You should go back and read more carefully. In the same post you argued their response was appropriate for a hoax bomb, which is why they didn't evacuate. You then argued that they lacked the ability to tell if it was a bomb or not. (I have seen no evidence that the arresting officers were familiar with bomb design) Those two positions cannot be both true.
Wrong again. His INTENT is what would make it a hoax bomb, not their interpretation of it. If his INTENT was to fool a layperson then IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THEY WERE FOOLED OR NOT. His intent is all that was ever suspected here because that alone is what would determine if this is a hoax bomb or not (in the absence of anything undeniable, like fake C4/"EXPLOSIVE!"/TNT markings, of course).
Regardless, you seem to forget that this wasn't one person or a group of people who all think exactly alike. The evacuation would likely have happened before the police arrived if it were going to happen, so their familiarity is completely irrelevant to whether or not the school was evacuated. I would not have faulted them for evacuating, but I'm glad they didn't.
It is indistinguishable for SOME people and obvious for others. Multiple people were involved. How is that so hard to understand?
I said that the evacuation response between a real bomb and a hoax bomb differ only when they know a suspected hoax bomb is not a real bomb. I didn't say that their response to a hoax bomb proved that no one involved ever for a moment thought that it was a real bomb. That isn't a requirement for it to be a hoax. His INTENT is what they have, thus far, failed to prove. His INTENT is what would make this a hoax bomb.
I'm perfectly willing to put myself in the shoes of the principal. If any kid brought me what I
thought was intended as a hoax bomb and I KNEW it wasn't a real bomb I would not evacuate. I WOULD still call the cops because
a hoax bomb is still a serious offense. Duh. Doesn't matter if they can't ultimately prove that it's a hoax bomb or even if they ultimately prove that it wasn't. If the cops determined that there was enough suspicion to detain for further questioning ("arrest") while they investigate but ultimately do not find any evidence to prove it was a hoax, that's also OK. That's how the process works. What isn't OK is denying him/her access to his/her parents or legal counsel, but we don't know that they actually did this. It sounds to me like the parents were called after the kid asserted his right (the whole family showed up, didn't they?). The police continued asking questions, which is also 100% allowed (he does not have to answer though). There's a reason cliche cop shows and courtroom dramas often depict the lawyer kicking the cops out of the room when the lawyer shows up. Go ahead and insult me for bringing up movies and TV as if there is no way art might imitate reality. I'm ready for it.
It sounds like he asserted two constitutional rights and did not answer with anything other than "it's a clock." Once again, there's nothing legally wrong with that, but now you can't argue that this only happened to him because he was Muslim/Middle-Eastern AND you now have to answer why it fits the explanation you refused to consider. All that ever mattered was his intent. If his intent were to have them assume that it was a bomb OR a hoax bomb, then it *IS* a hoax bomb. PERIOD. Not being forthcoming is evidence of intent because it's exactly what he would do if that were his intent. It doesn't come close to meeting the burden of proof for a conviction, so he wasn't charged.
I have another very relevant world-wise personal experience for you (oh, I bet you hate these). Earlier this Summer I had two teenage girls about Ahmed's age arrested for stealing from me and they invoked the same two rights.
I had 100% irrefutable photographic proof on video, but the police needed to see in her bag and the girls were not allowing it. They had been in trouble enough times to know that they didn't have to let police search their bag without parents/legal council because they were under 18 (supported by The Fifth because minors can't be expected to make reasoned decisions about legal council or self incrimination).
To avoid shoplifting charges, they asserted the same two rights and demanded their parents, knowing that one was a runaway from a group home (no parents to call) and the other was from very far away (would take hours to arrive). We waited HOURS for the parent of one girl to arrive before the police could demand to see inside the bag. Guess where she was taken even though she didn't have her parents? That's right: juvenile detention. Just like Ahmed, she was arrested and taken to juvenile detention on suspicion of a crime without speaking to her parents. These girls were not minorities.
It sounds very much like they took advantage of the same laws, telling the kid not to answer any questions except to say that it's a clock and that he should insist on having them present. As far as we know they called the parents right away and police questioned him while they waited (entirely legal; he doesn't have to answer though).
Remember, us calling you out on bad logic and shitty evidence is not an attack on you or an attempt to troll you. We're just pointing out that your argument is irrational. If you're as objective as you claim to be instead of further convincing yourself of your rightness with each new hole that's poked in your logic, take a step back and consider what people are telling you.
What you're saying isn't making sense.
Please show me where ANY hole has been poked. You have been the one failing to consider anything beyond the bombastic claims that went viral. I have openly considered both and watched as idiots accepts claims as truth and simultaneously demand proof to consider any alternative explanation, even one that fits BETTER.
Investigating and arresting are two totally different things. There was no cause for arrest here, full stop. It was stupidity.
Because you said so. Because they claimed so. You don't know what evidence the school and police have because the family has not allowed it to be released.