All right. >> How many does it take to how many >> how many how many free >> for what? >> Right now you're being detained right now. >> So we determine cuz we're doing an investigation right now. >> Investigation on what? >> On some crimes that we're investigating. >> Like what? >> I'll explain it to you in a minute. >> On May 9th, 2025, officers approached a male subject at an airport terminal. >> How you doing? >> All right. What brings you to the airport today? Uh, [snorts] >> not much. >> You got any ID on you? >> Uh, yeah. I have a I have a temp ID. >> Yeah. May I see it? >> Yes, sir. >> Absolutely. >> You want to take your hood off for me? >> Thank you. >> Are you flying out? >> I flew in. >> When? >> Um, just trying to figure out where >> You've been here a couple days. >> I've seen you around. You've been here a couple days? >> N I haven't been here. >> Yes, you have. Oh, I saw you a couple days ago. >> And we saw you at the rental car. >> Yeah. >> Level four. >> You remember being here a few days ago? >> No, I just I just got here like a few hours ago. >> Few hours ago from where? >> I got to figure out what what I'm doing. >> What is it? >> I figure out what I'm doing. >> Yeah. >> What do you mean? >> No, like a hotel or whatever. No, no. You said that you landed. They just came a couple of >> So, when did you came? >> Two hours ago. >> From where? >> From um uh >> you back on your back. >> How many idiots does it take to How many >> How many How many How many months? >> Apparently three. >> For what? >> Right now, you're being detained right now. >> For what? >> Till we determine cuz we're doing an investigation right now. >> Investigation on what? >> On some crimes that we're investigating. like what? >> I'll explain it to you in a minute. >> You got a seat. >> I'm going to go ahead and read your rights. Okay. >> Hold this for me. Hold. >> It's like it's hanging there like a >> I'm going to go ahead and read your rights. Okay. It's going to be up to you if you want to answer my question or not. >> Okay. >> Dang. >> Okay. >> You got me in handcuffs. You asking me if it's okay. >> You don't have to answer. >> I'm in handcuffs. What? What are you asking me if it's okay for him? >> I'm going to ask you based on >> ask. Just ask, bro. Just ask. >> You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can will and be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to consult with an attorney before you make any statement or answer any question. And you have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. If you want an attorney but cannot afford or to hire an attorney, one will be appointed to you to represent you before entering questioning free of charge. You may use any of these rights at any time before or during question and you may stop reading >> and you may stop me for and you may stop the interview at any time. >> What are you? >> You're detained. You're detained. >> What does that mean? >> What does that mean? I'm detained. >> You're not free to leave. Okay. I'm saying. So why do you have these handcuffs on me for detained? You're not afraid to leave. >> All right. I'm not going to leave anyway. You idiot. >> You're not. Okay. We're going to stop this. >> Okay. You're going to you're going to be arrested based on the cell phone that you took. Level four RCC. >> What cell phone? What cell phone? >> Okay. >> And see if we got what trap has. >> I only have my own cell phone. What are you talking about? >> Okay. Let me just go. I have one cell phone I took from home. What cell phone are you talking about? >> Your life, bro. >> You piece of bro. >> You know what I'm saying? >> Do you mind? Do you mind if we go through your luggage? >> Of course I do. >> So So you're not okay if we go through? >> Of course not. You idiot. What are you stupid? >> I'm just asking. >> Check. Forget your >> same tennis shoes. >> What happened? Why? Whoa. Whoa. What did you see there? >> We can't answer questions. You invoked your right. So, we can't we can't just >> You said you did not want to. >> You charged me with something. What do you What cell phone? You messing the cell phone? What cell phone? >> It would be a theft of a cell phone. >> Whose cell phone? But what cell phone? I have my own cell phone. What cell phone? What cell phone? >> You invoked your right. What cell phone are you talking about? Bro, >> are you telling me now after having your rights read, you're willing to speak with us? >> Yo, what cell phone are you? >> I'll answer your question. >> Where do you see a cell phone at? >> After you've been advised of your rights to silent and your right to have an attorney, are you willing to speak with us? Are you telling me you want to speak with me now? Yes. >> What cell phone are you talking about? >> You ain't answer my question. I'm not answering yours. got your life away. >> Talk about what you >> tried to call the caller is no longer on property. >> Are you several pieces of jewelry and other >> post arrest? >> I just wanted to ask him why. Okay. So, he's under arrest. >> But the cell phone is not going to be here because the >> No, but he's under arrest for you're going to you're taking him to jail. Okay. So, then we can search this. Okay. >> Why you you going to search myself right here? >> Because the cell phone he threw it out at the restaurant. Yeah. >> Yo, you you want to search my go any of these? Why you searching my Yeah. Why you searching my >> Cuz you're under arrest, >> huh? Why you >> You got any contraband in here? Marijuana or anything? >> Yo, your life, bro. Don't ask me no questions, bro. >> Don't ask me no questions. >> My ask me any questions that I stand up? >> Can I stand up? >> Oh, here you go. Passport. >> There's