pressuring me to give him money or he will abuse or kill me. >> I'm going to be brutally honest with you. I think you're lying to me. I think you did this. I don't think there's miles because when I write a search warrant for your phone, I don't think it's going to show any of that. And when I when it gets presented to the court and it shows that you were lying, >> you're an adult. >> Okay. >> So, each one of these customer names, they're not real customers. >> No, sir. >> You made them up. >> Yes, sir. >> So, how much money is in the Sunset Credit Union and or the Cash App? and she's been fraudulently credited them nine times for a total of $4,600. >> On March 27th, 2023, >> On March 27th, 2023 in Florida, an 18-year-old retail employee was arrested at her workplace after loss prevention documented nine fraudulent return transactions totaling $4,600. The funds were funneled to a man she called Miles, a person no witness had ever seen and whose existence the officer could not confirm. She was charged with felony grand theft. The question was never whether the theft happened. It was whether she acted alone. This is that encounter >> employee. She's been with us since February or so. Um, yesterday was the last theft, but essentially what she she has three separate credit cards and she's been fraudulently credited them nine times for a total of $4,600. So, what she did is she just grabbed a whole bunch of merchandise, bring it to the register, stick in her credit card, act like someone returned the merchandise, but it didn't. I have a written statement of admission and this is her mission statement. >> Okay. >> And I had her date and then initial date each. So, this is like the transaction that she stole. This is the transaction she transaction. These are all the transactions. >> There's nine of them. And those are the dates of the notes on the bottom. >> And she claims that she did it because her boyfriend's abusive and said, "If you don't bring any home money, >> beat the crap out of you." >> And I said, >> Becca, it's a felony. >> I know. >> So, I told her you guys are coming. You said that I do. >> I haven't contact with her yet, though. So, okay. Um, >> so I don't know. I'm here tomorrow, too. So, >> can I read her admission? >> Absolutely. >> She was crediting returns of items onto her credit card. So, essentially paying herself >> like like for example like she she she returned all these items like and then made >> she bought them and then she would return them to herself >> like this customer name. She just put in a dummy customer name. But I could see by the last name on the card it belongs to her. It actually prints out her name. So it's like Yeah, that's her name. You can put in whatever she wants over here, but the card you can manually type in the name or something. >> No, well, she she can manually type in that name. >> Lily Love. >> Yeah, >> that's the name she chose. >> Well, she used nine different names. Mostly Jones was the last name she used, but um but this >> So he's essentially this guy, whoever this is is >> pressuring me to give him money or he will abuse or kill me, >> right? Are you hot? >> Yeah. >> You want to take this? >> I don't care. >> I don't care. I really don't. >> Yeah. What's your first name? >> A N D. >> A N D. I'm going to read you something. Okay. It says, "I'm required to warn you before you make any statement. You have the following constitutional rights. Number one, you have the right to remain silent, not answer any questions. Do you understand that?" Number two, you have the right to the presence of a lawyer of your choice before you make any statement during any questioning. Do you understand that? >> Number three, if you cannot afford a lawyer, you're entitled to the presence of a courtappointed lawyer before you make any statement during any questioning. Do you understand that? >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, number four, any statement can and may be used against you in the court of law. Do you understand that? Yes, sir. Number five, any statement you make must be freely and voluntarily given. Do you understand that? >> Number six, if any time during the interview, you do not wish to answer any questions, your privilege to remain silent. Do you understand that? Lastly, I can make no threats or promises to induce you to make a statement. This must be your own free will. Do you understand that? Do you have any questions about what I just read you? How long have you worked here? Few months. Like when were you hired? >> Um, like February. >> February. Do you remember like midFebruary, early February? >> I don't remember the exact date. Okay. >> How long have you lived in Florida? >> 4 months. >> 4 months. Okay. So, we got called here in reference to essentially a theft. Um, do you have any idea what the allegations are against you? >> Yes, I do. Um, he just told me prior to you guys coming here. >> Who's