Complaint alleges OPD detective seized juvenile's phone without warrant
Five witnesses, three of whom are unrelated to the juvenile or his court case, gave nearly identical accounts of the incident, which occurred outside courtrooms on the judicial center's third floor Thursday afternoon.
The juvenile's public defender, Colin O'Brien, filed a complaint against OPD Sgt. John Preston with OPD's Professional Standards Unit Thursday.
'He literally snatched that phone out of that boy's hand,' said Stephanie Green, who witnessed the incident.
'Even the child said, 'Do you have a warrant?' and his grandmother said, 'Do you have a warrant?' ' Green said. 'He (Preston) was walking away and waving it in the air like, 'ha ha.' '
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals against 'unreasonable search and seizure,' and requires law enforcement to have a search warrant to search homes and seize property under most circumstances.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2014 a cellphone can't be searched without a warrant when a person has been arrested.
O'Brien said the juvenile was appearing in juvenile court on a 'status offense,' which is an offense only someone under the age of 18 could face. Examples of status offenses are truancy from school, being a runaway or possession of tobacco products by a minor.
The juvenile was not in court for any criminal charges, O'Brien said.
O'Brien said the juvenile was in the hallway with his grandmother when two detectives, Preston and a second detective, approached and said they wanted to ask the juvenile some questions. The juvenile declined to speak to them, O'Brien said.
'As soon as the first detective asked him if he wanted to talk and (the juvenile) said 'no,' he (Preston) said, 'we are going to be getting a warrant' for the phone, O'brien said.
'Sgt. Preston came up and said, 'We are going to be getting a warrant,' and forcibly took (the phone) out of his hand,' O'Brien said.
O'Brien said it appeared that 'Sgt. Preston (was) getting (angry) when the kid said he wouldn't talk to them.'
O'Brien said Preston gave his name when asked.
Liz Webb, who is not related to the juvenile or his case, said she heard several people question Preston about whether he had a warrant to take the phone.
When the juvenile refused to talk to the two detectives, Webb said the first detective started walking away, and that Preston took the phone from the juvenile.
'When he was walking down the hall, he lifted it up and said, 'I'm seizing it without' (a warrant,)' Webb said.
Kyle Webb, who also saw the incident, said the unnamed detective was 'very professional,' but that Preston was 'very aggressive.'
'The juvenile had the phone in his hand. He was trying to call somebody,' Kyle Webb said. 'The detective overpowered him.'
Kyle Webb said he heard Preston say detectives were going to get a warrant to seize the phone before Preston took it from the juvenile.
The detective identified as Preston was 'kind of 'in your face, I've got your stuff now,' ' Kyle Webb said.
Patti Cox-Young, the juvenile's grandmother, was with the juvenile, and said his status case was dismissed by the court.
The detectives said they wanted 'to talk to him concerning something his name had come up in, and he said, 'I don't want to talk,' ' Cox-Young said.
'He was cooperating, but he just didn't want to talk,' Cox-Young said. After taking the phone away, Preston left with the phone, Cox-Young said.
'I'm a very firm believer in the Constitution,' Cox-Young said and that, 'They trampled' on the juvenile's rights.
JD Winkler, deputy chief of police, said a professional standards unit complaint had been filed with OPD in relation to the incident, but that he could not comment further.
The Professional Standards Unit investigates complaints made against officers, and sends substantiated complaints to Police Chief Art Ealum for possible disciplinary action.
Preston told the Messenger-Inquirer Friday morning, 'We're actively investigating a juvenile crime. I can't speak on that.'
When the Messenger-Inquirer clarified that Preston wasn't being asked about any specific investigation but about the seizure of the cell phone, Preston referred comment to Mark Hammonds, OPD's public information officer.
The department would not be discussing the incident, Hammonds said.
