One 11001.

You're trying to be a street cop.

A piece of case law, it's day for it even applies to all the people across the country who are a part of this group.

Welcome everybody. We're one big happy family.

The guys from the south and the west and the

north that don't know New Jersey, New York, you'd be treated like brothers. If you come here,

we'll give you the utmost respect. And the Class A treatment, if you come to visit us here in

New Jersey, hopefully you extend the invitation and the courtesy the same way in the South,

although we've heard and some people have experienced

some different circumstances. I don't know why anybody doesn't think the way we do, but that's okay.

Let's talk about a U.S. Supreme Court case, Dunaway v. New York. And the reason I bring this up

is because I can tell you a story of I have a friend of mine who works for a large agency.

And when I first started writing this course, we had to be drinking some adult beverages. And he said, he was like, oh, I'm like, what do you do when you have somebody in a car? They're subject to a violation or a summons. You don't know who they are, and you need to fingerprint them to figure out who they are. And his answer was, well, we transport them for identification purposes, and I laughed, and he got a little offended. There's no such thing as transporting

for identification purposes. That's a cute phrase you guys have come up with, and I even use

that at one point in my career, but there is no such thing as a transport for identification

purposes. It is a de facto arrest and an arrest at that. So I'm going to read this to you and then we'll talk about it a little bit further. Hopefully you guys get the gist of it. So wherever it says, Dunnay v. New York, and I'll attach to hyperlink like I usually do, you guys can read this. Whenever law enforcement officer removes the suspect from where he is found and transports that suspect to police headquarters for questioning the police action is the functional equivalent of an arrest. Olsey State v. Dickie v. Dickey, 19908. There's no such thing as transporting for identification purposes, okay? Now, if they agree to come in under their own will, that's totally different. You have somebody who is saying, look, officer, I'll come in right now and you can fingerprint me. That's no problem. But if you're taking

somebody against their will, that is a de facto arrest. So handcuffs go on. It's an arrest. It doesn't

matter. We had a guy who was a member of this group who recently did this, brought somebody in,

did not fingerprint them. And it was just a screwy thing and then

let the person go, did not do a booking sheet. And now that agency is facing a little problem. I'm not

going to say which agency it is, but he called me. I'm like, why would you do a booking sheet on

that? So, guys, know that when you have somebody in a car and they're subject to a summons and you're going to arrest them because they're lying about who they are, you can't figure out who they are, you know, nothing makes sense. They have no idea you're going to arrest them to assure the respond before a court in response to a summons. It's an arrest, okay? It's not a transport for identification purposes. And if you transport for identification purposes, and don't treat it like an arrest, and somebody comes in and complains on you, and they're going to ask, where's the booking sheet officer? Because you brought my person from where they were back to headquarters to fingerprint them to find out that either they were the

...