The transcript is from an episode of a podcast titled "Audit the Audit," which discusses the incident involving an unidentified Harnett County resident who reported her dirt bike stolen. The bike was later found by the police and identified through its vehicle identification number. The resident contacted the Fuquay-Varina Police Department and informed them of the bike's location. Two officers were dispatched to the seller's home to investigate a possible case of felony possession of stolen property.
The initial responding officer decided to place the seller, Malcolm Ziegler, into handcuffs without verifying any of the facts associated with the encounter. The question of whether or not Mr. Ziegler was legitimately detained is a major aspect of this encounter. The court's perspective of what constitutes a lawful detainment is important to examine. The Fourth Amendment was intended to protect citizens against arbitrary arrests and unreasonable searches.
The officer failed to validate any of the claims made by the complainant before deciding to detain and search Mr. Ziegler. Probable cause is a necessary element in determining whether a detainment is valid. At the moment of Mr. Ziegler's detention, the officer had no way of objectively knowing whether he was in fact in possession of stolen property and was operating purely on the hearsay and speculation provided by the complaining party.
Mr. Ziegler offered to show the officers a bill of sale to prove that the dirt bike was purchased through a legitimate transaction in good faith. The officer removed the handcuffs and Mr. Ziegler was allowed to enter his home, where he was able to locate the bill of sale for the dirt bike. The officer explained to Mr. Ziegler and his father that as victims of a crime, they are entitled to restitution for the loss of their fund through the purchasing of an item that they were not aware was stolen.
The officer who confronted the initial officer gets an A-plus for considering the real-world implications of his fellow officers' actions, challenging the officer on the merits of his conduct, and ensuring that Mr. Ziegler did not face any unnecessary or unwarranted charges. The initial responding officer gets an F for detaining Mr. Ziegler before obtaining any substantiating evidence, exercising poor discretion by signaling an arrest to his fellow officers rather than a detainment, and for failing to consider the practical implications of his discretionary decision-making.
The episode concludes with the confronting officer commending Mr. Ziegler for remaining calm and collected throughout the encounter and making a concerted effort to prove his innocence.
1. The incident occurred on January 14, 2021, in Harnett County, North Carolina.
2. A resident reported her dirt bike stolen to the Fuquay-Varina Police Department.
3. 16 days later, the resident contacted a seller through Facebook who she believed was in possession of her stolen bike.
4. The resident and her boyfriend arranged to meet with the seller to verify that it was the bike that had been stolen from her.
5. They were able to positively identify the bike through its vehicle identification number.
6. The resident then contacted the Fuquay-Varina Police Department and informed them that she had located her bike.
7. Two officers were dispatched to Mr. Ziegler's home to investigate a possible case of felony possession of stolen property.
8. The officer decided to place Mr. Ziegler into handcuffs without verifying any of the facts associated with the encounter.
9. The court held that the appropriate inquiry is whether a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officer's requests or otherwise terminate the encounter.
10. The officer failed to validate any of the claims made by the complainant before deciding to detain and search Mr. Ziegler.
11. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
12. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
13. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
14. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
15. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
16. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
17. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
18. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
19. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
20. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
21. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
22. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
23. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
24. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
25. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
26. Section 14-72 of North Carolina's general statutes covers the crimes of larceny receiving stolen goods and possessing stolen goods.
27. The officer informed Mr. Ziegler that they were not accusing him of committing the act of stealing the dirt bike, but that being in possession of stolen property is still a crime.
28. Section 14-72