he? >> Oh, Mike. Michael. >> Who is he to the store? >> I don't know. I think you told me he died. >> I'm go for it. Uh, okay. So, explain to me what happened. >> Um, basically I uh met this guy. Her name is not clear. He just went here. Um, >> you met the you met a guy. >> Yeah. >> What's his name? >> Uh, Miles. >> Miles. >> Yeah. M I L E. Um, >> M I L E S. >> Yes. >> What's Miles's last name? >> I don't know his last name. Um, >> how long have you known him? since I've been in. >> So, you've known him for four months and you don't know his last name? >> Yeah. Um, >> what's his phone number? >> What day was that? March what? >> March 18th. >> So, the last time you talked to him was over a week ago. >> Yeah. So, um, at first when I met him, everything was fine. I I >> Can you hit the button? >> I told him I just recently moved here, blah blah blah. And like I seen that he started to manip manipulate me a little bit. >> Money what? >> Manipulate me. >> What does that mean? >> Like he started to manipulate me. >> Oh, manipulate. Okay. I thought you >> um like he wouldn't like hurt me, but like >> I'm still listening. >> Um like he would just do little little stuff to like make me afraid of him. I'm still listening. >> And then he told me that like, oh, like he needs some money, like he needs some money or he's going to beat me or kill me. And I gave him like all the money. Like I'll ask my parents all the time cuz they were the one taking care of me when I was there. I asked my parents all the time to our little turn into a lot. And like he's just like like it's either like you gave me the money or like I'm going to beat you or like killed them. >> Has he ever beat you? The first time he tried to do that, I just started screaming and yelling. >> Where did this happen at? >> Uh, this happened like outside of like my apartment complex. And that was >> Who do you live with there? >> Um, I have two roommates. >> So, have the roommates met Miles? >> Um, no. >> No, no, no. They >> Have your parents met Miles? >> No, they don't know about him. >> Okay. So, how would you give him the money? So he made me open like a a bank account and the account the name of the bank is called Sunset Credit Union. So he made me open that up and then he's like oh just basically put the money in this account or if not you can put it on this cash. He told me like open up. >> So you would transfer it from whatever credit card you use to refund yourself the money. >> Yes. >> From the close. >> Yeah. And you would transfer it to a Cash App or the Sunset Credit Union? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, if I pull up your bank account, it's going to show that. >> Yes, sir. Yeah. >> All right. Would Would you mind pulling your bank account up? >> And I'll also show you him telling me to open it up. >> Do you have his Instagram or his Facebook? >> Um, I have him on this app called Telegram. >> What the heck is Telegram? >> It's like a Slack or WhatsApp. >> It's not like pictures. No, it's it's a chat and messenger. >> All right, let me Can you show me his your >> Yeah, I am showing you him telling you to open Vietnam. >> Just so you're aware, you don't have to show me anything on your phone. >> When the officer told Andrea Peters she did not have to show her phone, that was constitutional law. In Riley versus California, the Supreme Court held police may not search digital data on a seized cell phone without a warrant. Still, the officer then said he could write a search warrant for the phone. That statement, while accurate, adds pressure courts will examine when testing whether her statements were truly voluntary. >> Oh, okay then. >> Okay. >> All right. >> I just don't want you to feel like I'm forcing you to show me. >> Okay. >> So, you don't want to show me? >> No. Okay, that's fine. Um, but your phone would be evident, so I do need it because I'll write a search warrant for it and find the information off. All right. So, he would transfer you would transfer the money to this Sunset Credit Card or Cash App. >> Yeah. And like sometimes like he was really good at getting to me and like I'm really good with people so I'm like very nice. I'm very forgiving. So like he would like lend me some like some of the money just to like justify it like you know like just to make sure like I'm in the right track and like I wouldn't snitch on him or anything like that. And yeah >> Pedro. How old are you? >> I'm 18. Sorry. >> You're 18. You ever been arrested before? >> Never. >> Never. All right. What was his name? >> Michael. >> Michael. Did Michael have you write a letter? >> Yes, sir. >> Is this the letter he had you write? >> Yes, sir. It is. Is that your name? Yes, sir. >> You signed this? Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> All right. So, in this letter, it says you started February 27th returning. >> Yeah. >> Returning clothes. >> That's the first date of uh on the paper. >> Did you get to see these papers? >> Yes. Sign these two as well. >> Oh, >> I'd like to see. >> There's one more. >> So, the these are initials AP, right? Yeah. Yeah, >> those are your initials. >> You did this? >> Yes, sir. >> For each one. I'm not going to go through all of them, but I think there's what? Nine, you said. >> Okay. So, nobody else did this but you. >> Yeah. >> How would this work? Cuz here, Mr. Michael was trying to explain it to me, but I'm I'm I'm pretty slow and I don't understand things. >> Oh, okay. So, basically, >> I don't have a degree. So, >> um, basically I'll just, um, grab like items and then do like a return and just like do it on the credit card. That's how that work. >> So, if I wanted to do it, I just go in there, pick whatever I want to return. >> Mhm. >> I put my credit card in. >> Uhhuh. >> And then just charge the store back my the money >> onto my credit card. >> Yeah. >> But how do I make a customer name like Lily Love? Oh, it's just when you're done with the return, it just asks you like informations of like um the customers and you can just like the random name, random address. >> Okay. So, each one of these customer names, they're not real customers. >> No, sir. >> You made them up? >> No. Yes, sir. >> So, how much money is in the Sunset Credit Union and or the Cash App? >> How much money were you allowed to keep? >> Um like it depends on how like he would be feeling. Like sometimes you'd be like, "Oh, cuz he he is a like a scammer." So like >> Well, I mean you are too, >> I guess. So um so he I don't know. It just depends on like how much he wants the cut out of it. Like it's not like always like the same amount. >> I'm going to be brutally honest with you. I think you're lying to me. >> Okay. >> I think you did this. I don't think there's miles because when I write a search warrant for your phone, I don't think it's going to show any of that. And when I when it gets presented to the court and it shows that you were lying, you're an adult. They're not going to have when the state attorney goes, "Yeah, she straight up lied to the officers the entire time." >> Okay. >> They're they're going to be more harsh on you, if that makes sense. >> So, is there a Miles? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. All right. What does Miles look like? >> Because if this is actually happening what you're saying, too, then that's not acceptable either. >> But you don't know his last name. Your roommates have never seen him. What does he drive? >> He has a different car every time. >> It's a Okay. >> I don't. >> Okay. Did I miss anything? >> You stand up for the sign. >> Just sign one more. >> This is the one we we went we flipped through them. Uh, so just to speak for today's date, this is my name, date of birth, and the address that I would like to get mailed to. That's my business address, my personal address at home, and my date of birth. >> Okay, if you need >> also, would you like her um trespass from from here? >> Sure, >> Miss Pedro, stand up for me. >> Face the wall. >> Put your hands behind your back. >> Your purse? Do you want it to go with you? >> Yes, sir. Okay. And all this jewelry too. You want to go with you to the jail. You don't want to call somebody with them. A lot of jewelry got brother. >> Miles Miles. >> Um. The officer delivered all six Miranda adisements before asking a single investigative question satisfying Miranda versus Arizona 384US 436 1966. Andrea Peters acknowledged everyone. She then waved both her right to silence and her right to counsel. That waiver opened the door to everything that followed. Under Colorado versus Connelly 479US157 1986, a confession is considered voluntary unless the coercion is police initiated. Two statements the officer made will be examined closely under that standard. Before police arrived, loss prevention had already obtained a signed written admission initial by Andrea Peters on each of the nine individual transactions. Private actors are not bound by Miranda. That document is fully admissible and it was the foundation of the prosecution's case. Defense will argue the backroom setting created a coercive environment that tainted the police interview that followed, reaching toward the two-step interrogation doctrine addressed in Missouri versus Cybert 542US600 2004. That argument has limited traction because Miranda was delivered before police questioning began. The central legal question is not the theft. It is the duress defense. Florida law requires an immediate threat of death or great bodily harm and no reasonable opportunity to escape. That standard is difficult to meet across nine separate transactions conducted over several weeks at the same workplace. Courts are skeptical when ongoing criminal conduct spans extended periods. Each transaction represents a point where the subject could have stopped, left the job, or gone to law enforcement. The