that you also do not know diddly squat as to what went down in that courtroom and conversely, you cannot produce any proof that Ms. Van Beek was telling the truth. Very easy to take a story, paste a deceiving headline too it and run with it. "Perhaps Ms. Van Beek should just be thankful that she's still alive?" Come on. Save the drama for your "I HATE THE POLICE BANDWAGON" friends. I've have also noticed more claims about this border crossing after an ambulance chaser lawyer in Windsor posted a billboard seeking clients so he can sue US Customs and Border Protection, on their behalf I'm sure. I'm interested to see how it all plays out myself.
  5. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    What we know is that it reached a jury -- that indicates that the judge thought there were issues in the trial that were of sufficient substance that they requried a jury to decide them.

    What you seem to be incapable of understanding is that these cases revolve around points of law that must be decided, first and foremost is that before there any be any decision against law enforcement officers, their immunity must be removed. You keep claiming it all revolves around "lies" when most of here understand that other issues are usually at play.

    Furthermore, you were the one who waltzed in here claiming that the had "lied", so the onus is pretty much on you to substantiate that.
  6. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    What I understand is that Ms. Van Beek went to court and told her side of the story, while the CBP Officers told theirs. Since Ms. Van Beek claimed she was sexually molested and the CBP Officer claimed that they followed procedures then somebody is in fact lying. I know the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, who was unable to convince the jury that the CBP Officers had done anything wrong. You believe that Ms. Van Beek is telling the truth and I believe the CBP Officers are telling the truth. I will never change your mind and you certainly will not change mine.

    Thanks for the dance.
  7. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    And once again you fail to understand that these cases revolve around points of law that must be decided by the judge and jury. The truthfulness of the testimony (for which you have zero evidence either way) doesn't necessarily factor in to these decisions.
  8. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Who cares about the rasberries!!!

    They brought her in, had her remove clothing, and felt her up because they thought she was living in the US illegally???? WTF!!! If you are going to refuse entrance, just don't let her in. What is up with you border pukes? Do you get your jollies doing this to people? These people felt up in her crotch and over her breasts. You just admitted it. I think they did exactly what they were accused of, and told the woman to prove it in court which of course she could not.

    This is just an abuse of power. If you don't like these types of accusations, then change your procedures so EVERYONE can be protected not only from the accusation, but from the event itself!

    You're full of conviction that the woman was lying yet you offer no transcripts to prove your case. I think she told the truth. With as much grounds for believing this as you do otherwise.
  9. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    My PACER account is alive again. :)

    Haven't had much time to dig but on June 5 the judge approved a motion by the plaintiff to dismiss the counts based on the Federal Tort Claims Act without prejudice, so in theory (unlikely in practice) she could return to court with those. So it appears that the case went to trial only on the Bivens claims.

    PDF of motion is attached.
  10. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    A pat down by its very nature is intrusive. When any person is being rejected entry into the US they are patted down, like it or not. The officer will check the area where a person will most likely carry a weapon or contraband. For a woman those areas will be the bra and crotch area because a person who has something to hide thinks they are less likely to be searched there, r that it can be better concealed there.

    I still think Ms. Van Beek was lying. Prove me wrong.
  11. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    The old Points of Law trump card. The judge decides the legal aspects of the trial and the jury decides on the factual aspects. It is not that I don't understand points of law, it is that I reject your assumption as to how significant a roll the points of law played in the juries decision.
  12. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    So it's supposed to be comforting that the CBP perversion conducted on Van Beek isn't in fact anomalous, but is systemic and perpetrated on everyone who is turned away at the border. Only in her case, they apparently gave her a little extra above and beyond in the sexual organs.

    Let me give you a hint: you aren't letting them in. Therefore whatever they might or might not have on them is of no consequence. In normal parts of the world, there are bins around before customs so you can chuck out any forbidden items before you get there. They don't want the stuff in the country. and that's their interest. The CBP clowns are into a different game. They're not concerned about keeping bad stuff out--they're into playing gotcha. They want to catch the person carrying the stuff. Probably because of incentives all the way up from these kinds of stats. So there are no bins, but only cameras to catch you in case you do try to chuck something out. So you get one last crotch feel-up on a person you aren't even letting into the country. Sick. Perverse and sick, and a subhuman way to live.

    All that crap going on, all that gotcha at the border crossing, while along thousands and thousands of miles of border, like a sieve, people and contraband flow over just about at will, with nearly 50% uncaught. Yet you apparently support the crotch perusals of innocent people like the Van Beeks.

