A jury will weigh whether Denver police have a practice of arresting people who record them. The law used in that arrest has since been rewritten

A jury will decide whether Denver has a widespread practice of arresting people who record or criticize police officers in public, after a federal judge let a man's lawsuit against the city go to trial, Colorado Politics reported on Friday.

The case grew out of a June 2022 traffic stop in Lower Downtown around 2 a.m. According to the ruling as described by Colorado Politics, a man walking by began recording and shouting at two officers during a "high-risk" stop and repeatedly asked one officer for his name and badge number. Officers arrested him for interference under the city's municipal code and took his phone. He completed a deferred prosecution agreement, and the charge was dismissed. He then sued the officers and the city. (We are not naming him; he is a private resident.)

In a Sept. 16 order, U.S. District Chief Judge Regina M. Rodriguez found the individual officers were protected by qualified immunity. But she ruled that the evidence, including other cases the man cited of Denver officers arresting people who were recording or criticizing police, was enough for a jury to consider whether the city's own practices were behind the alleged violations. She also sent his unlawful arrest and search claims to trial. The city's attorneys argued the man was too close to a dangerous stop and was distracting officers while an unsecured gun was in the car. These are allegations; no jury has ruled.

Why it matters: if a jury finds a citywide practice, the city itself, not just individual officers, can be held liable. Settlements and judgments are paid from city money and approved by the Council.

What our records add: the ordinance has changed

The man was arrested under Denver's old Section 38-31, "Interference with police authority," which made it unlawful to "in any way" interfere with or hinder an officer doing their job. That language no longer exists.

The Council rewrote it this summer as part of Council Bill 26-0328, a broad overhaul of penalties for city crimes sponsored by Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez, Sarah Parady and Shontel Lewis. According to the amended bill text, Section 38-31 is now titled "Obstructing a peace officer" and requires that a person use or threaten "violence, force, physical interference, or an obstacle" to knowingly obstruct an officer. It adds a line saying a person "shall not be charged" under the section for staying silent or for stating verbal opposition to an order. Failing to obey a lawful order that hinders an officer remains a lesser offense.

At the April 15 Health and Safety Committee, the sponsors described the change as aligning the city's interference ordinance with the state's obstructing-a-peace-officer statute. They said the bill was about sentencing and did not remove or add crimes.

The vote. The Council passed 26-0328 on June 29, 9-4, after a public hearing (meeting, roll call):

• Yes (9): Flor Alvidrez, Stacie Gilmore, Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez, Paul Kashmann, Shontel Lewis, Sarah Parady, Diana Romero Campbell, Jamie Torres, Amanda Sandoval
• No (4): Kevin Flynn, Chris Hinds, Amanda Sawyer, Darrell Watson

Mayor Mike Johnston signed it July 1. Most sections took effect 60 days after publication. The lawsuit concerns the 2022 arrest, so it is judged under the law as it stood then.

A police settlement on Monday's agenda. Separately, the Council's Nov. 2 agenda includes 26-1655, a $65,000 payment to settle a lawsuit involving the Denver Police Department. The resolution does not describe the claims.

What's next

• Trial: The case is in U.S. District Court in Denver. Colorado Politics did not report a trial date.
• Nov. 2, 3:30 p.m.: The $65,000 settlement is on the Council agenda.
• Sentencing working group: 26-0328 also created a group to recommend further changes for the Council to consider, Denverite reported.