Stop running or you're going to get tased. GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON THE GROUND. >> WHAT I GOT TO DO? >> DO NOT MOVE. FACE THE WALL. >> I'M TRYING TO PAY FOR MY >> Foot pursuit through the outlet. Here. You're going TO GET TASED. GET THE [ __ ] ON THE GROUND NOW. >> BRO, CAN I >> GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON YOUR STOMACH. >> OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. >> On December 8th, 2022 in Florida, On December 8th, 2022 in Florida, two women hit three stores inside the same mall in under two hours. The total merchandise reported stolen exceeded $4,000. Store managers from Prada, Forever 21, and Old Navy each filed independent reports matching clothing descriptions. Same two suspects, same afternoon. Officers made contact before either woman reached the exit. This is that encounter. >> I hope they didn't just walk out the exit right there. >> Thinking they might have. >> They probably did. >> So, I should Did they know? >> Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Yep. It's on. What is this store? Right here. Hey. STOP. HEY. STOP RUNNING OR YOU'RE GOING TO GET TASED. YOU'RE GOING TO GET TASED. STOP RUNNING. >> GO. GO. GO. GO. GO TO THE OTHER STORE. >> FOOT PURSUIT THROUGH THE ALLEY. LITTLE POLICE STOP RUNNING. LITTLE POLICE STOP RUNNING OR YOU'RE GOING TO GET LITTLE POLICE STOP RUNNING. LITTLE POLICE STOP RUNNING. 94 LITTLE POLICE STOP RUNNING. STOP RUNNING OR YOU'RE GOING TO GET TASED. GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON THE GROUND. >> WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO >> DO NOT MOVE. >> FACE THE WALL. >> HERE TRYING TO PAY FOR MY >> FULL PURSUIT THROUGH THE ALLEY. >> YEP. >> YOU'RE GOING TO GET TASED. GET THE [ __ ] ON THE GROUND NOW. >> BRO, CAN I JUST GET >> GET ON THE GROUND. GET ON YOUR STOMACH. >> OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. >> DROP YOUR PHONE OR YOU'RE GOING TO GET TASED. PUT YOUR HANDS BEHIND YOUR BACK. >> BRO, WHY WON'T YOU >> PUT YOUR HANDS BEHIND your back. >> Bro, why won't you give me my bag, bro? >> I got one secure. Stupid as [ __ ] Jury, you good? >> Yeah, you got yours? >> Yeah. >> Ooh, [ __ ] >> I got one secure right now. >> Keep it up. Ah. Are you guys secure? You ain't got me on camera doing anything. I got money. THAT GIRL JUST >> STOP. Stop resisting. >> I'm not resisting you. I'm on the phone. Bro, I'm going to see y'all in court. She just gave her bag, bro. >> All right, get up. >> Get on the ground. >> Get up. Come on. >> Bro, I'm burning my [ __ ] out of here, bro. >> No, you're not. >> How I'm not? I have money in my purse. >> Jury, you good? Hold on, she's still fighting right now. >> I I promise on my baby I'm >> Stop. >> I'm not fighting you. Excuse me, ma'am. Can you please go get my my cousin's car keys, please? >> Hold on. >> want to lose your car keys. >> You're not going to lose anything. >> I'm not resisting you. I have money in my bag to buy what I wanted. >> When I tell you to do something, you stop. >> I'm stopping. You scared me. She gave me her bag and started running. What you expect me to do? Can I get my shoes, please? I don't want to walk barefooted. Excuse me, sir, please. Mr. Officer, please, my shoes. >> Josh, where are you? >> My shoes, like, please. This is nasty. Everybody spits on this floor. Do you got her? Do we got her? Do we >> Thank you. Stop moving. >> going anywhere. I'm telling you I'm paying for my [ __ ] >> Probably. >> had my [ __ ] She gave me the bag. I'm trying to buy myself. I have money. I'm not stealing. >> I mean, I don't think they stole from you guys yet, but they've been hitting a bunch of stores, so. >> No, I have not. I JUST BOUGHT STUFF OUT OF NIKE. I just bought stuff out of Nike. I have money in my bag. That Old Navy lady, SHE MAD BECAUSE I STOLE A BIRD OUT OF HER STORE. >> LOOK, LOOK, LOOK. >> I'm trying to show you my stuff in my wallet. I'm not stealing anything. >> Yeah, we're going to be right outside Forever 21. >> Where you think you're going? >> Stop moving. WHAT >> GET OUT. GIRL, WHAT YOU DOING? >> WHAT DID YOU >> I GOT OUT OF JAIL. >> I TOLD YOU WHAT TO DO. You're not going to make me go chasing after you again. All the way out. >> Oh, sorry. I don't go to jail. I have money, though. Y'all got me here like I'm buying myself. What did I steal? What did I steal? >> You can come in through Saks. >> Bro, the lady got mad >> Put your feet back out. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Bro, the lady got mad cuz I shot a bird at her Old Navy. Nobody stole anything. Like y'all I have money. I have beaucoup money in my purse. I have beaucoup money in my purse. >> Stop. >> I'm sorry. I'm I have money in my purse. That's what I have. That lady I know that lady at Old Navy called y'all. She mad cuz I shot a bird and I told them that they were harassing us. >> Where was that? >> In the fitting room. >> In the fitting room? