Probably, and a Lexis or Westlaw account would make it easier to find.
"Drug" searches on my Amtrak round trip - racial profiling?
- Thread starter BigRedEO
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Ryan
Court Jester
I only need one example to prove his blanket statement incorrect. Now I have 2.
Ohio law according to Ohio Revised Code, sections listed, as it applies to conductor behavior on a passenger train.
[SIZE=18pt]4973.23 Detention upon probable cause by conductor or ticket agent.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt](A)[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] A conductor of any train carrying passengers or of the cars of any interurban railroad carrying passengers, and a ticket agent employed in or about a railroad or interurban railroad station, while on duty on the train or cars, or in or about the station, who has probable cause to believe that a person has committed an offense may detain the person in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time within the train, the cars, or the station, for the purpose of recovering any property involved in the offense, causing an arrest to be made by a peace officer, or obtaining a warrant of arrest. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt](B)[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] A conductor or ticket agent acting under division (A) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]©[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] Any peace officer, as defined in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code, may arrest without a warrant any person who the officer has probable cause to believe has committed any violation of law and shall make the arrest within a reasonable time after the commission of the violation of law. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Effective Date: 03-23-2000 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=18pt]4973.24 Conductor may eject passenger.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]When a passenger is guilty of disorderly conduct, uses obscene language, or plays a game of cards or chance for money or other thing of value on a passenger train or the cars of an interurban railroad carrying passengers, the conductor of such train or cars shall stop his train or cars at the place where such offense is committed, or at the next stopping place for such train or cars and eject such passenger from the train or cars, using only such force as is necessary. The conductor may command the assistance of employees of the company, person, or firm owning or operating such railroad or interurban railroad and of the passengers on such train or cars, to assist in such removal. Before removing such passenger, the conductor shall tender to the passenger such proportion of the fare he paid as the distance he then is from the place to which he paid fare bears to the whole distance for which his fare is paid. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Effective Date: 10-01-1953 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=18pt]4973.23 Detention upon probable cause by conductor or ticket agent.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt](A)[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] A conductor of any train carrying passengers or of the cars of any interurban railroad carrying passengers, and a ticket agent employed in or about a railroad or interurban railroad station, while on duty on the train or cars, or in or about the station, who has probable cause to believe that a person has committed an offense may detain the person in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time within the train, the cars, or the station, for the purpose of recovering any property involved in the offense, causing an arrest to be made by a peace officer, or obtaining a warrant of arrest. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt](B)[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] A conductor or ticket agent acting under division (A) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]©[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] Any peace officer, as defined in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code, may arrest without a warrant any person who the officer has probable cause to believe has committed any violation of law and shall make the arrest within a reasonable time after the commission of the violation of law. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Effective Date: 03-23-2000 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=18pt]4973.24 Conductor may eject passenger.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]When a passenger is guilty of disorderly conduct, uses obscene language, or plays a game of cards or chance for money or other thing of value on a passenger train or the cars of an interurban railroad carrying passengers, the conductor of such train or cars shall stop his train or cars at the place where such offense is committed, or at the next stopping place for such train or cars and eject such passenger from the train or cars, using only such force as is necessary. The conductor may command the assistance of employees of the company, person, or firm owning or operating such railroad or interurban railroad and of the passengers on such train or cars, to assist in such removal. Before removing such passenger, the conductor shall tender to the passenger such proportion of the fare he paid as the distance he then is from the place to which he paid fare bears to the whole distance for which his fare is paid. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Effective Date: 10-01-1953 [/SIZE]
Ispolkom
Engineer
As a Minnesotan, I have to point out that the conductor's arrest powers extend only to disorderly behavior, not paying a fare, and, oddly, smoking. Smuggling dope, he's got nothing to do with.Granted that is true, so in less than 5 minutes of searching reveals in Minnesota:
629.363 RAILWAY CONDUCTOR; AUTHORITY TO ARREST.A conductor of a railway train may arrest a person committing an act upon the train prohibited by sections 609.681, 609.72, and 609.855, subdivision 1, with or without a warrant, and take that person to the proper law enforcement authorities, or to the station agent at the next railway station. The station agent shall take the arrested person to the law enforcement authorities. A conductor or station agent possesses the powers of a sheriff with a warrant in making arrests under this chapter.
