On a Saturday morning in Aurora, more than a dozen audience members – mostly people of color – received a crash course in how to interact with police without compromising any constitutional protections.

The overarching message: You have the right to remain silent, and you should use it.

“The idea of talking yourself out of something is a fraud,” said Adams County Magistrate Phelicia Kossie-Tonje. “Sometimes, you have to just invoke your rights because one, the Constitution doesn’t say these rights only apply if you’re guilty. And by the time you find out they’re a ‘bad cop’, it’s too late.”

Hannah Seigel Proff, a defense lawyer in private practice, echoed the notion that police are trained to elicit information in a variety of ways, and the safest route to avoid an unreasonable search or a false confession is to invoke the rights granted to everyone.

“It seems awkward. Small talk with most people is a nice thing,” she said. “But with a cop, our recommendation is you don’t engage in it because it’s a slippery slope.”

In 2008, Seigel Proff co-founded Learn Your Rights in the Community (LYRIC), which educates children and adults about the Fourth Amendment (searches and seizures), Fifth Amendment (right to remain silent) and Sixth Amendment (right to counsel). Seigel Proff and Kossie-Tonje are both former public defenders, and they emphasized to attendees at Bethlehem Temple Family Worship Center that there is nothing “anti-police” about their message.

They also reminded the audience that courts have looked unfavorably upon prosecutors who suggest criminal defendants are guilty simply for exercising their constitutional rights.

“I represent a lot of cops’ kids,” said Seigel Proff, “and you better believe when cops’ kids get in trouble, they’re asserting their rights.”

As Colorado’s legislature enters its final month of the 2023 session, there is significant movement to bolster the rights of the criminally accused. One bill, which has already passed the House of Representatives without a single dissenting vote, would write into state law the holding of Miranda v. Arizona, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that requires law enforcement to advise suspects in custody of their rights to silence and to an attorney.

Another bill, currently pending in the Senate, would make it harder to use the in-custody statements of children if they were the product of deceit by law enforcement officer. One inspiration for the measure is the case of Lorenzo Montoya, who confessed to murder as a teenager in the face of officers’ coercive tactics, but whose conviction was later overturned.

“You have to remember there are tons of post-conviction relief (petitions) that people were innocent. They confessed. And you can sit here and say, ‘I would never confess to doing anything,'” said Kossie-Tonje. But “if they don’t have anything on you, they’re asking you these questions because they don’t know.”

Frequently, the appeals courts in Colorado are called upon to address alleged infringements of criminal defendants’ Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. Since March:

? The state’s Court of Appeals overturned an Adams County murder conviction because of an unconstitutional search warrant

? The Court of Appeals reversed a Denver assault conviction because the prosecutor implied the defendant was guilty for remaining silent

? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed officers violated the Fourth Amendment when they searched a man’s backpack and found a gun inside

At the LYRIC presentation in Aurora, Siegel Proff and Kossie-Tonje touched on specific scenarios the audience was curious about. What if an officer puts his foot in the door and prevents someone from closing it? What if the officer does not give a clear answer on whether someone is free to leave? Can an officer detain someone simply for not answering their questions?

Racial disparities in policing also arose, which is a particularly acute problem in Aurora that the Colorado Attorney General’s Office documented in a 2021 investigation.

“You don’t know what you match. By being Black, you match the description of 90% of open crimes right now,” said Kossie-Tonje.

“Police never have to tell you the ‘why’ of anything,” added Seigel Proff. “So, you could say something inadvertently, if you don’t know your rights, that makes the situation worse for you.”

The presentation’s message also resonated with the young children present.

“So, if they don’t have a warrant, I can say, ‘I don’t consent?'” asked one boy.

Yes, the presenters responded, with the caveat that expectations of privacy are diminished in school settings.

Jeffery Clint, the pastor of Bethlehem Temple, said his 10-year-old grandson would likely use what he learned about consent.

“I’ve seen officers do things and experienced officers doing things to people because they don’t know the law,” Clint said. “I have taught all my children, we respect the law. I teach my church: respect the law because it is biblical for us. … Knowing your rights aids in having nothing to fear.”

Lorna Ingram, the president of the church’s women’s department, pointed out that something as simple as a speeding ticket can have cascading economic consequences for some people. She believed Americans should not wait until they are in a defendant’s chair to learn their rights.

“If you’re gonna live in a country that is run by law and order, you have to know what the ground rules are,” Ingram said.