We got several casings up here right by the ATM. >> I got chopper in here. You ain't going nowhere. >> On August 21st, 2024, four armed suspects robbed a Brinks armored vehicle at a Huntington Bank ATM in Cleveland, Ohio, shooting one employee and fleeing in a black Dodge Durango with no license plates. Three weeks prior, the same crew profile and vehicle description were used in an identical armored truck robbery in the same area with no arrests made. Officers pursued the vehicle until it crashed, then apprehended three of the four suspects on foot. This analysis examines the three central legal issues raised by this footage: arrest authority, pursuit authorization, and liability, and the field Miranda advisement. >> What's going on? You guys got someone? Where? >> Brinks Brinks truck came to empty out the ATM. >> Uh-huh. >> Somebody shot the >> Where were they at? >> Okay, we don't know. >> The truck took off. >> Okay. Yeah, we're looking for him. Yeah, they're saying a Brinks truck employee is shot. We're speaking to Engine 30. Which way did it go? >> Right here, eastbound. It's in a It's a 2022 2023 black Dodge Durango, no license plate, with tint on the window. >> Here come a gentleman from the >> Police. >> Yeah. So, he got out, closed the window, and >> Wait, the the employee is >> Any >> The big dude. >> Yeah, they shot the No license plate in the back with tint on the window. >> 2022 to 2023 Dodge Durango, black in color, no tint on the windows. He's the one that's possibly shot. He was emptying the You guys Wait, so he was the employee in the Brinks truck? >> Yes. >> He's an employee in the Brinks truck. >> But he's in the Dodge Durango. >> No, he's in the Brinks truck. They made The shooter is in the Durango. >> Where did Where did the Brinks truck go? I don't care about the >> know. He He pulled >> He self-transported to >> Yeah, we went to ask him, "Was he okay?" and he just kept saying, "Yeah, but they must have missed." Dispatch told him don't let the windows down. No, it's two guys. >> Yeah, we get any more details on the Brinks >> Yeah, they were filming in the back of the Brinks truck. >> They said the guy in the Brinks truck is shot. They think he self-transported to the hospital. We have >> Well, let's go find the crime scene, Bobby. >> Where? >> All right here. >> Yeah. >> Bobby, come on. Got one here, one here. >> Yeah. Right there. We got several casings up here right by the ATM. I'm going to mark them off real quick. Where Which way did that car go, the guy with the gun? What was he wearing? >> He had on light jeans, light blue >> you mean light blue jeans? >> Yeah, light blue jeans. This part was This part was white and then this part was sky blue. That's the only one I had seen. >> On the right side? >> No, this whole bottom part. >> Your truck hit? So, on the radio, it's black shirt with white at the top on the right side and then light blue on the right bottom, right stomach. It was a black sweatshirt? >> Black sweatshirt. >> Yeah, said the shooter. I don't know what shirt What the shooter What kind of shirt was he wearing? >> He had on a jacket. It was >> Okay, what color was the jacket? >> It was This top part was white and this bottom part was like a sky blue with light jeans >> jeans. >> Yeah. Yeah, some of it I'm pretty sure this might have been all black. >> Yeah. No, the guy who shot your friend. >> It was It was multiple ones. One of them >> Give me a second, let me go. Huh? >> One of them probably did have on all black. >> The guy who actually shot, the guy who did the shooting, you were describing him, you said he had light blue he had red white here and blue. What was the rest of the shirt? >> That No, it was a It was a jacket. >> Okay, what was the rest of the jacket? >> It was white up top and it was sky blue at the bottom. >> Okay. He's saying the shooter had a what a jacket on that was white up top and light blue on the bottom. He said the other one of the other gentlemen had all black on. >> Going to be going eastbound on Arcade. Turned down 167 and I don't have them anymore. >> I thought I saw him earlier in the area. >> White pickup photo. >> I lost him at 167. [snorts] >> There it is. >> And I got it. >> We got it 169 and those are going north on 169 towards Lakeshore. >> Eastbound on Lakeshore. >> Eastbound on Lakeshore. >> We have permission to chase. >> 10-14, light it up. Are you close? >> We just had a car. >> Trying to get back where we were last seen. >> No. >> I'm on 169 on Lakeshore. >> Give us the air. We got a crash. Males ran southbound. Now on Keith, calling, but it's an emergency SOS. I'm going to check on this victim here. It struck a Ford SUV. Are you okay? Do you need EMS? Do you need EMS? >> Yeah, I'm fine. >> Do you want EMS to check you out? >> No. Yeah, I think you should. >> I'm on Ozark right now. >> Can I get you EMS at 169 and Lakeshore for a 19-year-old female conscious and