Not did you, why did you? We know you did, we want to know why you did. Why I did? >> Why did you steal the money? Why I did? Why did you put the $400 on the gift card and put it in your purse? On April 23rd, 2024, Officers Ferolo and Swanson of the Derby Beach Police Department responded to a 7-Eleven where franchise owner Russell reported a gift card loading scheme totaling nearly $15,000 over several weeks. How's it going, buddy? You're you're the gentleman that we're meeting with? Okay. All right, beautiful. Um so, what's going on? >> you the Oh, okay. So, I have a 19 locations. So, this is the location that I'm having some issues. I just took over there a few months back, right? All right. So, every time they have a audit inventory, you know, 7-Eleven they do their stuff. I'm short, short, short. I'm trying to find what is going on. All right. It has to be, you know, according to our business, most of the time is employees stealing. Not the Well, customers steal, but not Right, right, right, right. You know, they steal candy, how much? $1, $2, $3, right? >> Yeah. But I have a $15,000 shortage almost. >> All right. How much? $15,000. Well, $14,900 something, right? I don't have the report yet. It's just estimated. All right. Then I was trying to dig up, "Oh, what is happening? Why is that?" Uh-huh. From the cash on 19th, I think, Friday, Uh-huh. I had $816 short from the register. Then I go, "You know what? I'm busy guy, right? In the north." I said, "You know what? I'm going to spend some time and find out." >> All right. Then one of the employees I see that she took that She took $405 something. This is on the video. I have that So, I'm going to share with you guys anyway. All right. So, I said, "You know what? Forget the 15. This is what I have right now. >> Right. I want to move forward with that thing. So, I I I want the All right. So, she Right now we have today what we're dealing with is we're dealing with $400 and something. >> Yes. Okay, I just want to make sure that's clear. All right. So, today we're dealing with $400. >> Yeah. With that being said, this employee, are you looking to uh fire them and issue them a trespass warning, or are you looking to press charges on them as well? All right. So, you're looking to press charges. Okay. So, okay. We want her to stay here. All right. No problem. That's fine. >> money, man. Okay. What is the employee's name that you >> Her first name is Tamara. T A M A R A. T A M A R A? Correct. Okay. I don't know the last name. Okay, you don't know the last name. Okay. But I have all of those information >> All right. We'll get that once we go inside. And she on duty right now? >> She's on duty right now. >> All right. So, we're going to go in there. We're going to go with you. Um you know, I I still have to question her, of course. But um now you have video showing her taking Okay. >> Yes. Are you inside? Yes. Oh, okay. Hello. How are you doing? I'm doing well. My name is Officer Damien Farrell. I'm with the Derby Beach Police Department. This is Officer Swanson. He's uh my buddy. Um The reason we're here today is because This is Russell. Do you know who Russell is? He's my boss. He's your boss. Okay. So, Russell has concerns that you have stolen from the store. What? Okay. So, before we talk about it, all I'm just going to read you something, okay? Um this is real fast. I'm sure you've seen this type in the movies and stuff like that. Um All right. So, All right. So, I'm required to warn you before you make any statement that you have the following constitutional rights. You have the right to remain silent and not answer any of my questions. You understand that? Um I what? You have the right to remain silent and not answer any of my questions. Do you understand that? Like your question? Yeah, like in other words, if I ask you questions, you don't have to answer. Okay. >> understand that? Yeah. Okay, so that's one of your rights. That's your first right. Any statement you make must be freely and voluntarily given. Do you understand that? Statement? Yeah, in other words, like I can't have this gentleman shake the truth out of you. Do you speak English? Okay. Or do you Do you speak a different language? Help us out. Uh I'm not speaking English very well. Hm? I'm not speaking English very well. Okay. What language would you prefer? I'm good. Okay. Try to get Creole to do this. Who we have with you? All right, then. >> [clears throat] >> Tamara, do you have your ID on you by any chance? No. Can I see your ID, please? Thank you. Okay, so uh here, let's go over here in this area. This is where we're Excuse me, sir. Here you go. Thank you. Here you go. Okay. You feel okay over back here, right? This is a nice safe area. This is where we're out of the limelight. All right, so. So, okay. So, any statement you make must be freely and voluntarily given. Do you understand what that