History10297) RL s 5027; 1963 c 753 art 2 s 11; 1983 c 359 s 130; 1985 c 265 art 10 s 1; 1989 c 5 s 17
I'll bet there are more arrest authority granted to Conductors than first thought :huh:
G
Guest
Guest
It does not matter if any state, or any local authorities give conductors authority to arrest since Amtrak does not give it's Conductors that authority. Even removing a passenger must be facilitated by Amtrak Police or local law enforcement.
Card players Beware! when riding the Train through Ohio!!
If you read the last sentence of his post he states he is an elected judge in his jurisdiction it may not be the case and as such his statement is correct for his jurisdiction.
Second, so far we have seen two states that grant a limited arrest power. If the general assumption is that conductors do not have authority to arrest anyone then these two states would be exceptions until proven otherwise by a majority of states.
BCL
Engineer
California gives "public rail commuter transit services" conductors performing fare inspection the power of arrest for violations of California Penal Code 640. These are things such as eating/drinking, spitting, smoking, fare evasion, etc.
Whether or not it applies to Capitol Corridor or the San Joaquin I don't know. They might fall into the category of conductors operating a service operated by a joint powers agency. However, I suspect that the conductors aren't trained to perform arrests and would just contact Amtrak PD or local law enforcement to affect and arrest or to remove a passenger.
Regardless of the good judge's hyperbole, I think his point stands that a train conductor certainly doesn't have broad powers of arrest, and pretty much not for someone suspected of transporting illegal drugs (the topic at hand).
Whether or not it applies to Capitol Corridor or the San Joaquin I don't know. They might fall into the category of conductors operating a service operated by a joint powers agency. However, I suspect that the conductors aren't trained to perform arrests and would just contact Amtrak PD or local law enforcement to affect and arrest or to remove a passenger.
Regardless of the good judge's hyperbole, I think his point stands that a train conductor certainly doesn't have broad powers of arrest, and pretty much not for someone suspected of transporting illegal drugs (the topic at hand).
C
conductor
Guest
i was going to refrain from chiming in, mainly because well I don't care all that much. However I figure I can help to clear the air a bit. Being a conductor on Amtrak, I can tell you right now that regardless of whatever state law/statue/penal code is on the books, Amtrak does not give or honer ANY conductor having police powers. Amtrak does not want the law suits associated with a conductor or other employee man-handling a passenger. We are not cops, our job is to run the train, and that's it. We are to comply with any requests from local or state police and any federal agencies. If DEA gets on, or Reno PD or any other agency, don't count on the conductor to stand up for you, they will lose their job...seen it happen. Contrary to popular belief any passenger removal is facilitated through CNOC or Operations and the conductors managers. We don't make the call to remove somebody, we don't even have the authority to remove somebody. We call it in and let our boss or CNOC make the decision to have somebody removed or not.
Amtrak Police, while being part of Amtrak, are considered to be Federal Officers and they share many of the same facilities with the DEA, FBI, and other federal law agencies. Amtrak corporate doesn't really control what Amtrak PD does or doesn't do, though sometimes a request will be honored they are their own entity. Amtrak corporate views Amtrak PD the same as any other law agency and EXPECTS ALL crew members to comply with their requests, same as the local police jurisdictions. If the police remove you, Amtrak considers it a matter between you and the police, not them.
When you buy your ticket you give consent to being searched for the purposes of the trains security....that's a very broad term. You may have to right to refuse a search on the 4th amendment, but the chances are the agency in question will ask the conductor to deny you transportation and the conductor will agree with them, regardless of their personal feelings as they have bills and a such and need their paycheck. If police ask for a manifest it is expected that the employee asked will produce one.
