Aurora Colorado mass stop

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

geetarman

New member
It seems their was a bank robbery in Aurora, Colorado and an anonymous tip phoned into police, indicated the perp was in a car at an intersection.

Here is a link to the story.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlin...lt-at-intersection-in-search-for-bank-robber/

The police proceeded to stop every car at the intersection and handcuff the occupants while they searched for the perp.

According to the report, they did find the person/s responsible and charged the person/s.

Question for the attorneys here and LEOs.

What happened to the Fourth Amendment here? Was this a good stop or has the city opened the gate to a bunch of lawsuits?

The police response is that it was an unusual circumstance requiring an unusual response.

When something similar happens, do we throw a bunch of people into the pool of the great unwashed and keep everyone in custody in hopes of catching the bad guys?

I am really disturbed by what seems to be a very casual disregard of the Bill of Rights.

Opinions please.

Geetarman:(
 
Why am I never one of these people?,,,

I need a deep pocket lawsuit,,,
I have student loans to pay off here.

Typical "end justifying the means" scenario.

The actions of the police have been met with some criticism, but Fania said this was a unique situation that required an unusual response.
“It’s hard to say what normal is in a situation like this when you haven’t dealt with a situation like this,” Fania said. “The result of the whole ordeal is that it paid off. We have arrested and charged a suspect.”
Click to expand...

So in his opinion any "unusual situation",,,
Justifies throwing the Bill of Rights out the door.

Aarond

.
 
I am pretty sure there will be lawsuits regardless if the city says it was justified or not. Detaining everyone and cuffing them is a disturbing precedent to set IMO.
 
The spokesman stated "... we didn't have a description, ...". It sounds like anyone who was at that intersection and had a firearm in the vehicle would have been considered a bank robbery suspect!

I think this is going to get bad. Outrageous. I just hope that some has the guts to file a lawsuit!
 
The police response is that it was an unusual circumstance requiring an unusual response
Click to expand...

This is the typical response whenever they really can't justify breaking the law or violating the Constitution - and then it becomes their justification for more intrusions (like drones, red light cameras, etc)
 
Does the actual criminal have a case for tossing out the 'evidence' due to no 'articulable reason' for the stop/search?
 
The stop itself might pass muster but handcuffing everyone is over the line. If the robber really consented to the search, then the seized evidence would probably come in. If not, the evidence would be tossed out since the police obviously had no probable cause to believe that particular car was the one.

I really couldn't believe 19 people would consent to have their cars searched but, after thinking about it for a minute, realized that this is what sheeple do.
 
I don't think it makes any difference whatsoever that the police didn't have a description. The basic rule established by the Supreme Court of the United States in Terry v. Ohio was (and still is) that in order to detain a suspect (which placing someone in handcuffs certainly is) requires that the officer(s) have "a reasonable suspicion based on clearly articulable facts that the suspect has committed a crime, is committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime."

The fact that a bank was robbed and I happened to be driving on Main Street a few minutes after the robbery does not IMHO appear to provide any clearly articulable basis for suspecting that I committed the crime. I think (and I devoutly hope) the police department is looking at a number of lawsuits for unlawful restraint and violation of civil rights under color of law.

But maybe it was justified, since the suspect was armed with "high-powered" handguns. Those are much worse than regular handguns, of course. (What IS a "High-powered" handgun, anyway? They were both semi-autos, so no .44 Magnums involved.)
 
Last edited:
They would have to have a carved in stone 100% reliable informant that could place the guy at that interesction at that moment. IMO.
 
They would have to have a carved in stone 100% reliable informant that could place the guy at that interesction at that moment. IMO.
Click to expand...

So, what would you have done had you been an officer on scene?

Please understand I am not being critical, I am really interested in what you would have done if you had received a radio call to shut down the intersection and do the mass stop the police in Aurora did.

Geetarman:(
 
I would have called in for more details, and if I was told that there was reliable information that an armed robber was at that red light, at that moment, I would act on that information. I am not sure what took 2 hours, or what information they had in front of them, but it's not something you can ignore.

I understand the thought of detaining every person at an intersection for 2 hours sounds bad, and may end up being a bad search after judicial review, but I don't see how they could ignore information about an armed robber being at that location.

I had a similar situation a few weeks ago, guy calls up and says his daughter is sending him text messages that she has been kidnapped. She tells him via text that she is riding around somewhere on Rte. 202 in a Jeep with one white guy and one black guy. I find a Jeep with one white guy, one black guy, stop it, and ta da, she is in the back seat. There was more to the story after the fact that came out, like she is a hooker and was supposed to be paid in cocaine fo riding around and having sex with these two guys. The cocaine was in the car and the two guys freely admitted they bought the coke to give her for sex. She was worried because they had been riding around for over an hour, no coke and no sex. But it came in as a kidnapping.
 
I would have called in for more details, and if I was told that there was reliable information that an armed robber was at that red light, at that moment, I would act on that information. I am not sure what took 2 hours, or what information they had in front of them, but it's not something you can ignore.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. I am sure this incident is going to undergo much scrutiny.

Geetarman:D
 
@ Conn Trooper, in your case you had a somewhat specific description. A jeep with one white guy and one black guy in it. I imagine those are rare. Maybe 1 in 100 or 1 in 1000 jeeps on the road on Rte. 202.
You had a location, description of the suspects and the type of car they were driving.


In this case there was no description perhaps other than a male suspect, no car type, color etc simply HE WILL BE THERE. I ask how would you feel if you were in a mall and someone stole some Jewelry. Without a description beyond male, they handcuffed every male in the mall until the bad guy was found? I imagine you would be none too happy.

If it had been even a vague description of the man or his car: E: Young white male, 50 year old black male, white male driving a black car I would be a bit more understanding.

If memory serves It was in the 80's here in Chicago, Police Officers would take sniper fire from giant public housing buildings (more compelling than the evidence of criminal presence than in this case) then go in and sweep the whole building. In the end every single illegal item the cops turned up was typically thrown out in court and few if any charged because the courts found the cops did not have proof which specific apartment/s the fire was coming from.

IMO The police cannot simply detain every single individual in a fully public location (a road) because they have a tip a bad guy is there. The handcuffing part is excessive, as a good citizen knowing I have nothing to hide I would probably have just let the officers search my car so they can get on to finding the perp. But had I been handcuffed for no reason for two hours I imagine most of us would be pretty annoyed and probably be looking into legal action.
 
MO The police cannot simply detain every single individual in a fully public location (a road) because they have a tip a bad guy is there.
Click to expand...

Ah, but they are doing these things all over - especially in NYC where they claim "the right" to stop you for no reason, frisk you and question you - especially if you fit a few certain "profiles" - and then they trot out the guns, drugs, etc., and boast how safe the streets are

Seems that Ben Franklin comment ab out freedom and security needs to be drummed into the voters' heads before election time
 
@oneounceload: Just because they do does not make it right, we need a big civil rights pushback, maybe from the ACLU on this?
Let me re-phrase by saying: The police SHOULD NOT be able to do mass stops like this, or stop and frisk for that matter(not to get side tracked).

I do not know the law in Colorado but some states treat the car like an extension of the home, this case has implications that the police can enter your home, without a warrant, search your home, handcuff you simply because they think a criminal "is in the area".
 
Something just does not add up...

'Reliable' information that made them 'certain' that the robber was at that EXACT location, but no description whatsoever?


C'mon...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top