On March 6th, 2024, police responded to a Family Dollar after a cashier named Tina was caught running an under-ring scheme that had been bleeding the store since January. She let acquaintances walk out with full carts. They paid 59 cents. She pocketed 50 to $100 cash per visit. Total losses exceeded $5,000. >> What's going on? I know you called me. What's going on? >> Good afternoon. How are you? >> We have an employee that has been under-ringing. Like she would charge a dollar and let the customer leave with about $150 of merchandise. Uh multiple times during the month of January, multiple times in the month of Actually, a little bit in January, multiple times in February, and the last one was on Sunday. Um I interviewed her. She's sitting in the back, wrote a statement, recorded a statement. She admitted to what happened. And we just called you guys. >> Okay. Do you have any evidence of this? Videos? >> I got four videos, and I got a recorded statement that I know >> I can't use a recorded statement because she's not issued her rights. So, I can't use a recorded statement. So, it's like >> The statement that I I took it, and I didn't have to read her rights. >> Yeah, but I have to. >> I got >> Under court of law. Under court of law. >> I understood. >> Okay. Uh All right. Do you have a tally there of how much she actually took? >> Uh we're still What We're still having to finish >> How old is she? >> I believe she's 21 22 years old. >> Her app is 5960. >> What are you >> I'm right here. >> Okay. >> You just do a zero sale zero and whatever. >> This is Tina. >> Hello, Tina. >> This is the officer. >> How you doing? >> Hi. >> You have an ID on you? >> It's in my purse. >> Okay. Where's your purse at? >> It's in the front one right here. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. >> It's under the thing. >> Okay. I'm pretty sure there's more money in those wallets. >> Um >> And Roger, come on. Under this. LP is back there. >> What's going on? >> So, um I need to get my LP back here. >> Yeah. >> I did. >> Yeah. Roger, okay. >> You don't want to speak? >> All right. Deputy Paul, here. Yeah. Um what's going on? >> Pretty much as explained, um since the beginning of February, >> Mhm. >> she pretty much knew people from Facebook and regular customers. >> Mhm. >> And she's, you know, tough situation with her family and she said, "Well, I'll let you take the merchandise you want. All I need is 50 to 80 dollars coming to me in cash and I will under ring every other night item." So, she would void the items or not even ring it. So, you can see transaction when she had the invoice >> Okay. >> to zero or you can see when she only scan a lollipop for 35 cents a dollar and then you see like a full buggy leaving the store full of merchandise. >> Do you have Do you have the videos each time the in time? Yes. Okay. Um do you have a laptop or anything I can view that I can look at? >> Um we can view it right now in the screen. >> Yeah. >> You also have this is also a log of everything right? >> Not everything >> Not everything >> Some of the stuff is not logged. >> I'm going to talk to you for a minute but I don't want you to start calling everybody. I don't want people to start showing up here and >> Ain't nobody going to show up here but I'm not just going to I can't get in contact with my fiance. I just want to go to jail and nobody >> No no no no see I don't know where you going to jail or not. >> I would have been in jail already. I know what police told me to I'm not dumb. There's a reason y'all came. >> I'm not going to speak Well if someone makes a complaint so I have to come I have to respond and investigate okay? So that's that's why I'm here. Do you understand? [snorts] So just give me a second. >> Which one? Number 4 o'clock. We have a minute 35. >> At 13:25. >> 35 at 13. 35 25 25. It would give this one of the transactions. [music] All those items how much the transaction amount Yeah that's 100 but how much did the customer pay for? >> 59 cents. >> 59 cents. over 100 over 100 on that particular one. Okay 59 cents. So, what's the What was the date? >> Uh the day over there is March 5th at 12:21. >> So, 3 5 >> That will be Sunday. That will be the last transaction. >> 12:21 >> What's the next one you got? >> Um 3 3 >> 3 3, what time? >> 19:56 >> Did I give you a quarter or was it the same? >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Or the link that you guys sent, I can open it up to the file also. >> Yeah. So, back here. >> That customer paid $3.59. >> This is another customer that paid. So, what was the date? >> Uh March 3rd, Sunday at 19:56. >> So, the other one was March 5th. >> Correct. >> And this one is March 3rd. >> Yeah, we're going to >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> 3rd >> Biggest question, do you all want to prosecute? >> 100% >> Yes. What the What was the time? >> Uh time is 19:57. >> So, 7 >> This is a lady with a pajamas. There's over $150 in here or more. And how much did she pay? >> $3.59 >> 59 cents is 50. >> Why did we calculate her? When we look at the product over $150, yeah. So, she said she's she's been going through some financial difficulties and that's what you say on the on the video. I mean on the recording and doing my statement that she was doing it for her kids. >> For her kids? >> Okay. >> And she you know she would let him go and then they