Somebody wrote a book about the future of television, among other things. It's called "1984".
In corporatist 21st century, television watches you!
Right because somone who does not possess electronics knowledge can tell the difference between a PCB for a cheap electronic clock and one that is some kind of detonator.
The school officials, and the police, all asserted that they had exactly that ability, as none of them actually invoked a single procedure that they had in place for dealing with a suspected bomb.
Schools get evacuated on the basis of a single anonymous phone call which says there's a bomb in a locker. It happens on a regular basis. Yet when they had the device IN HAND, they very obviously made the determination that it was in no way, shape or form dangerous. They did not evacuate the school. They did not call in bomb disposal. The teacher kept it in a desk drawer for a fair length of time. The police transported the 'device' in the same vehicle that they used to perpshame Ahmed.
They didn't just believe it wasn't a bomb, they made a specific determination, at every level and at every point in the debacle, that it wasn't a bomb, and SPECIFICALLY CHOSE to not invoke the procedures that all start with 'If there is ANY possibility that there is a bomb, do this....'
Being arrested requires that charges be filed.
Incorrect. You're 'detained' of the officer stops you for any reason. You're 'under arrest' if you don't feel free to leave, if the police transport you anywhere, or uses force to prevent you from leaving. The officer requires 'reasonable suspicion' to detain you, and requires 'probable cause' to arrest you, but it DOES NOT need to lead to charges. The officer can reasonably believe you were commiting a crime, then turn out to be wrong, or have new evidence come to light without it having been false arrest.
Your twenty minutes is plucked out of the air and meaningless.
Actually, it's a rule of thumb applied by the SCOTUS. Google it a bit and you'll find all sorts of case law, opinions, and the like.
TLDR: You can be 'detained' on suspicion. If you're not free to go, if the officer moves you, or if the officer starts calling in backup, drug sniffing dogs, and the like, you're under arrest. If he develops 'probable cause' to believe you've committed a crime, he can arrest you.
Ahmed was not detained. He was arrested. At no point would he have felt that he was free to go. Also, 'twenty minutes' seems to be the rule of thumb for how long somebody can be 'detained' before it turns into a de-facto arrest.
Ahmed was hauled off in cuffs, for zero reason. The American legal system specifically puts a dollar value on damages, as well as having the idea of putative awards. Ahmed deserves both.
My credit-card supplier will issue single-use or otherwise restricted numbers, to use with "untrustworthy vendors". This allows a similar functionality: with the vendor I can be OscarTheSuspiciousGrouch and use a card number that is limited to legitimate stuff.
In both cases I can credibly demonstrate I'm really "Oscar"
"Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed." -- Robin, The Boy Wonder