Lawyers for the City of Aurora and one of its police officers on Wednesday told a federal judge that a subpar investigation may have wrongfully sent a man to jail, but there was no clear constitutional violation and no evidence of racial bias.

The civil lawsuit from Darren Rucker, of Parker, features more than one dozen claims against multiple defendants stemming from Rucker’s August 2018 arrest, which was based on a mistaken belief that he had stolen a large roll of synthetic grass from an Aurora warehouse. Rucker claimed that had one of the defendants, Officer Paul Seiwald, used his common sense during the course of the investigation, he would have discovered the error before ever obtaining an arrest warrant for Rucker.

U.S. District Court Judge Daniel D. Domenico alternated between expressing sympathy for Rucker and openly doubting whether Seiwald was obligated to investigate further because witness statements, albeit erroneous ones, had established probable cause of a crime.

“Your client may have made a small mistake, but of everybody involved he seemed to me to have made the smallest mistake and paid a fairly significant price for it,” Domenico told Rucker’s lawyer. “On the other hand – and I don’t necessarily disagree with you about using common sense – but I’m not sure that’s the legal standard.”

Aurora and Seiwald have moved to dismiss the claims against them. At a hearing on the motions, Domenico, unprompted, wondered how he should account for Aurora’s recent entry into a consent agreement with the state, after the Colorado Attorney General’s Office issued a report documenting patterns of bias and excessive force in the city’s policing.

As part of his lawsuit, Rucker, who is Black, alleges that Aurora police disproportionately issued arrest warrants for Black suspects in the years preceding his arrest, and Seiwald personally arrested a large proportion of Black people. Rucker’s theory was that his race, in Seiwald’s eyes, made him presumably guilty and discouraged the officer from investigating the theft allegations further.

The city responded that statistics alone cannot sustain Rucker’s allegations of racial bias, and the attorney general’s report should play no role in the case because it came about after Rucker’s arrest.

“I guess my point is not so much that it somehow would be conclusive evidence or would be used to directly say, ‘This shows that in this case there was illegal discriminatory activity’,” Domenico clarified. With the consent decree, “the city and the attorney general are saying this, in general, has happened in the past.”

George Farmer, the attorney for Rucker, admitted that even though his client was alleging racial bias in Aurora policing, he was unfamiliar with the city’s consent agreement and was “at a loss here today to be able to respond.”

In his lawsuit, Rucker described how he placed an order online in July 2018 for a roll of synthetic grass. He used a company called Majestic Turf, which in turn instructed Rucker to visit Xpress Global Systems’ warehouse in Aurora to retrieve the turf.

When he showed up with a friend, Karina Padilla took Rucker’s driver license, among other documentation, and processed his order. Padilla had Rucker sign a purchase form, which incorrectly listed an order for another customer, Turf Pros Solution. Neither party reportedly noticed the mistake, and Rucker picked up his turf roll and then left.

According to Seiwald’s police report, an employee with Turf Pros Solution reported that someone had taken their artificial turf from the Aurora warehouse. Upon his arrival, Seiwald spoke with Padilla, who said Rucker had claimed the turf roll and “told her it was for Turf Pros Solution.” 

“Rucker did not have an address in the city and left no phone number. Rucker did have a valid (driver license), but no history in which to obtain a phone number,” Seiwald wrote. “With no way to contact Rucker I will apply for a warrant.”

On Aug. 4, 2018, police arrested Rucker while he was driving with his daughter in Morrison. They booked him into the Jefferson County jail. Prosecutors later dropped the charges against him.

Rucker sued Xpress Global Systems and Turf Pros Solution for negligence, malicious prosecution and emotional distress due to the companies’ false statements that led to his arrest. Against Seiwald, Rucker alleged an infringement on his due process rights. He also claimed Aurora failed to train or supervise its officers.

“I understand this may not have been the best investigation that was ever done, but it was certainly sufficient to meet the probable cause standard,” Julia A. Bannon of the Aurora City Attorney’s Office told Domenico.

Seiwald argued that he was entitled to qualified immunity, which shields government employees from civil lawsuits unless they violate a person’s clearly-established legal right. While the intent of qualified immunity is to protect officers who act reasonably, courts in practice require there to be prior cases under very similar circumstances in order to label a right as clearly-established.

Rucker alleged that if Seiwald had even attempted to contact him, the officer could have realized he had no probable cause to believe a crime was committed. But Seiwald’s attorney, Jonathan Eddy, said his client acted reasonably by relying on the statements of witnesses, and courts had never said otherwise.

“There’s no requirement that an officer seek out the accused party or get his side of the story or seek out any exculpatory evidence to establish probable cause,” Eddy told Domenico.

Farmer attempted to show that Seiwald lacked probable cause for an arrest warrant because the facts, in his view, simply did not make sense. That Rucker provided his real driver license while allegedly trying to steal a piece of turf valued at over $1,500 and also had a receipt for the merchandise should have tipped off Seiwald that something was amiss.

“At that point in time he should have called Rucker,” said Farmer. “Not to get rid of any possibility of guilt. He needs to call Rucker to find out what the story was.”

“In a lot of ways I agree with you,” Domenico responded. “But an officer’s told, ‘Hey, this guy came and took someone else’s roll and lied about it’. … Isn’t that itself probable cause?”

Domenico appeared to concur with the defendants that general arrest statistics broken down by race were insufficient to prove racial bias against Rucker, and that Seiwald had no obligation to explore whether Rucker was innocent of any crime before pursuing a warrant. But the judge acknowledged that it may be an “open question” whether Seiwald had information at the time suggesting the missing turf roll was a clerical mistake and not a theft.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Domenico indicated he would decide whether to solicit further written arguments from the parties about the role that Aurora’s consent decree should play in his decision. Otherwise, he would address the motions to dismiss as they stand.

The case is Rucker et al. v. City of Aurora et al.