would give her money. >> Yeah, I guess they they know her from the streets. >> Okay. >> So they know to come to the area. >> They come to the director? >> to the director and then they will give her the money like in a little piece of paper. >> Okay. >> 50 to 80 dollars or more. And how about reading a statement if you want to read it? >> I think we have enough. Okay, so we have all the videos. >> Yeah, we will use the last day >> is for prostitution purposes, we need someone with expertise to explain all that to the state attorney's office. >> Okay. >> I'm going to need your information. >> Okay. >> Okay. So I'm going to talk to you a real quick and then >> Okay. >> No problem. Let me get you and save this and I need a >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes, okay. Um >> What's the point in talking here or what's going on? >> Yeah, feel free to come in if you want. >> Yeah. Oh. >> Turn around, buddy. >> Turn around. Yeah, turn around, please. All right. So I guess they already talked to you. No, you turn around, face me. I guess they already talked to you. Who's that? >> That's my people. I need I need to know what's going on. >> Okay. Um I guess they already talked to you and um and you talked to him about what's been on, right? Um I need to get get a statement from you and and find out >> statement I gave them. I wrote it on the paper. >> I Listen, I don't know what they do, okay? My job is to I'm impartial, okay? My job is to talk to you and find out what's going on, okay? I need to ask you a few >> I got money from people and then I ran them up. >> give me a Listen, just give me a second, okay? I'm going to ask you a few questions and I'm going to you know, you you watch TV, so I have to advise you of your constitutional rights, okay? And then I'm going to ask you a few questions. Do you understand? Um I need to ask you a few questions. Are you under the influence of drugs or alcohol right now? >> Weed. >> Oh, you you smoke a little bit of weed. What Uh what's what is the highest level of your education of your education? Eighth grade. Um did you play any sports in school or >> Softball. >> Softball. Um I'm required I'm I'm required to warn you before you make any statements. I'm required to warn you before you make any statements. You have the following constitutional rights. You have the right to remain silent and not answer any questions. Do you understand that? Any statement you make must be freely and voluntarily given. Do you understand? It is it's recording. You have to say yes or no. >> Yeah, I just feel like if I'm going to jail, there's no reason for me to explain anything. >> I'm just >> I just want to say that. >> No, I I have just just Listen, I Listen, before I ask you any question, I have to read your rights. It's it's by law, okay? Um you have the right to the presence and representation of a lawyer of your choice before you make any statement and doing any questioning. Do you understand? >> Yeah. >> 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 doing any questioning. Do you understand? >> Yeah. >> If at any time doing doing the interview, you you do not wish to answer any questions, you are privileged to remain silent. Do you understand? >> Yeah. >> I can't make no threats or promises to induce you to make any state to make a statement. This must be of your own free will. Do you understand? >> Yeah. >> Any statement can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand? >> Yeah. >> Do you understand those rights which I've read to you? >> Yeah. >> With those rights in mind, are you choosing to speak with me? >> Um, the only thing I got to say is if I'm going to jail, I don't want to be interviewed. >> I All right. So, what I'm trying to tell you is that if someone says something, I've I've known you for for I've I've come here. I talked to you, whatever. I don't know anything about you. All I say is, "Hi, how are you doing?" I come to you. I I purchase whatever I need to purchase and I walked out. I don't know anything about you. Someone says something. I need to know what happened, okay? Cuz a lot of time, people say, "Hey, did you talk to so-and-so?" Yeah. She was nice. She told me what happened. You know, she was having some issue, whatever. So, I can present that to whoever I need to say to. But, what I'm trying to say is that I can't just go by what someone say. I have to talk to you and get your side of the story. Okay? All right. Um, how long you been working here? >> I've worked November. October or November. >> So, you've been working since October? >> October or November. >> Okay. You're part-time or time? >> Full time. >> Full time. Um you work normally day shift, right? >> Mhm. Both. >> Day and night? Are you married? Have kids? >> I have kids. >> How many kids? >> Three. >> Three kids. You like working here? >> Yeah. >> Do you have any problem with anybody here? Um who's your Roger is your supervisor, right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Do you have any issue with him? Okay. So, um like with with the transaction, can you tell me like what's what's going on? Like I my cuz I don't want anybody to come here and put a gun to your face and threaten you and whatever and and then we're going to have to go hunting them down and and and find out just make sure that it didn't happen, okay? I just that's why I need to get a status report from you to make sure that you're not you're safe, that no one threatened you or anything. >> Nobody threatened me. >> I I can't hear you. >> Nobody threatened me. >> Okay. All right. Can you tell me what's going on? >> I just said I rang people up and they gave me money and that was it. I ain't >> So, you you charging more charging less than what the value of the the merchandise? >> Mhm. >> Huh? How much you normally get from them? >> It just all depends. 