bureaucratic coughry

[Bodie]

Sorry
Tried to avoid responding but cant help - John K I totally understand the tone of the questions- - its not a power trip- its their job to ask sometimes difficult questions.

Look at it isolation
solo traveller
white male
Age ?
multiple holidays to thailand

Sorry but that would raise some red flags

In relation to the original post - Nothing can help embarrassment, Its like when I used to detain a shoplifter in a store and then walk them through the shopping centre to the police beat so I could process them or call parents (juvenile) to collect them. The juvies were more embarrassed by that walk then any later caution ( you could easily tell if it was one off offence or it was going to lead to more offences by the walk to the beat and subsequent phone cal to parents) Secondly where are Border Force/ police supposed to do official interviews etc except inside an office/interview room.

 

[DC3]

... "Did you go out?"
"Where did you go?"
"Did you go to any bars?" ...

LOL. Are they serious? Is that what they teach at Border Force school?

 

[drron]

I guess some people read words only, and others interpret the words written.

As everyone in this thread.Not even the OP was present when all this happened.
I can understand that the lady was embarrassed and very upset but a funeral and disrupted travel would have made this the last straw possibly even if they were the most empathic ABF officers in the force.
So none of us know.

 

[drron]

LOL. Are they serious? Is that what they teach at Border Force school?

So you are not an older male who has been to Thailand?
I certainly know why they would ask those questions even though I know none would be relevant to JohnK.

 

[mannej]

LOL. Are they serious? Is that what they teach at Border Force school?

If you look at the bigger picture and the flags raised, the questions make sense.

JohnK, this is in no way a dig at you as a person, but it’s the profiling of age, gender and travel patterns that led to this. It is unfortunate as profiling can be a nuisance to those who do the right thing but I have a fairly clear picture of what they were trying to ascertain from the information you’ve provided.

DrRon has nailed my thoughts exactly.

 

[JohnK]

If you look at the bigger picture and the flags raised, the questions make sense.

JohnK, this is in no way a dig at you as a person, but it’s the profiling of age, gender and travel patterns that led to this. It is unfortunate as profiling can be a nuisance to those who do the right thing but I have a fairly clear picture of what they were trying to ascertain from the information you’ve provided.

DrRon has nailed my thoughts exactly.

I'm sorry but those questions are totally irrelevant and if you think they are relevant in my situation then they assume I am guilty but guilty of what? A drug mule?

The questions are a gross invasion of my privacy and I treat them with the seriousness they deserve. Do they seriously think I will answer those questions? My replies do get to be very sarcastic.

Funny thing is in the past 10 or so years I've been to Thailand even more times yet have never had much more than a query on whether my golf shoes/golf clubs are clean. Most times sent straight through without a look at the golf shoes. So I was profiled then but not profiled now?

 

[DC3]

… "Did you go out?"
No

"Where did you go?"
Didn't go out (stayed at hotel)

"Did you go to any bars?"
No

Then what? Those questions are rubbish.​

 

[Forg]

Those questions are rubbish.

The response being examined isn't only the words being used to respond.

 

[DC3]

The response being examined isn't only the words being used to respond.

So, designed to get people upset. Even more so if innocent and law-abiding with nothing to hide.

 

[tgh]

I am just plain devastated by the continuing contributions to this thread.

Right from the start , I considered a bid for the popcorn concession .
In decided that the "quality" of the thread content was unlikely to result in propagation and did not bid.

now we are at post 169 and it could go on for years…..sigh…

 

[mannej]

I'm sorry but those questions are totally irrelevant and if you think they are relevant in my situation then they assume I am guilty but guilty of what? A drug mule?

The questions are a gross invasion of my privacy and I treat them with the seriousness they deserve. Do they seriously think I will answer those questions? My replies do get to be very sarcastic.

Funny thing is in the past 10 or so years I've been to Thailand even more times yet have never had much more than a query on whether my golf shoes/golf clubs are clean. Most times sent straight through without a look at the golf shoes. So I was profiled then but not profiled now?

It has nothing to do with drugs JohnK

 

[Forg]

So, designed to get people upset.

No, designed to be easy to answer.

 

[drron]

So, designed to get people upset. Even more so if innocent and law-abiding with nothing to hide.

Being an elderly white grey-haired fellow I know the profile.Fortunately we fly into Bangkok from Asia and don't directly fly home otherwise I would get the same questions as JohnK.
It is why we rarely go out at night in Thailand.I can be walking down the street holding hands with mrsdrron and be offered the services of a young girl.When I say I am happy with the lovely woman I'm with I am told so I can find you a young boy.
Do that-blackmail-drugs.Can you see possibly why ABF might be interested.