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh Just give us give us a minute Once we get more officers over here, they're going to come in and they'll try to see what else they had there. >> I didn't know. That was the other girl that just walked out. DEEP IN SAKS. >> HEY, HEY, STOP YELLING. STOP YELLING. STOP ACTING LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT we're talking about. >> Stop yelling. Stop yelling, lady. Stop yelling. Those other girls that just walked out of there just left because something was going on. I'm in there shopping. Why would I be in there that long? >> Yeah, that was THAT BLACK GIRL. YOU WATCHED THE BLACK GIRL WALK RIGHT OUT THE DOOR. NO, CUZ SHE WATCHED THE LADY WALK RIGHT OUT THE DOOR and then they accused us. >> You ran cuz the police yelled stop, police you kept going while you looked back at me. >> Subject two insisted the Old Navy >> The moment officers called stop and both women kept running, the legal calculus shifted. What had been a detention based on merchant reports became something structurally stronger the instant deliberate flight began. Under Illinois versus Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 2000, unprovoked flight from police is a legitimate factor in establishing probable cause. Flight does not prove guilt, but it adds cumulative legal weight to every other factor the officer already holds, and it follows a suspect into that courtroom. The officer stated on camera that subject two made direct eye contact before she ran, not after. That distinction is critical under Wardlow. Reactive flight reads differently than deliberate flight following visual acknowledgement of law enforcement. The officer's contemporaneous statement locked that sequence into the record. Taser warnings were issued throughout the foot pursuit. Under Graham versus Connor 489 US 386 1989, the reasonableness of any force option is judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, not with 20/20 hindsight. What matters is what the officer knew at the moment of the decision. Three independent merchant reports, matching clothing descriptions, and two suspects actively fleeing through a crowded mall. That is the factual picture the officer carried into that pursuit. The taser was never deployed. Graduated verbal warnings drove compliance. Under Graham, that restraint is both legally and tactically significant. Both subjects are now secured. The arrest rests on Florida statute 901.15, which authorizes a warrantless arrest when officers have probable cause that a felony has been committed. Three corroborating merchant reports, consistent clothing descriptions, and visual confirmation in the mall satisfied that threshold before the chase ever started. Subject one repeatedly claimed she was in the mall to pay for merchandise, and that no theft occurred. Under Florida statute 843.02, resisting an officer without violence requires an obstruction of a lawful duty. Verbal denials and continued talking without physical interference do not meet that statutory threshold, and the officer did not charge her with that separately. The legal exposure here is the underlying theft, not her words on the ground. Subject 2's argument that the Old Navy manager called police out of personal spite, rather than theft, raises a real legal question. Under Florida statute 812.015, a merchant report must be grounded in a good faith belief that an actual or suspected theft occurred. A purely retaliatory call would not meet that standard. But officers did not build their probable cause on Old Navy alone. Prada and Forever 21 each filed independent reports with matching clothing descriptions of the same two subjects hitting multiple stores. Under the totality of circumstances doctrine, that corroboration was in place before any officer made physical contact. Even if the Old Navy report were excluded entirely, two remaining independent reports plus deliberate flight plus visual confirmation would still satisfy probable cause under Florida statute 901.15. Officers ran a warrant check on subject 2 during processing, a standard step in any post-arrest procedure. The radio contact and dispatch coordination visible here reflects standard post-arrest protocol. The question of whether existing warrants compound the charges is one the court will resolve, but the record of those checks becomes part of the case file. >> At this point in the encounter, subject 1 made a voluntary disclosure that will follow her into a separate and independent legal