Long story short, Amtrak considers the conductors or any other employee to be of no importance. We don't make decisions, we are to do as instructed. If police want to go on a fishing expedition they will and Amtrak will not interfere. A conductor can not arrest anybody, no can a conductor tell police to go away with out a warrant. Amtrak considers the conductor to be in charge of the train only so there is somebody to blame if it goes bad, there is no authority granted no any support offered. The days of conductors actually being in charge and making decisions is long gone, sure there are a few fossils (old head conductors with prior right seniority on the freight RR) who still insist on doing it their way, but anybody that has been hired by Amtrak off the street so to speak is going to do as they are told or they will be terminated.
Sorry to be Debby downer folks, but you are on your own as far as Amtrak is concerned.
Amtrak Police, while being part of Amtrak, are considered to be Federal Officers and they share many of the same facilities with the DEA, FBI, and other federal law agencies. Amtrak corporate doesn't really control what Amtrak PD does or doesn't do, though sometimes a request will be honored they are their own entity. Amtrak corporate views Amtrak PD the same as any other law agency and EXPECTS ALL crew members to comply with their requests, same as the local police jurisdictions. If the police remove you, Amtrak considers it a matter between you and the police, not them.
When you buy your ticket you give consent to being searched for the purposes of the trains security....that's a very broad term. You may have to right to refuse a search on the 4th amendment, but the chances are the agency in question will ask the conductor to deny you transportation and the conductor will agree with them, regardless of their personal feelings as they have bills and a such and need their paycheck. If police ask for a manifest it is expected that the employee asked will produce one.
Long story short, Amtrak considers the conductors or any other employee to be of no importance. We don't make decisions, we are to do as instructed. If police want to go on a fishing expedition they will and Amtrak will not interfere. A conductor can not arrest anybody, no can a conductor tell police to go away with out a warrant. Amtrak considers the conductor to be in charge of the train only so there is somebody to blame if it goes bad, there is no authority granted no any support offered. The days of conductors actually being in charge and making decisions is long gone, sure there are a few fossils (old head conductors with prior right seniority on the freight RR) who still insist on doing it their way, but anybody that has been hired by Amtrak off the street so to speak is going to do as they are told or they will be terminated.
Sorry to be Debby downer folks, but you are on your own as far as Amtrak is concerned.
The "arrest" powers spelled out in local railroad laws are simply "holding" powers.
The "arrestee" is held, confined, turned over, according to the statutes UNTIL the person is turned over to the police.
It is the police who process the individual, bring him to court, and in one instance "file the complaint" - not the conductor. The conductor may be given the cloak of authority by local law, but that is merely to preserve order on a public conveyance and once the person is removed from the conveyance, that cloak of authority is removed. You don't see conductors appearing in local courts charging spitters as the train moves away, do you?
Look to the purpose, spirit, and history of the laws. They are to protect good order until the police and judicial system can take over.
There are many more incidents on cruise ships where the captain may incarcerate an abusive drunk - like a conductor can - BUT DUE PROCESS REQUIRES RELEASE TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES.
There are no "train courts!" to hear train offenses prosecuted by conductors.
The "arrestee" is held, confined, turned over, according to the statutes UNTIL the person is turned over to the police.
It is the police who process the individual, bring him to court, and in one instance "file the complaint" - not the conductor. The conductor may be given the cloak of authority by local law, but that is merely to preserve order on a public conveyance and once the person is removed from the conveyance, that cloak of authority is removed. You don't see conductors appearing in local courts charging spitters as the train moves away, do you?
Look to the purpose, spirit, and history of the laws. They are to protect good order until the police and judicial system can take over.
There are many more incidents on cruise ships where the captain may incarcerate an abusive drunk - like a conductor can - BUT DUE PROCESS REQUIRES RELEASE TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES.
