On January 4, 2020, Harris Elias was pulled over in Loveland, Colorado for speeding and missing a signal on a lane change. He was arrested for DUI. At the station he took the breath test he was offered and blew 0.000 — no alcohol at all. But minutes BEFORE that test was administered, the officer already told him what would happen if it came back at zeros: he would compel a blood test anyway. The blood was drawn just before 2 a.m. It came back negative for alcohol AND drugs. The Larimer County District Attorney's Office dismissed the charges. In December 2023, the City of Loveland paid Harris Elias $400,000 to settle his civil rights lawsuit. This is the full body-worn camera recording, broken down against the one Colorado statute that decides whether any of it was legal: the express consent law, C.R.S. § 42-4-1301.1. CHAPTERS 0:00 "If it comes back at .00s, I would compel you" 0:14 What happened, and the question it creates 0:54 The stop — "How much have you had to drink tonight?" 1:59 Colorado express consent — the test is not optional 2:33 "Your eyes are bloodshot" — and "some voluntary tests?" 3:33 Voluntary vs. mandatory — most people get this backwards 4:02 "You're under arrest for that charge right now" 5:22 The driver elects the test — and the election is binding 5:51 Before the test: the officer says a 0.000 won't change anything 6:40 The second door — when blood can be REQUIRED 7:22 "This is triple zeros" — "Would you like to take a blood test?" 7:57 What it all comes down to 8:16 "The only thing a breath test can detect is alcohol" 8:43 "One more opportunity to say yes" 9:04 "I did not refuse, sir" 9:47 "I'll just call this a refusal" 10:37 Why that one word can cost you your license 11:11 The form — consenting to a phlebotomist 12:07 What the blood actually showed 12:38 What it cost: $400,000 13:15 If this ever happens to you THE LAW (verify it yourself) C.R.S. § 42-4-1301.1 — Colorado express consent · (2)(a)(I) — by driving in Colorado you have already consented to a test of breath OR blood, if an officer has probable cause to believe you are driving under the influence. The test is not optional. · (2)(a)(II) — for ALCOHOL the driver elects which test: "If the person requests that a specimen of his or her blood not be drawn, then a specimen of the person's breath shall be obtained and tested." The election is binding, and failure to complete the elected test "shall be deemed to be a refusal." · (2)(b) — for DRUGS, blood/saliva/urine may be REQUIRED, with probable cause AND "when it is reasonable to require such testing." A breath test can only measure alcohol. A 0.000 ends the alcohol theory — it does not by itself end the stop. But the pivot to a drug theory carries its own burden, and the recording is the evidence of whether it was met. SOURCE Body-worn camera of Officer William Gates, Loveland Police Department (Colorado). Axon Body 2, serial X81375984, recorded 2020-01-05 (UTC). Public record obtained through litigation discovery / Colorado Open Records Act and published in full, unedited, by attorney Sarah Schielke, The Life & Liberty Law Office. Full unedited source (3h20): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI5Wtp9LENY Nothing in this video is legal advice.

bodycam police bodycam wrongful arrest false dui arrest dui loveland police loveland colorado harris elias express consent colorado dui law breathalyzer 0.000 blood test 42-4-1301.1 police accountability sarah schielke civil rights lawsuit settlement bodycam breakdown real bodycam footage legal analysis know your rights