proceeding. Without any prompting from officers, she confirmed on camera that she was currently on probation. Miranda versus Arizona, 384 US 436 1966, applies to custodial interrogation, meaning questions initiated by law enforcement after a person is in custody. It does not apply to and cannot suppress statements a subject volunteers without being asked. That probation disclosure is fully admissible. Under Florida statute 948.06, any new arrest while on probation triggers a violation proceeding that runs independently of the underlying criminal case. That track moves on its own timeline, resolves separately, and carries its own consequences entirely apart from whether the theft charges survive prosecution. The store representative is now on camera confirming stolen merchandise recovered from the bags, items attributed to Old Navy and Steve Madden. Under Florida statute 812.015, organized retail theft becomes a felony when the aggregate value of merchandise across incidents reaches $750. Three stores, over $4,000 reported. The felony threshold is not a close question. Where the prosecution's case holds is in the corroboration. Three independent merchant reports, merchandise physically confirmed on camera by store representatives, flight documented by the officer with a contemporary statement about deliberate eye contact. The area a defense attorney will examine is any post-arrest statement made without a Miranda advisement captured on camera that absence creates a suppression argument for anything beyond spontaneous disclosure. >> Oh, no, I'm not going to work. >> I bet you do. >> I bet I don't. >> Why did you say why did you say? I'm going to see why? >> I'm going to see why. Echo 94 NEW YORK LIST. DO YOU GOT AN ID? DO YOU HAVE AN ID IN THERE? >> NO. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY weapons in there? >> No. >> Okay. What's your name? >> Jessica. >> We're right in front of Forever 21. If you walk in through Saks, go all the way through Saks, you'll see us. Okay. Fairfax. >> Girl, she said she going to go watch the footage. See. >> We don't have y'all mixed up with anybody. Why would you >> Did I say you got me mixed up? Did I say that? >> I don't know what she's saying that. >> That I didn't say that. >> I didn't say that. Excuse me, sir. Can you Can I talk to you? >> No. >> No? >> You can talk to me. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So, you don't want You don't want to talk to me like you're being slick. Like you're being like >> Is yours? >> Yes, sir. Please. >> Hold Hold on. I mean, they're probably stolen, too. So, we got to make sure. >> No, they're not. They're mine. Look at the bottom of them. We got paint and everything on them. >> Okay. Hold on. >> Can I get my shoes? >> We'll make sure. >> Can you please call my mom? Yeah, well, it was all the black girls. >> Now, you got enough problems going on in our city here. The store we ran through should've done that. You don't have yourself a felony. Oh, that's why I told you. Probation as well. That just got violated. >> It don't matter, [ __ ] Girl, I'm going to go to jail. >> either way CUZ I HAVE I'M ON PROBATION. And I just leave it at that. So, what you think? >> Oh, man. >> No. Can I Can I Can I be honest with you? It was three It was It was three already in there when we went in there and I just so happened to know the girl. I'm being real with you. Hey, Uncle Joe. That's my [ __ ] uncle. Are you [ __ ] kidding me? Joe? >> Like the best security guard we have here. Oh, man. >> Uncle Joe. >> Joe? >> What's up? >> You know her? >> Uncle Joe. >> Yeah. Yep. It's a lot, I know that. It's a lot. And running, too. >> I ran cuz my knees really hurt me. >> So, no, no, ma'am. We're not going to We're not going to deal with the We're not going to We're not going to deal with this part of the investigation, no, ma'am. No, ma'am. Can be, is that she's going to be? Cuz they look They looked back at us both and then she ran towards the store. So. So, we got to find So, we'll go back Okay. >> You work here? >> Somebody bagged those leftovers here. >> Um okay. >> Oh, she I don't know. >> Thank you. >> So, if I have a wrong call to you at 9:20, Miss Lane, you can have >> All right, check, shall we? Uh that looks like yours. >> Yep, that's ours. >> And is that? Is any of this yours? >> Yep, that. >> This thing? >> Mhm. >> And probably this one, then, too. >> Mhm. That's ours, too. >> Okay. >> That's Old Navy. >> Old Navy. >> And then that is probably hers, yeah. >> Is there stuff in here? >> hers. >> Yeah, that's probably stolen, too. >> Josh Brooks This just looks like that. So, these are both Steve Madden. This is Steve Madden. And this is a rental car. And then this is Old Navy in here. Old