a passport. I >> keep seeing stuff with John Mahoney on it. John Mahoney. >> John Mahoney. I don't know who it is. >> Romeo Romeo. >> Got a passport for a John Mahoney. It's >> not even his. >> Yo, what are you doing? Fix my car. So, we're going to have to take this. >> Yeah. >> Fix my magazine. >> He can identify. >> Man, you stupid. >> Stupid. >> I took property from what? From who? >> You want to talk to us? >> From where? >> You want to talk to us now? >> From where? >> Is that Is that what you're saying? You want to talk to us? >> I want to talk to who? >> So, you say you want to talk to us? >> You trying to be funny? >> I'm saying you want to talk. >> You trying to be funny? >> Yeah, let's talk. Nobody Nobody's telling you to get up >> your life. Why you Why you wing me up for? >> All right, we're going to go to the car. >> All right, let's go. >> Relax. >> Can I take it easy, bro? >> We're just going to go this way. That's all. >> Take it easy. >> No. Yeah, we got to we got to search him. Search him. >> Did you check him like really good under in his waistband? Everything. >> Of course. >> Hold this. Hold it. >> Put my foot back on. >> Spread your feet. >> Uhhuh. >> Spread your feet apart. >> Yeah. You're not in charge, buddy. Okay. So, you're not in charge. I don't know who you think you are. >> So, you're going to be searched. >> Okay. >> What the is wrong with this man? >> What's wrong with you? >> Why are you acting like this? because I didn't do nothing. >> All right. >> Yeah, we're in charge right now. So maybe you should just calm down. >> Let me look at the phone. Switch sides. >> Nope. >> You got anything on you? Cuz when you go to the trial, I don't have you have anything on you, you're going to get a felon charge for introduction. >> Anything on me? I don't know about it. >> Fine. Look, I don't have anything on me, bro. What's wrong with you? >> So, you're still going to be checked? I am being tight. >> This guy right here. This guy right here. Yo, can you >> my arm like that, bro? >> All right. >> Yo, my arm, bro. My arm, please. >> You see anything? No. >> No. No. No. >> Yo, boy. Don't push my arm like that. >> Ah, my arm, bro. [ __ ] arm. Stop. Stop. Stop. >> Stop tensing up then. >> Nobody touching up anything. >> Sit down. There you go. >> Where's my shoes? >> We're going get your shoes. >> My shoes are like that. >> We're going to get them for you. >> Your pathic life. This is DB. >> Your life >> began as a casual contact escalated into a formal arrest within minutes. Analysis examines the constitutional framework governing every phase of that encounter. One, the initial contact and fourth amendment seizure. The officer opened with a consensual inquiry asking the subject's purpose at the airport. Bostic 501 US429 1991. A person approached in a public place is not yet seen. Sensual encounter requires no suspicion and imposes no obligation to cooperate. The officer then claimed to have observed the subject at the airport for several days. He also referenced seeing the subject at the rental car area on level 4. Terry v. Ohio 392 US1 1968. A lawful investigative detention requires more. must articulate specific objective facts, not a vague sense of familiarity. Recognizing a face from a prior day without more is a thin foundation for a Terry stop. Subject denied being present in prior days. No witness corroborated the officer's claim. When the subject hesitated, answering where he came from, the officer ordered hands behind his back. That command converted this encounter from voluntary to an involuntary Fourth Amendment seizure. Two, Miranda sequencing and the fifth amendment violation. Once handcuffed, the subject was immediately questioned about his origin and travel purpose. No Miranda warnings had been given at this point. That is the central legal problem. Under Miranda 84 US436 1966, warnings must precede custodial interrogation. Trigger is custody, not formal arrest. Handcuffing establishes custody as a matter of law. V. Mccardi, 48 US20984 confirmed. Once in custody, Miranda attaches immediately. questions asked before the advisement. Where did you come from? Why are you here? To constitute custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings. Any responses obtained during that window are subject to suppression under the exclusionary rule. The Miranda advisement was eventually read complete and accurate in its content. Sequence interrogation first then warnings does not cure the earlier violation. Three invocation of prites and continued questioning. Following the memorandum of adisement, the subject stated, I answer nothing. D. Tommpkins 560 UE70 2010 invocation must be clear and unambiguous. Nothing is a credible invocation of the fifth right to silence. Invoked all custodial interrogation must cease. Officers continued questioning regardless. Continued questioning post invocation raises serious fifth amendment admissibility concerns. However, the subject subsequently re-engaged, askedly about the cell phone charge. Under Burgess, voluntary re-engagement after invocation creates ambiguity about waiver. Used that re-engagement to resume questioning, a legally defensible but aggressive tactic. Never explicitly requested an attorney, which would have triggered Edwards v. Arizona. The Arizona 51 US477 1981 prohibits all questioning once council is invoked. Without that explicit request, officers retained more flexibility to continue the dialogue. The arrest, probable cause analysis. The formal arrest was based on a reported theft of a cell phone and multiple personal items. Traffic identified a caller who described a white gift bag and several pieces of jewelry. Also referenced the subject discarding a phone in an airport trash can. Probable cause requires a reasonable belief under the totality of circumstances that a crime occurred. 