There are no "train courts!" to hear train offenses prosecuted by conductors.
After you leave that bar in Toledo, be sure you know when to hold 'em AND know when to fold 'em.
BCL
Engineer
Basically from what I can tell, California law basically gives commuter train conductors and fare collectors the authority to issue citations for fare evasion. They call it the power of arrest, but I'd have a hard time imagining any conductor I've seen try to arrest anyone. There are other issues like eating, drinking or smoking where a citation can be issued, but quite a few of those (save smoking) are actually allowed on commuter trains.
Now it might be interesting if a citation were contested in court and it was issued by a conductor. I've heard of many a citation dismissed because the issuing officer didn't show up in court. I doubt they pay conductors to do that. Perhaps designated fare inspectors.
Ryan
Court Jester
Point to the part of the statement I responded to that indicated that his comments were limited to Amtrak.
I read it, thank. Likewise, point to the part of the statement I responded to that indicated that his comments were limited to Amtrak. I'm sure it is true in his jurisdiction, however he made a blanket statement about all jurisdictions that I objected to.
It's a good thing that nobody is claiming that there are.
FriskyFL
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 782
I'd hate to think that I might get railroaded in a Train Court.
Or "CONDUCTORS" Whatcha gonna do when they come for you, bad boys, bad boys.......
NorthShore
Conductor
Jury duty notice comes complete with a train ticket!
G
Guest
Guest
Is a train ticket what you get from the conductor when speeding on the train?
Guest
white rabbitt
Lead Service Attendant
jim hudson better not try to smuggle
any of that contraban BBQ
from taylor back to austin on the trainh34r:
the amtrack BBQ police will find it jim :giggle: :giggle: :hi:
any of that contraban BBQ
from taylor back to austin on the train
h34r:the amtrack BBQ police will find it jim :giggle: :giggle: :hi:
StriderGDM
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2014
- Messages
- 581
Funny you mention that.
Years back on our honeymoon my wife and I were on the Southwest Chief in New Mexico having lunch when we rounded a curve too quickly.
Next thing we knew, the conductor had basically told the engineer to stop the train and called in for a new crew. Never heard what happened to the engineer, but he (or she) had clearly exceeded the MAS (from the amount of glassware destroyed in the galley in the diner, I suspect it was by a lot more than I want to know
and my guess is that it was a CLE (Career Limiting Event).What, I didn't realize that possession of alcohol and tobacco are illegal in every state!
And Amtrak even allows people to smoke (outside the train) at "smoke stops," they allow people in the sleepers to drink their fill of booze in their rooms as long as they don't get rowdy, and they even let coach passengers transport booze, but if they want to drink it they have to buy it from Amtrak.
I've never heard of BATF doing fishing expeditions on the trains.
NW cannonball
Conductor
So true.
All the lawyers and civil rights people I've ever asked, and oh yeah, the Bill of Rights.
NEVER NEVER NEVER consent to a search without warrant. Never.
For one thing - if you consent, there's no limit to what you consent to - unless you made an enforceable deal with the searchers on the spot.
If you consent on the spot to a search -- the cops will (if it seems profitable) push that consent far beyond any limits you ever thought of.
Just calmly say "I do not consent"
Don't ever consent to unlawful search. Any search without warrant is unlawful.
The civil contract of carriage - totally different thing - where you consent to having your bags searched for possible threats to other passengers or the carrier.
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,687
This may also have to do with cruise ships operating in international waters, where the legal situation is different.
Furthermore, the captain is by tradition "the supreme master and commander under God" and in the past when sailing ships many have been weeks from any port, captains were called upon to pass judgement and administer punishment when there were no other authorities who this could be delegated to (their responsibilities also extended to religious functions such as leading Sunday worship and ministering funerals). Of course these days are gone but some remnants of that remain in legal understanding.
You can't compare this to the situation on a train.
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,687
not even while crossing Lake Pontchartrain?
- Status