    I don't have to prove jack sh*t to you. Prove to me you're a human being and not some sick CBP troll. Nobody with a brain or a conscience would think CBP conduct reasonable here.
  13. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    In a civil case, the jury instructions will outline the points that the jury must decide on, based on the evidence and testimony presented. The judge himself doesn't necessarily rule on everything.
  14. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    You're the troll who's posting this stuff all over the internet with no proof. When we eventually get bored, we'll flip your switch to the "down" postion. :)
  15. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    You're the troll who's posting this stuff all over the internet with no proof. When we eventually get bored, we'll flip your switch to the "down" postion. :)
  16. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    Let me see, you were going to provide updates that Ms. Van Beek lost her case when? How about NEVER! You have titled this thread with lies that you are going to correct when? Once again, NEVER! You don't like it that I don't accept without question all of the claims and allegations made by Ms. Van Beek so you say I'm a troll. Oh, and by the way, where is YOUR proof? I'll go on the web and post whatever I want, which has more truth that what YOU are posting here. I assumed that you would eventually block me from this site anyway so go ahead and flip your little switch. Don't forget to delete all of my post so you and your cronies can continue to live in your fantasy world that no one would ever lie about negative experiences when crossing an international border.
  17. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    I like you, you're funny. My conscience is clear and currently CBP conduct was not proven to be unreasonable here or that they gave Ms. Van Beek any extra above and beyond in the sexual organs. Also, Ms. Van Beek has not proven herself to be innocent of living in the US illegally. I guess CBP Officers are supposed to not do their jobs and ignore the little stuff. By the way you are mistaken when you say CBP is not concerned with keeping bad stuff out. The US is not the only country that will interview, fingerprint and pat down when someone is being returned to their home country, no matter how much this disturbs you. Yes, everyone that is being returned to their home country is subject to this process.

    "I don't have to prove jack sh*t to you" Yeah you can't and you don't.
  18. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Fishing in and around the sex organs of someone not being granted admission to the US is unreasonable and inhuman. Don't call it a patdown when you're searching those areas the way you do. And don't hide behind the "just following procedure" mantra. That's the defense of moral cowards for millenia. I've got no problem with border guards doing their jobs so long as they don't violate basic human dignity as they are doing in cases like this. This country should be better than that, instead of wallowing in the excuse "well, other countries do it". If doing your job involves sexual humiliations like this, your conscience would only be clear if you're a sociopath.

    And exactly what have you proved here? what new light have you shed to prove conclusively all these people are lying about being sexually abused? Other than the mere fact they could not obtain a verdict. Other than yet again, justice is not achieved in the US court system, which is a system of whores.

    You've only proved you're a troll.
  19. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    Hey my friend nachtnebel , how are you? Customs and Border Protection and Customs and Border Patrol never find any drugs, undeclared cash, weapons or other forms of contraband when they are patting somebody down before they are returned to their home countries do they? Of course not. A woman who wants to hide something would never think of putting something in her bra or panties, especially one that has no legal right to enter the country. Wow, in light of this I’m just as surprised as you that they continue this pat down policy.

    Do you know what else? If someone is being arrested for a crime on the street they are patted down before being placed in a police car. If the person being arrested is a female and the arresting officer is a male, the arrestee is patted down by the male officer just like Ms. Van Beek was by CBP. (The actual way she was patted down, not the fabrication of the pat down that she created.) Yes the underside and sides of the bra area are checked (not the nipple area) and the crotch area is checked with the back of the hand from the pelvic bone, between the legs and back up the rear waist area. Oh My!!! Mantra or not this is procedure, and my conscience is STILL clear.

    I never said all of these people are lying, whoever all of these people are, but all of them are certainly not telling the truth. I know I don’t want to be patted down and have some guy run the back of his hand around my junk, can’t blame people for thinking they are being sexually abused when in actuality, they are not. Most officers derive no pleasure from the pat down and many are wishing they were somewhere else when they have to conduct one.

    Too bad the US court system is a system of whores, especially when a verdict does not go your way right?

    I’m a troll? Oh no, I will have a hard time sleeping tonight.

    Take care my friend, hope to speak to you again real soon.
  20. Lancer69

    Lancer69 Member

    I'm making a trip, by car, in a few days to the Canadian Maritimes (PEI and Nova Scotia) and will be traveling into Canada, back into the US through upstate New York and back into Canada again. I will be there for a couple of weeks. If I have any negative experiences with Customs through my several crossings, on either side of the border, I'll make sure and let you know. That is unless the Admin here gets "bored" (Yeah, riiiiight) and blocks my account.

Share This Page