AURORA | Aurora police didn’t violate the law when they stopped 25 cars and detained dozens during a search for bank robbery suspect in June, a federal judge has ruled.
The June traffic stop at East Iliff Avenue and South Buckley Road sparked a firestorm from critics who said police violated the rights of innocent motorists by ordering them out their cars at gunpoint at a busy intersection. Court documents said police stopped the cars because a GPS tracker in showed the robber was in one of the cars.
Christian Paetsch was arrested on bank robbery charges during the traffic stop and his lawyer argued that because the stop was unconstitutional, the bulk of the evidence against Paetsch — including money stolen from the bank, a disguise and two pistols — should be tossed.
But in a 30-page ruling handed down Tuesday, United States District Court Judge William J. Martinez said that while the stop was out of the ordinary, police acted appropriately.
Martinez said some statements Paetsch made to police about the guns in his car won’t be allowed at trial because the officers improperly questioned him after he asked for a lawyer. But the guns themselves, which police found when they searched Paetsch’s SUV, will be allowed as evidence.
Paetsch’s trial is scheduled for December.
Federal prosecutors said Paetsch, a former music teacher, robbed the Wells Fargo Bank at East Hampden Avenue and South Chambers Road a day after a banker there refused to renegotiate his loan.
I hope this goes higher up in the courts. Its a pretty blatant violation of our god given constitutional rights. I have a great deal of respect for the police, but they failed to uphold their oath here.
Technically, that’d be your constitutional “founding-father” given rights. Please make sure to use the correct modifiers in a sentence.
Actually, no. We have these rights because we are human beings. They are given to us by our Creator, whoever or whatever you believe that to be. The Constitution merely recognizes those rights. It does not grant or define them. Of course, it is up to us to stand up to rogue cops and demented judges to protect these rights.
Their “rights” you refer to were ruled by a Federal Judge to be not violated. Therefore, without a violation, they didn’t go against their “oath”. The court rules they did nothing wrong yet you argue they still did? That ruling is pretty close to the equivalent of a not-guilty verdict.
Judges get these things wrong all the time. That is why we have a slew of appeals courts and a Supreme Court.