means? You told me any statement? >> Yeah. So, in other words, if I'm asking you questions Mhm. any statement that you tell me, Mhm. you have to give it of your own free will. In other words, he can't shake it out of you. You have to tell us cuz you want to tell us. Okay? You understand that? I need to try. Okay. You have the right to the presence and representation of a lawyer of your choice before you make any statement and during any questioning. Do you understand what that means? No? Okay, so what that means is in other words, right now I just want to have a conversation with you. If you don't want to have a conversation with me unless you have a lawyer around, you have that right. Okay? All right, but I'm not going to ask you anything that you don't want to answer unless you're willing to answer it, okay? If you cannot afford a lawyer, you are entitled to the presence and representation of a court-appointed lawyer before you make any statement and during any questioning. So, Twana, what that means is in other words, if you can't afford a lawyer, then what will happen is they will provide one for you. Okay? Do you understand that? Can I have Can call someone to um translate for me? Uh I don't have someone on duty right now, but I mean, you seem like you understood me perfectly clear when I was asking for ID and everything. I believe if you work in this store, you deal with people that are speaking English all day long. I believe that you understand these things I'm telling you. If you need clarification on what I'm trying to say, I'll clarify it for you. I don't mind taking I I don't care if we spend the next half hour just talking about these things. I just want to make sure you understand your rights. Okay? Cuz I don't want you to feel uncomfortable, okay? I understand this is an uncomfortable situation because of course we're here with your boss and you're being accused of something, but I want to try to make sure you just understand your rights, okay? That's all we're doing right now. Okay? So, I don't want you being nervous. I'm going to read that last one to you again. If you cannot afford a lawyer, you are entitled to the presence and representation of a court-appointed lawyer before you make any statements and during any questioning. So, what that means is if you can't afford to hire your own attorney, then they will provide one to you. Do you understand that? Yes, you do? I just need a verbal yes or no. But I I just need a verbal yes or no. Like, in other words, I need you to say yes or no. Like, do you understand that you can't afford an attorney, they will provide one for you? Yeah. Okay. If at any time during the interview, you do not wish to answer any of my questions, you are privileged to remain silent. Do you know what that means? All right, so that means if I ask you a question and you don't want to answer, you have you have the ability to remain silent. You can tell me, "Officer Ferriello, I don't want to answer that." Or you could just call me Damian. You don't even have to call me Officer Ferriello, okay? Okay. All right. I can make no threats or promises to induce you to make a statement. This must be of your own free will. Do you know what that means? All right, that's back to the big guy. I can't threaten you to make a statement and say if you don't make a statement, he's going to beat you up. I can't do something like that. That's not true. And I can't make you a promise. I can't say, "Oh, if you make a statement to me, then I'm going to let you go scot-free and you can go live on with your life." Okay? Any Anything that I say to you is, you know, going to be just questions regarding what we're talking about for today's incident, okay? Do you understand that? All right, yeah, I need a yes or no verbal. I think you should say yes or no. Yeah, yes or no. Do you understand that I can't threaten you to make you make a statement? What's that? I I don't understand the video. Okay, but understand that I can't drive. Yeah. Okay. All right, any statement can be and will be used against you in the court of law. Do you understand that? Any? Any statement. So, in other words, anything you say what's going to happen is anything that you say right now is going to be used one day in court because right now, like I said, you're being accused of stealing. Uh-huh. >> So, you're being accused of stealing. You know what stealing is, right? Stealing. Yeah, what is stealing? Do you know what stealing is? Stealing. Yeah, stealing. Uh-huh. Do you know what that is? Yeah. Okay. So, in other words, when you make any statements about it that can be used in court. Do you understand that? Oh, yes. Okay, you do. Okay, so you understand your rights as I've read them to you. Okay. Yes, you do? Yeah, I understand. Okay. The first constitutional issue surfaces within minutes. Ferolo's decision to administer Miranda