Everyone of those folks need to hire an attorney and sue the city. This is an outrage. Are you with me Scoutmaster?
It’s the new American way...everybody is a suspect,everybody is guilty,everybody is a criminal.
Speaking of experiments, I recommend that everyone reading this thread should mention the Aurora motorist search to the nearest person under 30. Ask the young person if what the cops did was proper or not, and ask why. You may be surprised.
FROM THE COMMENTS SECTION AT THE LINK:
Yesterday, my wife and I were at Unique Thrift Store at Iliff and Buckley shopping. During that time, the Aurora Police responded to an apparent robbery of a bank. In the process of that response, the police stopped multiple vehicles by force, forcibly evicted individuals from their vehicles at gun point, handcuffed individuals, traumatized children and adults alike, all of whom, apart from one suspect, were innocent. In all this, there was NO probable cause, NO search warrant, etc. This whole ordeal was a blatant violation of the constitutional rights of every US citizen; it was illegal harassment, search and seizure, and temporary arrest on a mass scale. Is this now a police state in which we are living? What happened to our constitutional republic? Do those in charge at the Aurora Police Department believe they can act as vigilantes outside our republic’s constitutional law and legal framework? Using the excuse that they “felt they had no other choice” but to conduct such an operation if they were to catch the “bad guy” is NO EXCUSE AT ALL. In fact, to carry out the law (arrest the robber), the police themselves chose, quite intentionally it seems, to violate several laws, upon which this entire country is founded, themselves! That is outrageous, and the Aurora Police department should be up in arms over it! Do you folks want this country to be a police state, or do you prefer to see it remain the great country it has been since its founding? You are on the former course with such blatantly illegal and unconstitutional behavior on the part of your officers. This is a sad day for Aurora, Colorado, and for the United States when police officers feel they are above the law to carry out the law! I for one expect to see the Aurora Police Department sued left and right for violating the constitutional and other legal rights of those whom its officers illegally and wrongfully traumatized yesterday. It is my hope that those officers responsible for this fiasco face serious penalties and are held accountable to the public and the citizens of this state of Colorado and our United States over these events. It matters not to me, as a citizen, that the Aurora Police Department caught a suspect when the price of doing so was the mass violation of the law on the part of the officers involved. This is truly an example of where the end does NOT justify the means! I would gladly provide my contact information, and speak directly with those responsible for this mess, were it not for my sadly legitimate concern that there would be more vigilante action coming from the Aurora Police Department or its vigilante officers over my doing so! In fact, by conducting itself in this way, the Aurora Police Department has harmed its own reputation with the public in Aurora and beyond in a very severe manner that will have repercussions for many years to come; yes, it IS that egregious. As a concerned citizen and committed Christian who cares, I pray that those in charge at the Aurora Police Department legally and constitutionally address this “wickedness” and vigilantism in the ranks and clean house.
Video here, showing people cuffed on ground (and no bystanders emitting a peep of protest).
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/06/02/aurora-police-detain-person-of-interest-in-bank-robbery/
You can certainly argue with this, but I think the operative item was: “Immediately following the robbery, police closed the intersection of Iliff and Buckley after reports the suspect might have taken hostages.”
If the officers were polite, and explained why they were handcuffing all the adults, then I think they at least had a good excuse for what they were doing. They likely didn’t have enough officers to watch and question all the cars’ occupants at once, and if they didn’t do something like this, they risked having a hostage killed.
Ordinarily, I would be mad as hell if this happened to me. But I would put up with it if it was explained that innocent hostages might otherwise die before they had a chance to search the cars and question everyone.
And if they refused to consent to a search? Did the cops do it anyway? Has the constitution now been replaced by the Walls Fargo stock certificate? Do these fascist "cops" realize that Wells Fargo has insurance, and will survive if the money isn't found, but that our Bill of Rights IS our insurance against tyranny? Any officer who did this should be fired.
I would not react well to this Hitler/Stalin thing.
Golly, I sure hope I’m never “a person of interest”.
Rape of Liberty ping
In the short term the police pulled fascist tactics in broad daylight with armor and rifles while stunned citizens complied and watched and filmed with cameras.
In the long run this will go viral as we’ve crossed another line in the sand and this dept is going to face lawsuits and hearings, not to mention informing more citizens to prepare for such un-Constitutional infringements.
Another question for law enforcement. Locally we had a hostage situation in a downtown area in an office building. Several of the SWAT team operators had their trusty AR rifles with fancy Eotech sites which cost a bundle. Just like this situation. Why are rifles being used in urban settings, firing the 5.56mm which can over-penetrate cars, walls just like many rifles? What happened to the trusty submachine gun like the H&K MP-5 favorite or shotguns for these situations? Unless all the ammo is frangible rounds you are putting innocent bystanders and public at risk.
Ladies and Gentlemen, if you are tired of the excesses of today’s law enforcement, the disregard for the Constitution, and the very rational fear that the police are becoming militarized, please consider this.
This has all come about because of the government’s zeal to prosecute the drug war at the behest of it’s law-abiding citizens.
The drug war has been going full swing since 1972 and has been responsible for more challenges to the 4th, 5th, and 2nd amendment than any other source. Police are CONSTANTLY looking for narcotics, gangmembers, and guns. It’s the mantra of every police department because it provides statistics that they can provide city councils to justify their actions and their need for more toys, overtime, etc.
At some point, you are going to have to make a choice. Allow the drug war to continue, with the continued assault on liberties, and the further militarization of the police, or demand an end of the drug war and the restoration of the Constitution. It is far better to provide all the free narcotics a user can do, than continue with the nightly body count and the expansion of out of control government enforcement.
