The officer didn’t “mirandize” the victim. Sheesh! Also, the officer performed an illegal search so therefore whatever he found wouldn’t be admissible in a court of law.
What?
The cop has to read the rights before questioning, not before the arrest.
And the cop has significant latitude in a search after the guy’s behavior. Much more than a Terry or lunge area search.
The officer doesn’t have to mirandize the driver until he has him in custody and his environment is secured. As far as searching the vehicle he asked the wife if she was taking possession of the vehicle and then asked her if he could look inside. If he had found something he would have been covered by the video.
I agree, I noticed the “search” of the vehicle and no arrest. Bad day for USP
The officer didn’t Mirandize the victim during the course of the video. That doesn’t mean he didn’t do it after the video stopped. Once he was under arrest, the officer had probable cause to search his vehicle.
Victim? A victim of his own stupidity.
You don't have to Mirandize a perp. Miranda rights are only given before questioning in order to make any confession admissible. When a crime is committed in front of a cop (like resisting arrest) and its all caught on film (like this one) you don't need a confession.