breathing? >> Issue one is arrest authority under the Fourth Amendment. A warrantless arrest in a public place requires probable cause. Officers here had eyewitness accounts of the robbery, spent shell casings. At the scene a confirmed vehicle description relayed by radio and active coordination between multiple units under United States versus Watson decided in 1976 that combination easily satisfies the probable cause threshold. This case goes well beyond a Terry stop. Terry versus Ohio requires only reasonable articulable suspicion for a brief investigative detention. What officers had here was full probable cause, a significantly higher and more durable legal standard. Under Illinois versus Wardlow, unprovoked flight from police after a crime is itself a factor that further strengthens probable cause. Every suspect who ran after the crash reinforced the lawfulness of their arrest. Issue two is vehicle pursuit authorization and the liability it creates. Under Ohio Revised Code, section 4511.03, officers may disregard standard traffic laws during emergency operations, but only when pursuit has been properly authorized by a supervisor first. In this footage, supervisors granted that authorization over radio before officers engaged. That is not a procedural formality. It is a legal prerequisite and operating without it exposes both officers and the department to civil liability under section 1983 of the federal civil rights code. When the Durango crashed, it struck a civilian vehicle carrying a 19-year-old female. An officer paused the active foot pursuit to check on her condition and request emergency medical services. Under duty of care doctrine established in state tort law, that decision was legally required, not discretionary. The obligation to protect an uninvolved civilian who was injured as a consequence of the suspect's flight does not yield to the pressure of an active pursuit. >> Where were they last seen? >> Can you go get my phone? >> Did one of them have a backpack? >> 10-29 East 172 continuing East bound. One of them's got red underwear on. He's headed north. Still headed north. He's around here somewhere. Over to 176 maybe. And that Yeah, 176 in the alley here. GET ON THE GROUND! GET OUT ON THE GROUND! I GOT ONE 176 IN THE ALLEY HERE. GET ON THE GROUND! >> THAT'S YOUR >> 10-20 40 IS 176. >> Game 40 is 176. You got handcuffs? >> Going to cuff him. Try. I need cuffs. >> I got it. >> Palms together. Palms together. Like you're praying. This is going to be the one with the red underwear. >> There was another one right in front of him. >> On your side, bud. >> I don't know where he went. >> side. >> Any weapons on you? No. Any weapons on you? Roll over. Turn over. >> Hey. Hey, LITTLE [ __ ] WHERE'S THAT CAR? >> Go to the Durango and sit with it. Go to the Durango and sit with it. >> Shut up. Shut up. >> You got three more. >> Stand up. This way, this way. Which way they go? They're around here somewhere. >> There was one right in front of him. >> What was he wearing? >> All black. But he's the one I saw with the red >> Yeah, with the red >> underwear. Victor 89. Next block over, it's locked. >> So, he's still going that way? >> Little, you're with the Durango now? >> I think that the Durango is not a vehicle in this car. >> Next street over. >> He does not have your lap. >> Yeah. >> But what I know is not your doors are locked. and they knew to come out. >> You good to go, okay? Uh they just robbed somebody at gunpoint. 1074 East 176. He's in that area. Come on out. COME ON OUT. COME ON OUT. I GOT another one just one north of 1074 1024 East 176. COME ON OUT. RIGHT BACK HERE, GUYS. DON'T YOU [ __ ] MOVE. Put your hands behind your back. Where's he at? >> Right here. >> Where you at, Brian? >> Right here. >> Oh, he's underneath the deck? >> Yeah. >> I got No, I got him out here. I need cuffs. Man, we've been looking for you guys for a while. >> It's coming. >> Where you at, Brian? >> Right here. >> Put your hands together and palms together like you're praying. >> Is there anything under here? >> Roll your leg out. Roll over to your butt. I'm going to sit you up, okay? Is there anything under there? >> No. >> No pistols, nothing? >> I don't got anything. >> All right. >> Two grandmas got >> I'm going to advise you of your Miranda rights. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. What's that? >> Issue three is the Miranda advisement and it is the most significant evidentiary concern in this footage. At approximately the 9-minute mark, an officer begins to deliver Miranda rights to a suspect in custody in the field. But the advisement appears incomplete in the audio. Miranda versus Arizona decided by the Supreme Court in 1966 requires that before any custodial interrogation, a suspect be clearly informed of four rights. The right to remain silent, that anything said may be used against them in court, the right to have an attorney present, and the right to have an attorney appointed if they cannot afford one. A partial advisement is not a valid advisement. Any statement obtained through custodial questioning before a complete and documented Miranda warning is subject to suppression under the exclusionary rule. The prosecution must establish on the record that the full advisement was delivered and that the suspect knowingly and voluntarily waived those rights before any questioning occurred. What appears in the body cam audio alone does not satisfy that evidentiary burden. On the use of force Graham versus Connor requires that force be objectively reasonable from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the moment of the decision not assessed in hindsight. Officers in this footage were apprehending suspects connected to a confirmed shooting with an unrecovered firearm still in play. Ground command's physical restraint and handcuffing under those circumstances represent measured proportional force at or below what the situation legally permitted. There is no excessive force issue present in this footage. Additionally, a suspect in custody spontaneously demanded that officers retrieve his money referring to the stolen Brink's cash. Under Rhode Island versus Innis, that statement is admissible as a party admission regardless of Miranda status because it was not the product of any interrogation. >> All right, well, we're going to add another charge to everything that's going on, my man. Okay. >> It's fine. It's fine. >> I got a white HAND ON THE FIELD. I NEED SOMEBODY TO COME ON MY SIDE. >> WHERE IS SHE AT? >> SHE'S AT THE LAUNDROMAT. SHE UH PISSED IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE HAD IN HER SOCK. >> CAN YOU HOLD ON to him? I'll go with her. >> Keep Keep on him. >> One female PR. >> Get him up against the hood. >> I see her by the pool. >> Muldoons? >> I'm looking at him. I'm looking at the field. I got a freeway. THE FREEWAY. >> WHAT? >> C25 >> GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON THE GROUND NOW. GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON THE GROUND NOW. GET ON THE GROUND. I got chopper in the air. You ain't going nowhere. Get on the ground. >> Yeah. >> Hands behind your back. Behind your back. >> Drop that. >> Got any weapons on you? >> Yeah, you got >> He's got a weapon. >> Okay, no weapon. No weapon. You got me? >> Get up. >> I can't walk. >> Get up. >> Is that me? >> Get up. >> Actually, I'm already on the highway. >> Can I get my money? >> Where at? >> Oh, god. Can I get my money? >> Is that your money? >> Yes, it is. >> Actually, I'm already on the highway. >> Can I get my money? Who are you? >> Actually, I'm already on the >> Huh? >> Sorry about that. >> The responding officers receive an A minus. Pursuit authorization was properly obtained before engagement. Probable cause was firmly established across multiple independent sources. Force applied during arrest was proportional to the circumstances. Civilian welfare was correctly prioritized during the foot pursuit. These reflect textbook decisions made under significant operational pressure. The one deduction is the incomplete Miranda advisement captured on camera. A constitutional advisement must be delivered in full, confirmed on the record, and paired with a documented voluntary waiver before any questioning begins. That procedural gap creates a suppression risk that could exclude evidence the prosecution would otherwise rely on at trial. The three apprehended suspects receive an F. Aggravated robbery under Ohio Revised Code section 2911.01 is one of the most serious violent felonies in Ohio carrying a mandatory prison term. Their return to the same crime method 3 weeks after a prior robbery in which no one was arrested suggests organized and deliberate criminal conduct, which may support enhanced charges under Ohio's organized criminal activity statute. One suspect remains at large as of this analysis. Three lessons from this incident. First, Miranda advisements must be delivered in full and documented on camera before any custodial questioning. Beginning an advisement and not completing it under field pressure is not a minor procedural error. It is a Fifth Amendment violation that can collapse the admissibility of statements obtained afterward. Second, pursuit. Authorization is a legal prerequisite, not a courtesy. Departments without a clear and documented authorization protocol carry civil liability exposure every time a pursuit ends in civilian injury. Third, preserve spontaneous suspect statements immediately. Statements made without interrogation are admissible as party admissions under Rhode Island versus Innis and frequently carry more probative weight at trial than post-arrest interviews conducted hours later. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic that you would like us to discuss in the comments below. Thank you for watching.