FWIW, I do not call citizens, “civilians”, have been a drug warrior, am convinced that the fed has nefarious plans for all police officers, and the license I have on the wall still says Peace Officer.
handicuffed all the adults?......this is insanity....this can be allowed without a fight...
Its been a well known fact here at FR that all the police in Colorado are thugs, since around late ‘98 or so.
We’ve had numerous threads about the brutality and violation of rights in Denver and its suburbs.
They won’t be happy until everyone is shooting police on sight it seems. I’d hate to be a cop in any town where they’re as hated as in Denver.
A simple phrase given to me by a lawyer friend of mine...pro bono...I did have to spring for lunch though...
“I do NOT consent to a search of my vehicle or person, am I free to go?”
Remember everything you and the law enforcement officer say is being recorded, by audio and video sometimes...
I would never answer a question like: “Do you mind if Itake a look in your vehicle?”, without using that exact statement I mentioned above...Never utter the words “Yes, or No” in response...
Yes can be interpreted as consent, or agreeing to the serch...And they can cut that very word out of a sentense you use in a court of law...
Stating “No” an also be used against you, as you just answered “No, I do not mind you taking a look in my vehicle.”
It take a little practice to get the response down,but your point should be understood by the person presenting you with the “option”...
Of course, you may feel bad about all the time they will be spending on you trying to get a judge to issue a warrant for a search of you and your property, and the real bad guys will probably get away...
But YOU did not instigate the encounter, nor are you likely to have committed a crime to warran such a fishing expedition...
I have the upmost respect for the Law Enforcement community, they have to put up with a lot of crap from us civilians...And it pains me to see them get killed for doing their jobs...
But until the nonsense and bad administrative policies stop bringing this contentuous, derived, and decisive atmosphere to the country and its law-abiding citizenry...
You need to know what to say, and how to say it to keep your rights and dignity intact...
The bottom line is you may very well have to take the ride for taking such a prinicnpled and legal stance against this abuse of power, but hey, when you walk out, you will know you were right all along...Because in the end it’ll hurt them more than it hurts you...
Unless you have to share a holding cell with Rufus, or Bubba or even Danny (a.k.a.-Daniella)...;-)
Also remember you have nothign to hide, but YOU have everything to protect...
Ah, yes, that sewer pit of a city I grew up in. Left there in '79 and haven't missed it for a nano-second.
This event sounds exactly like an active shooter event where everyone runs out of the building with their hands up. We know someone in the group is the shooter, but who is it? Obviously everyone must be detained until we determine the answer. In this case we have an armed bank robber who pointed his gun at customers and employees and then ended up among a large group of motorists. Police did the same thing they would have done for the active shooter scenario, and IMHO they did it right - got the guy out of the last car. Here are a couple of articles with more information about what really happened, without the emotional substances included:
http://kwgn.com/2012/06/04/armed-bank-robbery-caught-on-camera/
http://kdvr.com/2012/06/02/aurora-police-searching-for-bank-robbery-suspect/
One thing I haven’t seen in this thread is a recommendation for what the police should have done. So let’s try a little exercise. You’re the cop on the scene and you know that somewhere among this group of motorists at the stoplight, there is an armed robber who just held up a bank. The longer you wait to take action, the more nervous he will become until finally he will jump out of his car and start shooting wildly in all directions. What do you do? Time starts now - GO!
Chief defends detaining 40 during Aurora bank robber hunt
AURORA | Aurora police Chief Dan Oates today defended the department’s decision to stop almost 20 cars and detain 40 people Saturday during a search for a pistol-wielding bank robber.
Oates said the operation, which included handcuffing all the men and some women, was unusual, but necessary.
“We had a virtual certainty that the bank robber was in one of those cars,” Oates said.
Officers did find the suspect in one of the cars, and he will likely face bank robbery charges in federal court, Oates said. Investigators also found a beekeeper mask they say the man wore during the robbery as well as two pistols connected to the crime, he said.
The United States Attorney’s Office in Denver identified the man this evening as Christian Paetsch, 45. He was charged today with armed bank robbery and using a gun during a crime of violence, prosecutors said.
Oates said Paetsch was from Centennial and had one misdemeanor arrest on his record.
The incident started around 3:50 p.m. Saturday when police say the robber barged into a Wells Fargo Bank at East Hampden Avenue and South Chambers Road and pointed a gun several people in the bank.
The robber, who was wearing a mask that covered virtually all of their face, then fled the area.
Oates said officers determined that the robber had to be in one of 19 vehicles headed east on East Iliff Avenue near South Buckley Road at about 4:20 p.m. The intersection is about two miles northeast of the bank.
Oates declined to say exactly how officers knew the suspect was going to pass through the intersection, but stressed that investigators were certain he would.
Officers didn’t have details about the suspect’s appearance, including gender and race, so they stopped every car, Oates said.
The operation lasted more than two hours and Oates said officers searched just the one car where they found the mask, guns and suspect.
Oates said “investigative detentions” like the one Saturday are very rare, but allowable under the law.
None of the 40 people detained have lodged complaints, Oates said, but the department has heard complaints form other people who weren’t involved in the stops.
Oates apologized for the inconvenience the operation imposed on people, but said it was needed to catch a dangerous bank robber.
“No question we inconvenienced citizens, and I feel badly about that,” Oates said.
The operation will be reviewed, Oates said, but he stands by the lieutenant who ordered it.
“I can’t find fault with the decisions that were made,” he said.
http://www.aurorasentinel.com/news/chief-defends-detaining-40-during-bank-robber-hunt/
bmfl