DENVER – The ACLU of Colorado announced today that it will represent Ryan and Benjamin Brown, two African-American men who were pulled over, removed from their vehicle, handcuffed, searched and detained by Colorado Springs police over an apparent cracked windshield. Benjamin Brown, the driver, was ordered by police to exit the vehicle at taser-point, immediately handcuffed, searched, held in the back of a police car, and finally issued a citation for an obstructed view.  Ryan Brown, the passenger, who recorded the interaction on his phone, was dragged from the car, held at gunpoint, and now faces a criminal charge for “interfering with official police duties.”

“What Ryan and Benjamin Brown experienced at the hands of the Colorado Springs police is sadly all too familiar for young people of color,” said ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Mark Silverstein.  “No reasonable person could watch the video recording of the traffic stop and say that two white men would have been treated the same way.”

The two brothers were within a block of their home when they were stopped.  Shortly after pulling the car over, an officer opened the driver’s door and, pointing his taser at Benjamin, demanded that he exit the vehicle.   The officers immediately handcuffed, searched, and then detained him in the back of a police vehicle, even though he had been fully cooperative, no weapons or contraband were found, and there was no evidence to suggest that he had been involved in any criminal activity.

As his brother was being removed from the car, Ryan Brown began recording the scene on his phone. His repeated requests for the officers to identify the reason for the traffic stop were ignored, despite official Colorado Springs Police Department policy that instructs officers to begin each interaction by advising drivers of what prompted the stop.  The video recording catches a quick glimpse of an officer approaching the passenger-side door with a gun raised in a shooting position.  Officers worked together to force Ryan from his car, push him to the ground, face down in the snow, search him, and cuff him, all the while at gunpoint.

When dragging Ryan out of the car, officers are heard saying he is not under arrest and that they were just checking him for weapons.  No weapons were found.  Officers took Ryan’s phone, turned off the video, and threw it in the snow.

Benjamin Brown, who was watching from the back of the police car, feared that his brother was about to be shot.  “It seemed like forever,” said Benjamin.  “I was scared that the officer was going to pull the trigger.”

“From the beginning, it was the officers, not the two young men, whose outrageous and unlawful actions caused the situation to escalate,” said ACLU of Colorado cooperating attorney Dan Recht of Recht Kornfeld PC, who will represent the Browns in Colorado Springs Municipal Court. “Ryan Brown has been charged with obstructing justice, but, as the video clearly shows, he acted calmly and like a gentleman, even in the face of an unjust stop. There was no justice for him to obstruct.”

The ACLU encourages people to record their interactions with police.  This summer, the ACLU of Colorado will launch Mobile Justice, a free smartphone app that allows people to record video that automatically uploads to the ACLU, preventing law enforcement from deleting or destroying it.

The ACLU has also actively supported HB 1290, the first legislation in the country to affirmatively declare a right to record police officers.  The bill passed both chambers of the state legislature, and is expected to be signed into law by the Governor.

more on this case

The long awaited Aurora theater shooting trial began this week.  This is a death penalty trial and is expected to last four to five months.  I was able to attend the opening statements, which can only be described as heart wrenching.  They were a preview for what is to come over these months and I believe represent a strong argument against the death penalty.
As the prosecution started the day with their opening statement, they described in detail the events that took place in the movie theater on July 20, 2012.  They played audio of 911 calls, shared the names of many of the victims and showed graphic images of injuries to the jury.  Many people in the courtroom were moved to tears, especially the victims as they were finally, after nearly three years, forced to relive this night.
The defense’s opening statement painted a different tragedy, that of severe mental illness.  It was distressing to think of an individual succumbing to schizophrenia and what that disease does to the mind.
Opening statements also brought out facts and information that were unknown to the public until now.  Details of the tragedy and events leading up to it as well as information about the defendant’s actions directly after the shooting took place.  These details truly bring the horror of the theater shooting back to life and while it fills in the blanks for a lot of the public and victims involved, it also forces people to relive the whole tragedy over again.
If the defendant is eventually found guilty, the trial will then move into the sentencing phase.  After this, if he is sentenced to death, many people think that will finally mean closure for the victims and community.  In reality, it is the opposite.
As with all death penalty cases, the defendant is entitled to appeals, these are in place because the punishment cannot be reversed once it is carried out.  These appeals mean that victims, family members and the community will be forced to relive the details of this crime over again.  The emotional turmoil of hearing about the case and the defendant’s name will continue for years to come.  After just a few days of listening to testimony about that night, I can’t imagine having to go through this for the duration of the trial, let alone know that that is not the end.
This is a fundamental problem with the death penalty.  Ultimately it does not provide closure and does not allow victims to heal.  More and more victims and their family members are coming out against the death penalty for this very reason.
Last year in Colorado, Bob Autobee pleaded with the District Attorney not to seek death for his son’s killer, and ended up protesting outside of jury selection for the trial.  Eventually he was joined by several other family members of murder victims who also don’t believe in the death penalty.
More recently in Boston, as the trial for the Boston bomber entered the sentencing phase, several victims and family members publicly stated their opposition to the death penalty, arguing that they were ready for it all to be over.  Ultimately the death penalty would not provide them closure.
The false promise that vengeance is justice just perpetuates the broken death penalty system.  In reality, murdering the murderer will not bring anyone back and the prolonged capital punishment process just elongates the nightmare for victims, family members and the community.

4/17/2015
DENVER – The American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado issued the following statement today on SB 268, the “Personhood” bill introduced in the Colorado State Senate on April 14:
“The ACLU of Colorado strongly opposes Senate Bill 268, the latest in a long line of attempts to change Colorado’s laws to establish legal personhood at conception.
“Colorado voters and legislators have repeatedly recognized the dangerous consequences of defining a fertilized egg as a person and have summarily rejected all previous “personhood” initiatives, even those cloaked in deceptive language and intentions.
“We extend our deepest sympathies to Michelle Wilkins and her family.  What she experienced was tragic and horrifying.  But her personal tragedy should not be used to push an unnecessary statute or an extreme political agenda.
“Colorado’s Crimes Against Pregnant Women Act was carefully crafted and enacted by the legislature for exactly this type of case.  It provides for severe criminal penalties against offenders who wrongfully harm a woman and cause her to lose a pregnancy, and it does so without interfering with reproductive rights. In this case, the alleged perpetrator has been charged with multiple felonies and faces a sentence of more than 100 years in prison.
“SB 268 contains language that is ambiguous and unclear.  If it were passed, it would ultimately be up to the courts to decide the true scope of the law and its effects on reproductive health and the rights of women.  The one thing that is clear is that this bill aims to permanently alter our laws to grant legal personhood at conception, a perilous legal precedent that would open a Pandora’s box of dangerous consequences, both intended and unintended, for Colorado women and their families.”