Here's my take, as a third year law student who is graduating in May and taking the bar in July. First off, I'm sorry this happened to you. From my experience, many attorneys, including prosecutors, don't think too highly of police. They often violate constitutional rights (even when investigating factually guilty criminals) which makes the prosecutor's job difficult. This is not legal advice, but just my take.

The police are able to conduct investigatory terry stops ( See Terry v. Ohio), which allows them to briefly stop someone if they have a reasonable articulable suspicion that the person has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime. Courts have determined the scope of what goes into reasonable articulable suspicion: an officer's training, geography (crime prone areas), time of day, the movements of vehicles or people that seem suspicious, etc. Courts often give wide latitude in what constitutes RAS, and if that bothers you, you aren't the only one. Now RAS standard is less than probable cause, but once they investigate you by invoking RAS, then they can use anything you say to establish PC and widen the scope of investigation (and detain you for longer).

In your situation, after reading the facts, the cops will chalk it up to a Terry stop. That their training said ... That this particular area is crime prone .... Etc. You get the idea. It doesn't make it right, but they know they can justify it. If you were to press with a Section 1983 claim (good luck getting an attorney to take that on), then maybe you'd get a concession or acknowledgement. Does your county have an office of professional accountability with whom you can file a complaint?

Again, sorry this happened to you.