warnings before substantive questioning is procedurally correct. Under Miranda versus Arizona, 1966 custodial interrogation requires a full advisement of rights before questioning begins. The custody threshold is met. A reasonable person surrounded by two officers and her employer would not feel free to leave. However, a critical complication emerges immediately. Tamara states she does not speak English well and explicitly requests an interpreter. Ferolo declines reasoning that working in a retail environment implies sufficient English comprehension. This fails the applicable legal standard. Florida statute section 92.565 requires consideration of interpreter services in criminal proceedings. Courts reviewing Miranda waiver validity do not ask whether the officer believed the suspect understood. They ask whether the suspect actually understood a materially different inquiry. Under Colorado versus Connelly 1986, a valid waiver must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Where a language barrier exists and an interpreter is requested but denied, the prosecution assumes a heightened burden at trial to establish genuine comprehension. Tomorrow's responses fragmented, monosyllabic, and inconsistent are more consistent with surface compliance than a knowing and voluntary waiver of constitutional rights. All right, you understand. So, with that being said, okay. Basically, Russell, as we determined, Russell is your manager, right? Or your boss? Uh my boss. All right, he's the big boss, right? I think he owns a bunch of businesses. Okay. Russell has noticed that some money has been going missing from here. Money? Money. Okay. All right. So, with that being said, Russell was very concerned. So, then he noticed one day that 800 and something dollars was missing. 800? Mhm. But so, what Russell did, well, My brother-in-law, he's the Oh, okay, okay. All right, just All right, thank you. So, what Russell did the day that he realized that there was $800 missing is he went and reviewed the video. Do you know that there's surveillance video? You know there's cameras in this guy everywhere, look. Right there, there's one. So, you know there's cameras watching you when you work. You know, it's it's there for your protection, too, because it's there in case you get robbed or something like that, but it's also for his protection to make sure his employees aren't stealing from him. When he went and watched the video and he showed me the video, do you know what we saw in the video? From Friday, this past Friday, that last Friday. Do you know what we saw? Friday? 4 days ago. Yeah. 4 days? Sunday, Saturday, Friday. Today is Wednesday, so today is Tuesday. Today is Tuesday, today is Tuesday, so okay. But you want 5 days ago. 5 days ago, Friday. So, 5 days ago, on Friday, the day before the weekend, he watched the video and do you know what we saw in video? Do you know what we saw? Okay, I'm going to tell you what I saw, okay? And then maybe you could tell me why. Okay? I saw you put $400 on a gift card that you then put into your purse. Friday? Friday. It's on video. You put $400 on a gift card and then you put the gift card in your purse, but you never put $400 in the drawer. So, when you put the $400 on the gift card, that's like stealing $400 from the cash register because you put it on the gift card. Do you know what I'm talking about? There was no customers in the store. This happened around 11:30 a.m. So, closest time this happened. Friday. Friday Friday at Friday. Yeah, it's Friday. $400 You don't remember taking $400 on a gift card? What? Yeah, I I I um I looked. Huh? I looked um Friday. Okay. So, how come Why did you take the $400 and put it on the gift card? Do you want to see the video of it? No, no, no. I I I saw that. You saw the video? I I saw the video. No, I'm saying I can show you the video of you doing it. Do you want to see the video? Which video? Of you putting the $400 on the gift card. I'm asking you why you did that. Um I Is there a reason that you did that? Like why we know we know that you did it. We want to know why. We? We. Him and me is we. And and and Russ, too. He seems like a nice enough guy. Why did you steal that money? Not did you, why did you? We know you did. We want to know why you did. Why I did? Why did you steal the money? Why I did it? Why did you put the $400 on the gift card and put it in your purse? Maybe the um uh um the gift card Maybe the what? The gift card? Uh-huh, the gift card um can I load um it's um but I saw that um I Oh my god. I load on She's She's got a process that No, she's got a process of a story. Well, she's got a story. >> She's trying She's trying to figure out what we want to hear. I don't want you to tell me what you think we want to hear. You're a smart girl. I can tell you're smart and I can tell you understand. Okay? So, you don't have to think about a story. You