Navy, Old Navy, Old Navy, Old Navy. Where's the Steve Madden? Oh, did they come out of Saks? They lost sight of them at the fountain. >> Okay. >> Can you get my purse? That purse is right there. >> Which purse is yours? >> This is my purse. >> How long? >> Can you get my purse? >> This purse is yours, ma'am. It's going with you. You're under arrest. It's just going with you. It's got money and all that. It's going with you. >> Where's my money? >> I know. It's going with you. >> It's going It's going to be in my belongings when I get out? >> Yes. >> All my money? >> Yes. Cuz there's money in it, it's staying with you. We're going to count it in front of you and all that stuff. I'm not handing it off to somebody else. >> Okay. No, that's my auntie. That's what I'm telling you. >> I got it. I'll I'll handle this stuff. Come on. Y'all can't Y'all can't be talking no more. You're under arrest. You're done with it. >> On the wall. What y'all talking about? Come out here and giving that and pounds and They did that [ __ ] They did that [ __ ] They did >> Cuz somebody tried to back of my neck cuz this is my thing for Untie. Wait, let me go down first. Untie cuz it's going to come off. He know you do your girlfriends on. You know how to do it. >> You said untie and tie it now. >> NO, I JUST ALL SHE SAID WAS CAN YOU >> CUZ YOU KNOW IF THE strap come around my neck then this is going to please >> You can't, Blackie. Your hands are tied. Child. That don't make sense. Make it make sense. >> So is it a bow tie? >> Yes, it's a shoe tie. You tie your shoe. >> All right. >> The store representative confirmed stolen. At the time of this analysis, the specific charges filed and case disposition were not publicly available. Based on the footage and applicable Florida law, both subjects face felony retail theft exposure under Florida statute 812.015. Subject one faces a concurrent probation violation proceeding under Florida statute 948.06, running independently of the criminal case on its own accelerated timeline. On the officer, a B plus. The probable cause architecture was built correctly. Three independent merchant reports before contact. Graduated verbal warnings before any physical force. No taser deployed. And property handled transparently on camera. The procedural gap is the absence of an on-camera Miranda advisement during processing. If post-arrest statements become central to prosecution, that gap creates a suppression argument that was entirely avoidable. On subject one, a D. She complied physically after initial contact, but she spoke continuously without invoking her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Her unprompted probation disclosure on camera activated a second and independent legal track under Florida statute 948.06. Every word she spoke after being secured is now part of the prosecution's available record. Honesty in the moment does not undo what the law set in motion. On subject two, a C minus. Running after direct eye contact with officers is, under Illinois versus Wardlow, one of the most legally damaging decisions a suspect can make on camera. It does not prove guilt, but it justified escalating force options, added weight to every factor the officer already held, and will follow her into that courtroom. Continuing to speak at length after arrest, rather than invoking the right to remain silent, extended that damage considerably. Lesson one in an organized retail theft investigation, the number of independent merchant reports is the architecture of probable cause. Under the totality of circumstances doctrine, one call can be challenged on good faith grounds. Three calls from three separate managers with matching descriptions filed within two hours is a fundamentally different legal conversation. That corroboration is what made this arrest airtight before the foot pursuit began. Lesson two, running from police, even when innocent, is one of the most consequential decisions a person can make in an encounter with law enforcement. Illinois versus Wardlow makes that official. Flight does not prove guilt, but it justifies escalating force options and adds legal weight to every other factor in the probable cause analysis. Subject two made eye contact and ran. That sequence is now part of the permanent record. Lesson three, if a person is on probation, a new arrest does not mean one legal problem. It means two, running simultaneously and independently. Under Florida statute 948.06, the probation violation track moves faster than the criminal case, resolves on its own schedule, and carries its own consequences. Most people do not understand that distinction until they are already in handcuffs. 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 know.