extended timeline works directly against the legal requirements for a valid duress claim under Florida precedent. Andrea Peter's account, however, raised a separate and more serious statutory issue. Florida statute 787.06 covers using coercion to compel labor or services for financial benefit. That is a first-degree felony more serious than the theft charge itself and it carries a mandatory minimum in certain circumstances. If Miles existed and controlled her through credible threats of physical harm, the statutory definition is met. Under Florida statute 787.06, once those indicators are raised by a witness on camera, law enforcement carries an affirmative investigative duty. It is not discretionary. The officer acknowledged Miles on camera. Then he moved past it. Failing to document the trafficking claim, initiate a referral, or conduct any follow-up on a named suspect is a procedural failure, and it left a potential first-degree felony perpetrator uninvestigated. The officer also told Andrea that lying would make the state attorney more harsh on her. That statement was intended as pressure toward truthfulness. Under Colorado versus Connelly, it is the kind of police initiated statement defense will use to challenge voluntariness. It was unnecessary and legally costly. Andrea Peters received 2 years of probation following a felony grand theft conviction under Florida statute 812.014. Theft between $750 and $20,000 is a thirdderee felony carrying up to 5 years imprisonment. At $4,600, she exceeded that lower threshold more than six times over. The officer receives a B minus. Miranda was delivered correctly and completely. The advisement regarding the phone was legally accurate, consistent with Riley versus California 573 US 373 2014. The arrest was lawful. The interrogation was measured. However, the harsher prosecution statement adds a voluntariness issue and the trafficking indicators raised on camera were not investigated, a documented procedural failure. Andrea Peters receives a C+. She raised a facially credible coercion claim with specific details named location, named individual, named financial accounts, described threats. She did not resist arrest. The probation outcome suggests the court found some mitigation credible. The critical error was waving counsel and delivering a complete operational confession on a felony charge describing the mechanism, the accounts, and the money flows step by step without an attorney present. Loss prevention receives a B. The investigation was thorough. Nine transactions documented. Signed, written admissions initialed on each one. that paperwork carried the prosecution. The grade does not reach A because best practice in loss prevention investigations includes informing the subject that cooperation with LP is separate from cooperation with law enforcement before obtaining a written statement. A distinction that matters when voluntariness is later challenged. Lesson one. If advised of the right to an attorney before questioning, use it. Speaking without counsel on a felony charge is rarely the correct decision, regardless of how innocent or coerced the circumstances feel. The right exists precisely for moments like this one. Silence and a request for an attorney cost nothing. A full confession on a thirdderee felony costs everything. Lesson two. If someone uses threats of harm to control your finances and direct your actions for their financial benefit, that conduct may satisfy the definition of labor trafficking under Florida statute 787.06, a firstderee felony. That legal distinction matters both for prosecution of the perpetrator and for potential mitigation of the person under coercion. Lesson three. Assigned admission obtained by a private employer before police arrive is not protected by Miranda. Under the private actor doctrine, loss prevention is not a government agent. That document is fully admissible and in this case was the foundation of the entire prosecution. Signing anything in a loss prevention back room with or without police present has legal consequences. Lesson four. Law enforcement officers who receive on camera statements describing coercion, threats, and financial control by a named third party have an investigative obligation under Florida statute 787.06. Acknowledging a trafficking claim and moving on is not fulfillment of that duty. The obligation is to document, refer, and follow up. Lesson five. The duress defense requires an immediate present threat with no reasonable exit at the moment each criminal act is committed. A course of conduct spanning multiple weeks and nine separate transactions does not typically satisfy that standard. Courts require the threat to be specific, unavoidable, and continuous, not a general fear developed over time. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below. We read all of them. If there is a body cam interaction or legal question you want covered, let us