I'm explaining it the way judges look at it. If you are handcuffed, you are under arrest for purposes of the Miranda warning, and statements given without that warning can be suppressed. However, if the police decide at some point that you are not going to booked you will be released and you have only been detained. The overwhelming number of lawsuits claiming "false arrest" will fail because someone has been handcuffed. Trust me on that.
That sure sounds self contradictory. There aren’t semi-arrests.
Has this matter hit the USSC? Just curious. It sounds more like for the amount of compensation one might get, most parties figure it is not worth sinking the money into the aggressive legal maneuvers needed to get a vindication.
Of course this is one of those times in which one is tempted to doubt there is a God, but people disobeying God and lying does not mean God ceases to exist or ceases to hold people accountable for truth and falsity.