 

[straitman]

I guess you only read what you want to read.

The OP's sister makes it very clear... taken aside in front of hundreds of people. Made to wait. Phone confiscated without explanation. Taken down corridors and searched without explanation... 'just doing our job'. She cried and they kept going. Belongings left in a pile. 'Awful awful awful'.

Short of the OP's sister saying 'I felt disrespected', what other evidence do you need?

What we think is important if we want to effect change. But it is astounding the number of people on this board who actually don't see the use of coercive powers, by officers who aren't properly trained, and without any rights to the detainee, as a problem. The bottom line is that with up to one third of searches being innappropriate and ten percent being unlawful, there is a strong possibility that this search either wasn't necessary, or was not conducted properly.

We are right to ask questions.

In, I think, my only other post in this thread I alluded to your posts being full of what if scenarios. I maintain that stance.

Also have read and reread your same comments time and again I have to ask what is gained by rewriting the same comment(s) time and again?

More specifically however:
taken aside in front of hundreds of people. How else do you take someone aside?
Made to wait. Waiting our turn is something we all have to do in life. Maybe it was wait until the correct/appropriate person was available
Phone confiscated without explanation. That could and should have been explained very simply.
Taken down corridors and searched without explanation... To an interview room for privacy is reasonable when you have already complained about being in front of hundreds of people. (can't have it both ways) I am sure BF didn't design the building layout so are stuck with whatever they are given.
'just doing our job'. I agree this could be explained a lot better. Still much better than the USA where they just grump at you and leave to to (correctly) interpret the grumps.

 

[JohnK]

It has nothing to do with drugs JohnK

Then those questions as mentioned by @DC3 are totally rubbish. I stayed in my hotel room whole trip and didn't talk to anyone.

This particular trip was questioned by a young woman on a power trip. From memory it was PER.

 

[Vic]

As everyone in this thread.Not even the OP was present when all this happened.
I can understand that the lady was embarrassed and very upset but a funeral and disrupted travel would have made this the last straw possibly even if they were the most empathic ABF officers in the force.
So none of us know.

The OP does have an email describing events. At least you agree with my view that the Sister did not have a good time...

 

[odysseus]

The OP does have an email describing events. At least you agree with my view that the Sister did not have a good time...

And? Not everything in life is a good time - including very often the lives of those impacted by the crimes being investigated…

 

[cambriamarsh]

While I don't think I feel the same fervour as you appear to feel about this (and I admit it's hard to tell the extent of ones passion about anything on Teh Interwebz), I do dislike the whole 1984'ness of it all.
I suspect that the reason it is what it is would be due to the small percentage of the population that's affected by it. While I couldn't quickly Google up stats, I suspect I'm around average with around one OS trip every couple of years; but my wife goes OS around once a month which is WAY above average. Now she's never been pulled aside for any of this stuff, incoming or outgoing. So the percentage of the Australian population who're subjected to any of this 1984-ish behaviour is going to be tiny; chance of anything changing, when so few of the voting public encounter it, is going to be miniscule (and frankly would be more likely to result from cost-related changes than behavioural problems).

I used to travel a lot, 2 to 6 AU NZ trips per month for about a year and was constantly getting various bag sniffs etc but never anything more serious. On balance I’m ok with it but agree it’s sometimes not pleasant and really depends on the operator. Most of my entries and exits were via BNE if that has anything to do with it.

The problem with explaining honestly why someone is subject to a more intrusive check is that it provides the bad guys with more intelligence on how to avoid being stopped!

Sorry if you don’t agree but that’s my perspective.

 

[nutwood]

Then those questions as mentioned by @DC3 are totally rubbish. I stayed in my hotel room whole trip and didn't talk to anyone.

This particular trip was questioned by a young woman on a power trip. From memory it was PER.

You have a very valid point. Is how you spent your holiday any business of the ABF? If you spent your time engaged in illegal activities, surely that's a question for the police? If the police question you, you have clear cut rights.
Obviously different if the alleged criminal behaviour is immediately related to border security but difficult to see the relevance of what bars were visited, unless the suggestion is that you have a case full of coughography, a question that the luggage search should have addressed.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Also have read and reread your same comments time and again I have to ask what is gained by rewriting the same comment(s) time and again?

Because the following two statements cannot both be true:

• 10% of searches are unlawful and 30% for searches are inappropriate, and
• border force officers are doing a good job

Those arguing in favour of the OP's sister's search have not addressed the issue presented by the first statement.