'I spoke to the major above me, and he advised me there is an ongoing investigation, so OPD will not be giving out any details or making any statements in regard to that investigation,' Hammonds said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
8 hours ago
- Fox News
Kohberger prosecutor reveals crucial moment: ‘Everything hinged on that argument'
Failure wasn't an option. With the entire case against Bryan Kohberger on the line, an Idaho prosecutor held steady and helped convince a judge to allow controversial DNA evidence to stand – despite the FBI violating its own policy to obtain it. Jeff Nye, chief of the criminal division at the Idaho Attorney General's Office, was the legal big gun brought in to back up Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson as Kohberger's defense threw a "kitchen sink" strategy at the court – challenging everything and hoping something would stick. "Just pure evil is the way that I would describe him," Nye said of Kohberger. "I think it was surreal, especially going up to Latah County, you know, small courtroom, small town. When I kind of get into my groove, everything else kind of melts away. I forget kind of the external details, but then I go to sit down for my argument and I see him sitting there, and I immediately think about what he did that night and the horrible, horrible acts that he committed against these totally innocent people." One of Nye's key contributions was overcoming the defense's challenges to investigative genetic genealogy (IGG) evidence – which the FBI used to tip investigators off to Kohberger for the first time in what was revealed to be a controversial move that the defense tried to have precluded from trial. "It was critical," Nye told Fox News Digital. "I mean, the stakes could not have been higher in this case on that issue." State police and the independent lab Othram had been working on IGG leads until Dec. 10, 2022, when the FBI stepped in and submitted the crime scene DNA sample to a commercial genetics database designed to help people track their family history. While technically a violation of the bureau's own internal policies and the service's terms of use, the court said the evidence could stand and knocked down Kohberger's arguments that the IGG technique had violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Nye had argued that the policy in question "does not impose any legal limitations on otherwise lawful investigative or prosecutorial activities." The judge on the case ultimately agreed that it had been a valid investigatory tactic. "I struggle with the idea that DNA left at a crime scene, that there's any expectation of privacy," Idaho Judge Steven Hippler told Kohberger's lawyers in January. The FBI previously declined to comment on the issue and instead pointed Fox News Digital to Hippler's Feb. 17 order, which found investigators had not violated Kohberger's constitutional rights and allowed the IGG evidence to remain in play. Nye, who argued in favor of the evidence for the prosecution, revealed to Fox News Digital that it would have been "devastating" if Hippler ruled in favor of the defense. "It would be devastating, because it wouldn't just be the DNA that goes out, the match at least, to Mr. Kohberger. It would be all of the fruit that came from that match. And that's a lot of things," he told Fox News Digital. "That's all the Cellebrite stuff, because they don't have his devices to review if they never made the identification. That's, all of his cellphone records, you know, those warrants were issued based on the identification that was made from the DNA. So all of that's gone. It would have put the state in a very bad position to move forward in this case." The IGG argument ended up being the biggest of his career, he said – and that's coming from a Georgetown-educated prosecutor who has argued homicide cases in front of the Idaho Supreme Court. "The other thing that made me a little bit nervous is when you're arguing Fourth Amendment issues, even if the state loses and the court finds that there was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, there are some exceptions to the exclusionary rule that the state can sometimes argue..." he said. "In my brief and an oral argument, we didn't even assert an exception to the exclusionary rule, because there just wasn't one that could apply, and so everything hinged on that argument that this did not violate the Fourth Amendment." If he failed, prosecutors could have lost access to the IGG and any evidence derived from it or from search warrants based on it, he said. He also had out-of-state decisions that went in the prosecution's favor, but it was the first time the controversy had come up in Idaho. He was nervous – at least before he stepped in front of the judge. "Once you get into a back and forth with the court, or at least once I do, that kind of melts away, and I can focus on the argument," he told Fox News Digital. Detectives said during a news briefing after Kohberger's sentencing that they believed they would still have identified the suspect if he hadn't left DNA at the scene. They had his car, and they said they would have found him eventually. On Nov. 13, 2022, Kohberger entered an off-campus house at the University of Idaho and killed Madison Mogen, 21, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20. He dropped a Ka-Bar knife sheath at the crime scene, near Mogen's hip. And his DNA on the snap generated the lead that brought police to the killer in December 2022. Officially called a "tip" in IGG terms, the DNA match was confirmed when police swabbed Kohberger's cheek upon his arrest at his parents' house in Pennsylvania. After years of denying the allegations, Kohberger's defense took a major turn in July. Having failed to have the IGG thrown out or to have the potential death penalty removed ahead of trial, in large part to Nye's work on the case, Kohberger pleaded guilty. "I wanted to hear him say that, and he finally did," Nye