What is going on at the TSA?

Brian F. Sullivan, FAA Special Agent (Retired)

Do you remember Carla Martin?

She was the TSA attorney who almost derailed the prosecution’s case in the Zacarias Moussaoui trial in March ‘06. Judge Leonie Brinkema said that Martin sent an e-mail message to seven Federal Aviation Administration officials outlining the prosecution’s opening statement and provided commentary on government witnesses from the first day of testimony in violation of her pretrial order.

In addition to “coaching witnesses”, Martin’s contacts with lawyers for American and United Airlines were detailed in a legal brief. Lawyers representing the victims’ families in the ongoing 9/11 litigation raised concerns that her efforts were intended to assist the airlines by altering prospective witness testimony. They called the relationship between the TSA and the airlines “incestuous and inappropriate.” The 9/11 families have since sued Carla Martin alleging that the attorney “colluded” with the airlines. They are looking for all documents related to her communication with United and American.

Well, Zacarias was eventually given a life sentence and Judge Brinkema decided that the families of the September 11th victims were entitled to the same unclassified aviation security documentation that the government turned over to the Moussauoi defense team. What did the TSA do then? They appealed Judge Brinkema’s decision, slapping the victims’ families in the face and essentially taking the position that information provided to an al-Qaeda terrorist could not be provided to the families of his victims. Whose side is the TSA on anyway?

Last month, the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the TSA and denied that evidence to the 9/11 families. At least the three judge panel acknowledged that Judge Hellerstein’s court in New York has exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising from the September 11th attacks. No thanks to the TSA, the FBI in that litigation now appears poised to begin release of information regarding airport security. Documents will include interviews conducted with witnesses at the airports in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, information which relates to logs and records of the airlines and screening equipment seized as part of their investigation and materials that were in possession of the hijackers, such as the contents of Mohammed Atta’s suitcase.

Inside sources report that Ms. Martin wasn’t fired by the TSA until early February this year. Those same sources say that Francine Kerner, the TSA’s Chief Counsel, allegedly “circled the wagons” in defense of Carla when the furor of her “tainting witnesses” first arose during the Moussauoi trial. According to them, Francine even at one point referred to Ms. Martin as an “American patriot.” Certainly a strange attribution for someone who almost single handedly derailed the prosecution’s case in the Moussauoi trial.

Ms. Kerner would have to be considered quite knowledgeable in this context as she too was once accused of taking actions which might have encouraged witnesses to “tailor their testimony.” A November 8, 1995 article in the New York Times states, “ Although, Ms. Kerner was supposed to avoid discussing the case with her colleagues in the counsel’s office, the committee presented evidence today that she provided significant details to those under investigation….” Did Carla learn from a master?

The bottom line is whether Carla Martin was acting alone or whether her actions reflected a commitment by the TSA’s leadership to protect the airlines in the 9/11 civil suit. Carla had a supervisor – Francine Kerner, the TSA’s Chief Counsel. Did she know of, approve and condone Carla’s actions or did she just do a poor job of supervising a “loose cannon.?” The public and, at the very least, the 9/11 victims’ families have a right to know.

Inside sources say that Carla Martin is appealing the decision to fire her. It certainly will be interesting to see if that process, and the ongoing civil suit against her, surfaces information which points to a wider involvement within the TSA’s Office of Chief Counsel than heretofore revealed.

One former TSA attorney has said that he had never seen a level of micro-management such as was the order of the day in Ms. Kerner’s office. Thus, it is difficult to believe that Ms. Martin was operating “wholly under the radar.” This assessment begs the question, “What is going on at the TSA, particularly in the Office of the Chief Counsel?”