Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes it will hold up in court. Police don't let suspects out of detention just because they complain they have to pee. High-tech state-of-the-art tracking technology from Google and Apple indicates that these people are somehow involved in the disappearance of a missing person. How dumb would the officer look if he let a suspect destroy evidence, escape, or otherwise pull something on the claim that they have to pee?
There's nothing in the article to say that the residents were arrested. An arrest is the threshold for controlling someone's legitimate actions: if the police don't have enough evidence to arrest the person, then they shouldn't be limiting their movements. That is the whole point of arrest (and the related burden of proof required to make an arrest). To restrict someone's actions without legal authority - such as arr…
everyone commenting on this is so ignorant you all must be teenagers
the cops dont have to arrest you to control you. They can detain you whenever they want and barely need any reason at all. A hunch is sufficient to detain you for pretty much as long as they want if their hunch continues.
fuckin privileged teenagers