said. "By the time of the sentencing, I had decided myself, I'm done with him. I want nothing else to do with him. I don't care what he's thinking, I do not care what he's doing, and so I made a very conscious effort at the sentencing to not ever look at him, to not pay him any attention, and instead to focus on the victims as they gave their impact statements." The now-convicted murderer received four consecutive sentences of life in prison with no parole – one for each of the first-degree murder charges he faced – plus another 10 years for burglary. As part of the plea deal, he waived his rights to appeal and to seek a sentence reduction. After Idaho AG Raul Labrador took office in 2023, he promoted Nye to run the criminal division in part because of his plan to revamp how the department works with county prosecutors, offering them assistance on major cases in an about-face from policy under the prior administration, which would either take full control over cases or avoid getting involved at all. Before the promotion, he said he led the special prosecutions unit and had a ground-level view of what smaller jurisdictions were asking for when they came to the state for help. It made sense, he said, to want to have control over a case, but he also believes that a community's ability to bring killers to justice should not be based on its population and budget. "I personally feel pretty strongly that the state should step in in these bigger cases and offer to assist," he said. "And so that's what happened in this case." Nye, deputy AG Madison Gourley and former deputy AG Ingrid Batey, who is now a member of the Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, all assisted on behalf of the attorney general's office. Thompson, the Latah County prosecuting attorney, led the case. His senior deputy, Ashley Jennings, also played a major role, handling a massive discovery process and battling more of Kohberger's pretrial motions. And former U.S. Attorney Joshua D. Hurwit was commissioned as a special deputy prosecutor to assist if the case had gone to trial.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Deel scores a lawsuit win, but not against Rippling
A Florida judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit filed against embattled HR and payroll provider Deel. And while Deel described this as a 'Rippling-aligned' and 'Rippling-supported' lawsuit, this is not the infamous lawsuit filed by its rival earlier this year that involved an alleged corporate spy. Rippling CEO Parker Conrad even went so far as to say 'This litigation has nothing to do with Rippling, we are not a party to it, did not fund it,' in a tweet. (Rippling representatives declined further comment.) Still, this is some good news for Deel. In January, a lawsuit was filed in Florida by Melanie Damian, who accused Deel of helping Russian entities sidestep U.S. sanctions by processing payments for Surge Capital Ventures. Surge had been part of a separate U.S. SEC action alleging it was involved in a Ponzi scheme that defrauded church members out of $35 million. Damian, a court-appointed receiver for Surge, was tasked with the mission to recover assets, Semafor reported at the time. She filed the class action lawsuit on behalf of Surge, attempting to blame Deel for processing the payments. This is the case that was dismissed. Deel is attempting to tie this case to the suit filed by Rippling in part because Damian's lawyers cited the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Rippling, who is suing Deel in California, is also claiming Deel violated RICO, as well as the Defend Trade Secrets Act, and California state law, as TechCrunch previously reported. RICO is famously the statute that was originally used to charge mobsters. Rippling's lawsuit, however, involves one of its own employees who testified in an Irish court that he had been acting as a paid corporate spy for Deel. Deel is clearly hoping that if one court dismisses a lawsuit arguing RICO violations, another court will also dismiss. 'The ruling invites further questions on the credibility of another baseless set of RICO accusations by Rippling in California,' a Deel spokesperson told TechCrunch in an emailed statement. But as these cases involve different actions and circumstances, we'll all have to wait and see how the California court responds. Meanwhile, Deel is also suing Rippling, claiming that one of Rippling's employees was unlawfully impersonating a customer. On top of all of that, the person who confessed to being Deel's alleged corporate spy, Keith O'Brien, successfully filed a restraining order against people he said were following him and scaring his family. O'Brien is now Rippling's star witness in its case against Deel. At first, lawyers for Deel denied involvement and later they admitted the company had hired 'discrete surveillance' of O'Brien, according to court testimony seen by TechCrunch, and first reported by the Irish Independent. 'Alex and his father can deflect and delay but they will face the music when we get our day in court,' Conrad added in his tweet, referring to Rippling's case that names Deel's founder CEO Alex Bouaziz and his father, who is chairman and CFO, Philippe Bouaziz. 'Deel will explore all its options for relief, defend itself vigorously against pending cases and continue to focus on winning in the marketplace,' a Deel spokesperson said in that statement. We're always looking to evolve, and by providing some insight into your perspective and feedback into TechCrunch and our coverage and events, you can help us! Fill out this survey to let us know how we're doing and get the chance to win a prize in return! Sign in to access your portfolio
NBC News
a day ago
- NBC News
Eric André lawsuit over drug search at Atlanta airport revived by appeals court