2V Gates 4C2V13 1983 established the totality of circumstances standard. A named or identifiable complaining witness, a described item, and a discarded phone combined likely satisfy that standard even with the complaining witness no longer on property. Inskenton to arrest. Following the arrest decision, officers searched the subject's person and his luggage. States V. Robinson 414 US 218 1973 authorizes a full search of the arrestes person. No warrant is required. The arrest itself is the legal authority for the search. Search of accompanying luggage is more complex in a non-vehicle context. Gant 556332 2009 limited vehicle searches incident to arrest for luggage in custody. Courts examine whether the item is within the arrestes immediate control. Chimlv California 395US752 1969 established the immediate control doctrine. Subject's bags were at his feet at the time of arrest within the Chimal zone. During the search, officers discovered a passport bearing the name John Mahoney. Subject did not identify as John Mahoney. The passport belonged to a third party. Third party identity document found during a theft investigation is significant corroborating evidence. does not standing alone established guilt but it strengthens the totality of probable cause use of force during cir during the physical search the subject repeatedly complained of pain in his arm Connor 490 US 386989 governs force must be objectively reasonable reasonleness is judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene not with the benefit of hindsight the subject was handcuffed and did not appear to resist no visible injury was documented in the footage. The complaints were verbal and repeated. Whether the force applied during the search was objectively reasonable is a factual question. The absence of visible injury limits the legal exposure but does not eliminate the concern. Seven. Outcomes and cacity. At the time of this analysis, the outcome of any criminal proceedings remains unknown. The subject was transported to jail. Court records were not publicly available. On legal analysis alone, any prosecution faces at least three significant challenges. Premaranda custodial statements are subject to suppression motions. Second, continued questioning after a plausible invocation risks additional suppression. Third, the complaining witness was not on scene at time of arrest, creating identification risk. Conversely, the passport's discovery and the corroborating radio intelligence strengthen the case. Any charges would likely include theft and potentially possession of stolen property. Part eight grades receives a C plus. The initial contact was measured and professional. The Miranda advisement was complete and accurate. Evidence recovery, particularly the third party passport, demonstrated investigative attentiveness. However, questioning a handcuffed subject before Miranda is a textbook fifth amendment violation. Continuing to question after the subject stated, "I answer nothing," compounds the problem. The officer also used profanity toward a handcuffed, non-resisting subject. Unprofessional conduct. These errors reflect a procedural gap between arrest authority and constitutional compliance. Chib receives AB. He asserted his Fourth Amendment right, refusing consent to a luggage search without hesitation. He invoked his right to silence, a constitutionally sound exercise of the fifth amendment. T. He did not physically resist at any stage, preventing the encounter from escalating further. However, re-engaging officers on the substance of the charges after invoking silence was a legal error. Heing to explicitly request counsel denied him the stronger protection of Edwards v. Arizona. Conduct kept the situation controlled, but his legal strategy undermined his own invocation. Officers ring AB menace. Radio coordination was efficient. Physical control of a resistant subject was maintained lawfully. However, the assisting officers did not redirect when the lead used profanity. Correction is a professional standard. Silence in that moment is passive endorsement. Tensified patown which produced the subject's arm complaints lacked verbal deescalation. Ter lessons learned one. Miranda timing is not discretionary. Custody triggers the obligation. Full stop. asked after handcuffing and before the advisement is pre-maranda interrogation must internalize. Advise first then ask. The sequence cannot be reversed. Two, a plausible invocation of silence must stop questioning, not invite negotiation. Under Burgis, the ambiguity standard protects officers, but only if they act conservatively. When in doubt, stop. The cost of silence is recoverable. The cost of a fifth amendment violation is not. Three, reasonable articulable suspicion must be documented before a Terry stop is made. I recognized him from a prior day is an observation. It is not articulable suspicion. Should document specific behaviors, dates, times, and locations before initiating detention. Four, professionalism under provocation is not optional. It is tactically required. Who match a subject's escalatory language lose credibility, control, and legal standing. Composure is not a courtesy. It is an evidence management strategy. Lesson five. Evidence recovery must be paired with procedural compliance to be prosecutorially useful. Passport discovery was significant, but its value depends on whether the arrest itself was lawful. Tainted arrest produced tainted evidence. Procedural errors cost cases, not just a trial. Gi arro. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below. Chi. Thank you for watching.