60, 80, 100. Depends the person, the I don't I don't know. It's just different prices. I don't know. >> Okay. >> I don't know how to explain the same [ __ ] >> So, like between 50 to 100 dollars? Um these people that normally like do they know you? How do you know them? Like >> The street. >> The street, like in the neighborhood? >> Around, yeah. >> Okay. Like do they know to come to you or how how does it work? >> We're doing the same statement the man just took from me on a piece of paper. Like, I I I >> No, what I'm trying to say is that I just I need to get >> I know them and they just come in to shop and they see me there and that's just what I do. I don't call nobody like I I I don't Like, that's why I'm saying if I'm going to jail, there's no point to explain all that cuz I'm going to go to jail with a migraine and aggravated as [ __ ] Like, They already got the video. They got all that. Like, I don't >> You can You can stop. You can say at any time, "I don't want to talk to you. I don't want to talk about this anymore." And then I'll stop. Do you understand? My My >> They got the video and everything. So, there's explaining myself ain't going to do nothing. >> But, what I'm trying to tell you is that I need to get your side of the story. And I told you already, you can at any time you can say, "Hey, I don't want to talk to you. I don't want to talk about this anymore." >> I already explained I was not I was getting money from people and I wasn't ringing everything up about who it is and where I know them from. All that is irrelevant. It's like I did what I did. It was a mistake. I know I was wrong. Like, now what's the next step? >> Okay, how long has this been going on since you started? >> January. Been doing it the whole time. >> How much money you think you got in total from these people? Like, >> hundred. I don't I don't know exactly money like >> No, what I'm saying from from January, like maybe >> That's what I'm saying, I don't know. >> two thousand? >> much, no. >> I mean, just just a rough guess. >> 500, 600, less? Like, I don't I don't know. Every time I get money it's gone. I don't know. >> Okay. Um Anything that you think I should know about you? Anything that I can do to help you, [clears throat] I mean >> Mhm. So no no one came here and and and threaten you and force you to do anything. Right? 12:45 11 12:12 can you come back here? >> Where you taking me? All right. I'll call you from in there. >> Um do you have anything in your pocket? >> Mhm. >> Anything in your jacket? >> I'll have to take your jacket off. >> Yeah, just do that. >> I'm cold. >> Can't take anything in the jail with you. >> Okay, well I can wear it till we get there? >> It's you're not you're not going to need it. >> No, you're going to be inside in the cold though. >> It's cold in there. I've been in jail >> Um you want to put that in the >> purse. >> All jewelry off, please. >> Okay, just when I get there. >> And will your your pants stay up without the belt? >> Oh lord. I'm not even at the jail yet, sir. >> Well, we have to take it all off so we can inventory >> The the last officer didn't do that to me. >> The first real legal issue surfaces before the officer even meets the suspect. The loss prevention manager tells him he already took a written statement from Tina, recorded, signed, detailed. The officer's response is immediate. That statement cannot be used. He's right. Private loss prevention officers have no obligation to read Miranda rights, but that also means anything they obtain before police arrive sits in a legal gray zone. Once a suspect is effectively detained on store premises and police become involved, courts treat the situation as custodial. Statements taken under those conditions without prior rights advisement are suppressible under Miranda versus Arizona, decided by the Supreme Court in 1966. The question of when custody begins matters here. In Berkemer versus McCarty, decided in 1984, the Supreme Court held that custody exists when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave. Tina was held in the back room before police arrived. That threshold was already crossed. There's one small but important error here. The officer explains the exclusion by citing the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment covers search and seizure. Miranda lives in the Fifth Protection against compelled self-incrimination. The conclusion was correct. The citation was not. Before reading the rights, the officer runs a short background check. Education level, drug use, sports in school. Eighth grade, softball, a little weed earlier. Tina's answers are clear and direct. She's tracking the conversation without difficulty. This is a pre-waiver competency assessment, a documented record that the suspect was coherent and responsive at the moment of waiver. Courts look at the totality of circumstances, and a suspect who admits to recent drug