The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old June 5, 2012, 11:18 AM   #1
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,745
Aurora Colorado mass stop

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/headline...r-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
geetarman is online now  
Old June 5, 2012, 11:28 AM   #2
aarondhgraham
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2009
Location: Stillwater, OKlahoma
Posts: 7,075
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.

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

Aarond

.
__________________
Caje: The coward dies a thousand times, the brave only once.
Kirby: That's about all it takes, ain't it?
Combat: "A Silent Cry"
Aarond is good,,, Aarond is wise,,, Always trust Aarond! (most of the time)
aarondhgraham is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 11:38 AM   #3
icedog88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 737
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 bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
icedog88 is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 11:41 AM   #4
Wyoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,254
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!
__________________
Go Pokes!
Go Rams!
Wyoredman is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 11:42 AM   #5
KenL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 137
We don't call it "Saudi Aurora" for nothin'!!
KenL is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 12:59 PM   #6
Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 3,650
If they did that in Aurora, imagine what they'd do in Commerce City!

__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 04:20 PM   #7
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
The police response is that it was an unusual circumstance requiring an unusual response
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)
oneounceload is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 05:15 PM   #8
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,346
Does the actual criminal have a case for tossing out the 'evidence' due to no 'articulable reason' for the stop/search?
Salmoneye is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 05:34 PM   #9
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 7,573
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.
__________________
Jim's Rules of Carry: 1. Any gun is better than no gun. 2. A gun that is reliable is better than a gun that is not. 3. A hole in the right place is better than a hole in the wrong place. 4. A bigger hole is a better hole.
KyJim is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 06:37 PM   #10
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,368
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 by Aguila Blanca; June 6, 2012 at 04:44 PM. Reason: Typo
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 08:44 PM   #11
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
They were both semi-autos, so no .44 Magnums involved.)
Desert Eagles and Auto Mags notwithstanding?........
oneounceload is offline  
Old June 5, 2012, 09:39 PM   #12
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,368
Quote:
Desert Eagles and Auto Mags notwithstanding?.......
T'warn't neither one o' them ...
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 07:58 AM   #13
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
They would have to have a carved in stone 100% reliable informant that could place the guy at that interesction at that moment. IMO.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 09:01 AM   #14
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
They would have to have a carved in stone 100% reliable informant that could place the guy at that interesction at that moment. IMO.
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
geetarman is online now  
Old June 6, 2012, 09:16 AM   #15
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
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.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 09:40 AM   #16
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
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.
Thanks for the response. I am sure this incident is going to undergo much scrutiny.

Geetarman
geetarman is online now  
Old June 6, 2012, 09:44 AM   #17
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
@ 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.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 10:21 AM   #18
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
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.
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 is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 11:27 AM   #19
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
@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".
Patriot86 is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 11:52 AM   #20
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,346
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...
Salmoneye is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 02:45 PM   #21
Ronbert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2009
Location: Ft. Collins, CO.
Posts: 398
I didn't follow it closely on the local news so I might have errors but.... I understand the suspect was somehow pursued to that intersection.

And I gather that when the intersection was locked down, people were ordered out of their cars AT GUNPOINT, handcuffed en masse, and waited for hours. That is not the time to object on any grounds at all - especially when looking down the cop's gun muzzle. The cop mindset at the time would make it a bad time to be legally carrying concealed.

I hope the court cases move swiftly and decisively against the City of Aurora.
Ronbert is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 03:33 PM   #22
JustThisGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Posts: 311
I've been following this and it seems that the police did make an arrest in the last car they searched, which had 2 handguns in it. However these were apparently unrelated to the bank robbery.

The Chief of Police conducted a TV interview in which he praised his officers for their quick thinking and innovative policing tactics (if by innovative he means completely illegal). He prominently mentioned the arrest, and lead reporters to believe that the arrested person was the bank robber (but there is no proof that the arrested person was the bank robber {no money, just guns}).

More below...

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/10...n-intersection
http://my.firedoglake.com/mason/2012...ook-aurora-co/

This looks like it was a clear violation of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in City of Indianapolis v. Edmund, 513 U.S. 32 (2000)
__________________
JustThisGuy

Mediocrity dominates over excellence in all things... except excellence.

Last edited by JustThisGuy; June 6, 2012 at 03:45 PM.
JustThisGuy is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 04:49 PM   #23
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,368
Yes, I saw an interview with the chief of police, and the impression I had from his statements was very clearly that they had arrested the bank robber.

Further, I believe they knew at least that the robber was male, yet they pulled women out of their cars and handcuffed them.

I think Aurora, CO, is going to be needing some very deep pockets.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 04:52 PM   #24
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
Patriot - I am in complete agreement - I would have liked to see the public revolt against the police and handcuff them to their own police cars, but I am a bit of an anarchist in that regard

As a Libertarian, I abhor the way LE at every level violates everyones' rights "in the name of safety"
oneounceload is offline  
Old June 6, 2012, 06:03 PM   #25
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
Women can kill you too. A cop my father worked with back in the day was killed in an incident where the intial approach was made, a woman driving. In the back of the van was armed robbers, who promptly exited the van and killed my fathers friend and another cop.

From the odmp website.

The truck was stopped at a roadblock manned by several Nyack officers.

One of the female occupants in the cab of the truck told the officers their guns were making her nervous. Thinking they had stopped the wrong truck, the officers began to holster their weapons. Almost immediately afterwards several of the heavily armed men exited the back of the truck and opened fire with automatic weapons, fatally wounding Officer Brown and Sergeant O'Grady.

Read more: http://www.odmp.org/officer/10136-se...#ixzz1x3bbcq14
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13384 seconds with 9 queries