don't have to try to convince me that you can't understand me. All we're trying to ask is listen. We're trying to figure out why you put $400 on a gift card. Because if he goes back, see right now is a good time for you being honest. Because if he goes back and finds more stuff on you, then I'm going to have to put a lot of charges on you. Right now we're giving you an opportunity to be honest with us and tell you why you did that and if there's any other times that you have taken money. Because right now he knows that over the past how long? Over the past month? Yeah. Over the past month, he's out around $14,000. Now, I'm only telling you 400 of that I know is you right now. But, if you make me do a lot of extra work and make him do a lot of extra work and everything for us to figure out who took the rest of the $14,000, then that's going to become a big felony case and you'll probably go to jail for a long time. Yeah. You understand so far? Cuz here's my next question. If you're not going to tell me why you took it, my next question is who taught you to do that? Who? Who taught you to go in the register and put $400 on a card and then take it? So, another employee here told you to do that or did you figure it out on your own? Another employee. It's a man. Who? Okay. You're you're you're just asking us the same things that we're saying over and over. He's saying, in other words, did you figure that out or did someone teach you that you could scam the system by putting $400 on a gift card? Cuz I saw you had it written down on a little piece of paper. You didn't even have the gift card out cuz you were trying to be less suspicious. Do you know what suspicious is? You're trying to be less obvious. All right? Sneaky. Yes, very sneaky. Sneaky, sneaky. Another employee. Camera, I have everything in the phone. I have it. We want to know They want to know >> to know who told you to do it. Who told you? Is somebody else told me? Who told you? Yeah. Did anybody tell you to do this? And be honest with me. Be honest with them. No. Nobody told you to do that, all right? No. You did on your own. Whatever you did, nobody helped you. Nobody Yeah. Nobody Like, you know other employee tell you, "Hey, do this So, I can find out maybe somebody is behind all this and making you do this. So, you did on your own. Nobody help you. Nobody give you the idea. Come on. Don't don't disturb me. We talk all the time. Yes, I know. Yeah. So, my Why you disturbing when we talk? We're trying to get a lawyer. I know. >> Very busy. Very busy right now. We're processing a lot. All you got to do is tell us the truth and we can figure it out. Yeah. That'll help us figure it out. If there's somebody else we're looking for or if we only looking for you. Who showed you to put the money on the card like that and then put the card in your in your pocketbook? Another employee here must have showed you. I don't think you're smart enough to come up with that idea yourself. I don't know. I think she's very smart. I think she's playing us right now. Or she thinks she's playing us. So, I have another question. Did you do that today since morning? Cuz I don't know what happened today. Today? Did you do anything like that? Any cards today? No. No? All right. So, this is what we're going to do. I'm going to be placing you under arrest. Okay? You're going to jail because of the crime. You're not really talking to us. So, if I can't really talk to you, I don't want to waste your time. I don't want to waste his time. I don't want to waste their time. So, I'm going to just put you under arrest cuz you're not talking to us. So, I'm going to have you put your hands behind your back. All right. But I don't know. But but I But we do know. You know, I know, he knows. >> you I I tell you nobody tell me. >> You tell You're not telling me anything. That's the thing. You're wasting my time. And if you waste my time, listen, I'm going to be >> But I I'm going to be cool with you if you're wasting my time. I don't like when people waste my The interrogation presents a second constitutional concern. Ferolo discloses total store losses of approximately $14,000, then frames continued silence as a path to a larger felony charge with significant prison exposure. The Ninth Circuit addressed this tactic in United States versus Tingle, 1981. The court drew a narrow, but consequential line in forming a suspect of realistic legal consequences is permissible. Conditioning the scope of charges on whether the suspect chooses to speak crosses into coercion, penalizing the exercise of a Fifth Amendment right. The framing here, speak now or face an expanded felony case, tracks that prohibited pattern precisely. Ferolo then announces the arrest by citing non-cooperation and refusal to talk. A suspect cannot be arrested for exercising the right to remain silent. That framing is legally imprecise