HAUPPAUGE – The fatal stabbing of CVS employee Edeedson Cline, Jr. on Christmas Day in Lindenhurst has sparked ongoing debate in the Suffolk County Legislature.
While working on December 25, 2025, Cline, 23, was stabbed and later pronounced dead at the hospital. These events have led to public scrutiny of procedures for the surrender and use of surveillance footage in felony investigations.
At their last General Meeting, Suffolk Legislators debated I.R.1393, which would require certain businesses to provide surveillance footage to law enforcement within 24 hours of a request related to a felony investigation. Noncompliance could result in financial penalties. The proposed legislation applies to public-facing businesses with surveillance systems and at least 10 employees.
The bill is sponsored by Minority Leader Jason Richberg (D-West Babylon). He and other supporters argued that quicker access to surveillance footage would allow law enforcement to respond more effectively to violent incidents and emergencies. Addressing the use of surveillance footage as evidence, Richberg (pictured right) stated, “If we can get it sooner, that is best. Twenty-four hours is enough time to complete whatever process and procedures are necessary, including corporate or counsel review. We need to make sure that we are all working together. It’s important that the details contained in the evidence are available to investigators.”
Ken-Patrick Johnson, a local business owner and ambassador for the Suffolk County Police Commissioner’s Office, exclaimed, “We have a young man dead because a maniac went in there and did that to him…anything that can give law enforcement more tools to keep us safe and get violent perpetrators off the street, I’m in full defense of that.”
In an exchange with the Legislators, it was suggested that most business owners would voluntarily cooperate with police following a violent crime. When questioned by Presiding Officer Anthony Picirillo (R-Holtsville), if something happened at his establishment, “would you ensure that the information was handed over if necessary? Johnson replied, “Absolutely.”
The bill has also faced criticism from other lawmakers and constitutional advocates who argue it raises Fourth Amendment concerns regarding warrantless searches and seizures.
“The Fourth Amendment is part of the Constitution, and this bill totally violates it,” Piccirillo (pictured left) told The Messenger. “It will not see the light of day as far as I’m concerned.”
At the General Body Meeting, Anthony Cacciato, New York State Chair for Young Americans for Liberty, also opposed the legislation. He maintained that the bill would create “a mechanism for law enforcement to conduct a warrantless seizure” by requiring businesses to provide footage without a court order or warrant.
Cacciato cited legal precedent, including City of Los Angeles v. Patel, asserting that businesses should have the opportunity for judicial review before facing penalties for noncompliance with government record requests. Concerns, defending existing warrant and subpoena procedures as sufficient tools for investigations.
“Our system is a bill of process…due process is an integral part of the legal system, and that takes time.” He also cautioned against allowing emotional responses to tragedies to weaken constitutional protections, reasoning, “If we allow knee-jerk reactions to undermine your constitutional rights and due process, it hurts every resident.”
Legislator Piccirillo closed his remarks by referencing a well-known warning from Benjamin Franklin on the balance between liberty and security: “Those who would give up essential liberty deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
At several points during the legislative discussion, legislators debated whether amendments requiring subpoenas, warrants, or judicial oversight could address contestants’ concerns.
Legislator Richberg ultimately requested that the bill be recessed to “make some amendments to the bill,” explaining that legislators were “still in communication with some folks about some of the things they’d like to see.” Richberg emphasized that he remains open to feedback as discussions surrounding the proposal continue, particularly from small business owners who may be impacted by the legislation.
“Reach out to our office,” Richberg said. “We can sit down and have a conversation and see what we can do to help address any of your concerns.”
