Arnoldo Bazan, name of company that bought his phone
Executive summary
The cellphone Arnoldo Bazan says was taken from him during an October arrest was tracked to a used-electronics vending kiosk — specifically to an ecoATM machine — according to reporting and a police report cited in coverage of the case [1] [2]. Multiple outlets describe Bazan using the Find My feature to locate his device at a vending-machine location near an ICE detention center, and police records referenced ecoATM as part of the recovery chain [1] [2].
1. The incident and Bazan’s attempt to trace the phone
Arnoldo Bazan, a 16-year-old U.S. citizen who recorded part of his encounter with immigration agents, says his phone was confiscated during the arrest and that he later used Apple’s Find My feature to locate it at a vending-machine site several miles away near an ICE detention facility, a detail reproduced across several outlets and in ProPublica’s reporting on the case [3] [1] [4]. Reporting also documents Bazan’s hospitalization after the incident and the family’s public statements about the confiscation and subsequent tracking effort [3] [1].
2. The vending kiosk and the name that appears in records
Local reporting and what the police report described to journalists name ecoATM — the automated kiosk company that buys used phones and tablets at mall and parking-lot machines — as the place tied to the device’s recovery; Conroe police said they would share information obtained from ecoATM with Houston police as part of the investigation [2]. Several outlets characterize the machine as a “used-electronics vending machine” or “vending kiosk,” and the police documentation explicitly mentions ecoATM in the context of tracing the phone [1] [2].
3. What the sources actually prove — and what they do not
Available reporting shows the phone’s signal was located at a vending-machine site and that police referenced ecoATM when describing the recovery process, but it does not provide a contemporaneous chain-of-custody log proving ICE agents themselves sold the device directly to ecoATM or that any specific ICE employee executed the transaction — those details remain alleged or inferred in media summaries [1] [2]. ProPublica’s broader coverage documented the confiscation and the family’s evidence, while local police reports and news outlets filled in the vending-machine recovery; DHS officials disputed aspects of the family’s account, and ICE spokespeople did not confirm selling the phone in public statements cited by outlets [3] [2].
4. Alternative accounts, official responses and investigative gaps
DHS authorities provided counter-statements disputing elements of the Bazans’ version of events, and local law enforcement indicated they would pursue information from the ecoATM operator to substantiate the theft allegation — a sign that the recovery chain involves third-party vendor records rather than internal ICE sales receipts [2] [3]. Media outlets have reproduced family claims that agents “sold” the phone at the kiosk, but those characterizations rest on the phone’s Find My ping and subsequent police contact with ecoATM rather than on a documented eyewitness account of an ICE agent making a cash sale to the kiosk [1] [2].
5. Why the ecoATM detail matters to the larger story
If a phone confiscated during an arrest turns up at a retail-for-cash kiosk such as ecoATM, it raises questions about evidence handling and potential theft that are distinct from the use-of-force allegations at the heart of the case; police interest in ecoATM records signals an attempt to trace the transaction and any identifying information for the seller, but public reports to date stop short of presenting final investigative findings or criminal charges tied directly to ICE personnel [2] [3]. Reporting thus establishes ecoATM as the company implicated in the phone’s recovery record, while leaving open who exactly sold the device and under what circumstances.