and creates unnecessary exposure in the record. The arrest itself is lawful. Probable cause was established before officers entered the building surveillance footage documented the specific transaction, and Tamara's identity was confirmed on scene. Under Florida statute section 812.01 for theft of $750 or more is third-degree felony grand theft. The documented loss of $14,900 satisfies that threshold substantially. The search incident to arrest yields multiple gift cards from Tamara's purse. Russell identifies several as store inventory admissible under Chimel versus California, 1969. This physical evidence is entirely independent of any interrogation derived statement. Even if admissions are later suppressed on Connelly or Tingle grounds, the physical evidence pathway to prosecution remains intact. Officer Ferolo receives a B minus. His advisement was proactive and procedurally sound. Three decisions create legal exposure denying the interpreter request without documenting the basis for proceeding, framing the arrest as a consequence of silence rather than probable cause, and applying interrogation pressure approaching the tingle threshold. The physical evidence survives. The statement record may not. Officer Swanson receives a C+. His backup role was adequate, but his audible remarks suggesting the suspect lacked the intelligence to devise the scheme captured on a recorded custodial encounter is unprofessional and hands defense counsel a credible bias argument. The suspect receives a C. Both protections were explicitly explained. Under Edwards versus Arizona, stating I want a lawyer stops all questioning immediately. Neither the right to silence nor the right to counsel was clearly invoked. After sustained pressure, a partial admission was produced. Franchise owner Russell receives an A-. He gathered documented evidence before contacting police, engaged law enforcement through proper channels, and provided the specific factual foundation establishing probable cause prior to officer entry. I know I make my mistake, but I I can't I can't um um I can't Can Can I Can I um Go ahead. Can I um give give my my I can't give my um my my check my my I can't give my my my um my um um my I can't give I can't do the the check. Well, he's checking He's probably going to withhold your check anyways. He's definitely not going to be paying you your check. Not Let me Let me Let me just grab it. Not me not stopping walking towards public. All right, he's probably not going to be paying you your check. I mean, the thing is you stole at least $400 from her. I don't know how much you make on your checks, but the thing is you're going to go to jail right now because you're not cooperating, you're not helping us out. But I have You understand the gift cards? It's this one. This one? No, it's not It's for me. That one's yours? Police are on it. It's my baby. Okay. And where the complainant victim is 97 in the area and he did confirm that's the correct subject. Now, which of these gift cards can you identify as ones that you sell here? This one I sell at eBay. I sell the Vanilla. No, no, it's it's only one. See, right now you're communicating real well. No, I I tried to understand. That's why I tried to speak. What about this one? It's just blank. I can please uh We're going to pull those all out real fast and we'll have you identify any of them that are yours. All right, let me have you put your hands behind your back. All right. Ma'am. You got to put your hands behind your back. Turn around. You got to turn around. Put your palms together like you're praying. All right. You want to put your palms together like you're praying. All right. Let me see your other hand. No, you got to put your other hand up. Put your palms together like you're praying. Three operational lessons emerge. First, when a suspect requests an interpreter during a custodial advisement proceeding without one and without documentation, creates a suppression vulnerability that physical evidence cannot fully remedy. The basis for proceeding must be on the record. Second, arrest justification must be stated in terms of probable cause, specific articulable facts known before entry, not in terms of a suspect's refusal to cooperate. Citing silence as the cause of arrest misrepresents the law. Third, interrogation pressure. Tying charge scope to a suspect's willingness to speak must remain within the Tingle line. Crossing it risks suppressing the very admissions the interrogation was designed to produce. For suspects, Miranda rights are only effective when invoked. Silence alone is not an invocation. A request for a translator is not a request for counsel. The right to an attorney requires those words stated clearly, after which all questioning must stop immediately. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like discussed in the comments below. Thank you for watching.