use needs that baseline on record before the rights are read. Before the Miranda reading even begins, Tina starts talking on her own. She mentions she's a convicted felon. She says she knows why police are there. The officer shuts it down, redirects, keeps things neutral. That discipline is exactly right. Volunteered pre-Miranda statements are a suppression minefield. The officer then delivers a complete five-point Miranda advisement, right to silence voluntary statements only, right to an attorney, right to appointed counsel if she can't afford one, and the right to stop at any point. Every element, on camera, acknowledged. Tina doesn't waive immediately. She says if she's going to jail, there's no point explaining anything. The officer doesn't push. No promises, no threats, no implied deals, just a calm explanation that he's impartial and needs to hear her side before making any determination. Under Colorado versus Spring in 1987, a valid Miranda waiver only needs to be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. It doesn't need to be eager. Tina eventually choosing to speak after hearing the warnings in full satisfies that standard. What follows is a remarkably candid post-waiver admission. Tina confirms the scheme, the cash amounts, the customers she knew from the neighborhood, and that it started in January. She says she never called anyone, they just came in and she went along with it. Everything admissible. She estimates she received somewhere between $500 and $2,000 total. Can't be precise. Then she closes with "I did what I did. It was a mistake. I know I was wrong." That's a prosecutable on-camera confession, and the officer got it without once stepping over the line. The charge was felony grand theft. With documented losses exceeding $5,000, that's the appropriate level under virtually any state's theft statute. The threshold for a felony in most jurisdictions sits somewhere between $500 and $1,000. This case cleared it by a wide margin. Worth noting, the customers who came to Tina's register, knowing what they were getting, are also legally exposed. Knowingly accepting under-rung merchandise in exchange for cash isn't a favor. It's theft by complicity and potentially conspiracy, depending on how organized the arrangement was. Tina ultimately received 24 months probation. Given the scope of the scheme, the felony charge was warranted. The probation outcome likely reflects her cooperation, her admissions, three dependent children, and a defense that leaned on financial hardship as mitigation. Now for the grades. The responding officer receives a B+. His Miranda handling was solid correct procedure pre-waiver assessment, full advisement, clean waiver, no coercion. He built the evidentiary record the right way and kept his discipline when Tina started volunteering information early. The deduction is for the Fourth Amendment citation. That's the kind of error a defense attorney flags in a suppression brief. The instinct was right. The legal language needs to match. Tina receives a C+. She ran an organized sustained scheme across two months, recruited accomplices, and treated her cash register like a personal side business. Not a one-time mistake, a deliberate ongoing operation with a pricing structure. She cooperated once police arrived, acknowledged what she did without deflection, and didn't make the situation worse. That matters at sentencing. The probation outcome likely reflects it. Credit where it's due. Loss Prevention Roger gets an A-. He identified the pattern, pulled the surveillance, documented the transactions, secured the suspect, and handed a clean evidentiary package to the arriving officer. That's the job, done well. The deduction is for taking a written statement before calling police. Best practice is to notify law enforcement first and let sworn officers conduct the custodial interview. The intent was right. The sequence created an admissibility problem that didn't need to exist. Now, the lessons. Loss prevention can document, preserve, and secure, but they cannot substitute for the officer's interview. Anything extracted from a detained employee before police arrive under conditions that look custodial is going to face a suppression challenge. The pre-waiver competency check is not paperwork. It's protection. Document education, sobriety, and responsiveness every time. A waiver taken from someone who disclosed drug use without any assessment on record is an open door for a defense motion. Miranda waivers don't require enthusiasm. A reluctant suspect who eventually agrees to speak after hearing her rights and asking questions has given a valid waiver under clearly established law. The tool is patience, not pressure. And when a suspect starts volunteering information before the rights are read, stop them. That discipline is harder than it sounds in a real interview, but it's the difference between a case that holds and one that gets picked apart before trial. The constitutional amendment matters, too. Telling a court a statement is excluded under the Fourth Amendment when the actual basis is the Fifth is the kind of mistake that damages credibility. Know which right you're citing before you walk into a suppression hearing. 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 and don't forget to check out our channel for even more police interaction and courtroom content.