A federal appeals court decided to reverse the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by comedians Eric André and Clayton English in 2022 in which they claim their Forth Amendment rights were violated. André and English alleged in their lawsuit that Clayton County officers stopped them in two separate incidents at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport while inside the jet bridge as they were about to board flights. The Black celebrities say they were told to hand over their boarding passes and IDs, and asked if they were carrying illegal drugs. The pair allege the officers violated their Fourth Amendment rights "to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures," according to the federal appellant court opinion published on Friday. They also claimed that the officers stopped them based on their race. Their lawsuit was eventually dismissed in 2023 by the district court, citing the plaintiff's "failure to plausibly allege any constitutional violations," and all defendants, including Clayton County and the police department's chief, were protected by immunity. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit said in its opinion that it found that André and English "plausibly alleged that Clayton County subjected them to unreasonable searches and seizures" and reversed the dismissal "after careful review." The court affirmed the remainder of the district court's dismissal, which includes the celebrities' claim that they were stopped by the officers based on their race. The Clayton County Police Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. NBC News has reached out to representatives for André and English for comment. Two separate incidents, one year apart English was traveling from Atlanta to Los Angeles for work in 2020 when he says Clayton County officers stopped him on the jet bridge after he had cleared TSA security and a boarding pass check by a gate agent, according to his and André's 2022 lawsuit. "The officers flashed their badges and asked English whether he was carrying any illegal drugs," the lawsuit said. "English denied carrying illegal drugs. English 'understood that he was not free to leave and continue his travel while the officers were questioning him.'" Officers stood on either side of English, blocking his path to the plane, and asked him for his boarding pass and ID, which he handed over because he felt he had no choice but to comply, according to the lawsuit. An officer also asked to search English's carry-on, which he allowed them to do, "believing he had no choice." The officers let English go after checking his bag, per the lawsuit. "Throughout the encounter, Mr. English was worried that if he said anything the officers perceived as 'out of line,' he would not be allowed to board the plane or reach his destination," the lawsuit stated. In 2021, André was traveling from Charleston, South Carolina, to Atlanta before heading home to Los Angeles. He was stopped on the jet bridge while trying to board his flight in Atlanta. André was also stopped on the jet bridge after clearing multiple security points, according to the lawsuit. Officers also asked the comedian if he was carrying any illegal drugs, like cocaine or methamphetamine, which he denied, the lawsuit said. He was also allegedly asked to hand over his ID and boarding pass and complied, believing he could not refuse. "After approximately five minutes of standing in the narrow jet bridge and being questioned, Mr. André was told by the officers that he was free to leave and board the plane," according to the lawsuit. The stops were part of the Clayton County Police Department's "drug interdiction program," which aims to selectively stop passengers on the jet bridge before they board flights to ask them if they are carrying drugs and request to search their luggage. The department claims the stops are random and consensual. André and English claim that the stops are not random or consensual, and that the Clayton County police program specifically targets Black passengers and other passengers of color, according to the court opinion. There were 402 jet bridge stops from Aug. 30, 2020, to April 30, 2021, according to police records, and passengers' races were listed for 378 of those stops. Of those 378 passengers, 211, or 56%, were Black, and people of color accounted for 258 total stops, or 68%, the celebrities' lawsuit states, The Associated Press reported. André called the experience "dehumanizing and demoralizing." "People were gawking at me, and I looked suspicious when I had done nothing wrong," André said in an interview at the time of the lawsuit filing. The court's decision In its decision, the federal appeals court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged that the coercive nature of the defendants' actions during their stops of André and English made them feel that they were not free to leave, or that they were "seized" by the officers, meaning they plausibly alleged that their Fourth Amendment rights were violated. English "plausibly alleged that the officers stopped him and began asking questions without telling him he could leave until after they finished questioning him," the court said, adding that they came to the same conclusion with André. However, the court did not find that the comedians were able to plausibly allege that the officers were acting with discriminatory purpose when they stopped them, citing that André and English "do not allege that the individual defendants knew of any racially discriminatory complaint or saw the County's logs or that the County directed the individual defendants to single out Black passengers for interdictions." "For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that plaintiffs plausibly alleged that defendants violated their Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures," the court said. "The individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, but Clayton County is not. Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal of plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claims against Clayton County. We affirm the dismissal of plaintiffs' remaining claims."
