I'm more concerned about um the public not knowing about it. >> In Aurora, Colorado, a newly elected city council member was arrested late at night on suspicion of driving under the influence. Police say the stop began with observed traffic violations. During the encounter, officers reported signs of impairment. Field sobriety tests followed. According to police reports, a breath test later showed a blood alcohol concentration of approximately 0.252, 252, more than three times Colorado's legal limit of 0.08. The council member was booked on suspicion of DUI and released. The case is now moving through the legal process. In the days following the arrest, public attention quickly shifted from the stop itself to what came next. Calls for resignation and a public refusal to step down. Fin Blue lies, baby. The council member later addressed the arrest during a public city council meeting. He acknowledged the incident but emphasized that the case remains unresolved. He cited due process, disputed portions of the police report and stated that he is taking steps such as attending classes and working with organizations focused on impaired driving prevention. He also made clear that he does not intend to resign. Under Colorado law, elected officials are not automatically removed from office following an arrest. Removal generally requires conviction, resignation, or a separate legal or political process. So, at this stage, the situation is legally straightforward, but politically and ethically far more complicated. The Aurora City Council member arrested for drunk driving with a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit didn't just hand the officer his city council ID instead of his driver's license. Rob Andrews also talked with officers about his concern that the public would find out. We obtained police body camera footage of Andrew's arrest on Saturday night. He was 8 miles from the Stanley Marketplace where he admitted he'd been drinking earlier. We should say his sober adult stepson was a passenger in the vehicle when Andrews was stopped for making an illegal turn and weaving. >> I'm more concerned about um the public not knowing about it. I'm more concerned about um the public not knowing about it. >> This is a moment that stands out. While still in police custody, the council member tells the officer that he's concerned about the public finding out about the arrest. Not concern for public safety, not concern about impairment, concern about perception. It's not illegal to worry about your reputation. But when you're an elected official, that reaction matters because it captures something unscripted. The difference between what's said before the press conference and what's said after. >> Okay. Um we don't tell anybody. >> So nobody officer or guest don't. Uh but everything that we do is open to public record. So um we don't go broadcasting, you know, hey, we arrested whoever, whoever, whoever. >> No, I'm sure you did. >> That's not But if somebody like pulls an open request, open records request, everything. Everybody gets arrested. >> I have no idea. >> It wasn't sealed. We got it on Monday. And then the video today. This is where the story stops being just about a DUI and starts being about accountability. No one is arguing that an arrest equals a conviction. Due process matters. That part is not controversial. What is controversial is the idea that an elected official can allegedly engage in extremely dangerous behavior, acknowledge it publicly, and still insist there's no obligation to step aside, even temporarily. This isn't about legal guilt. It's about public trust. If your job involves writing laws, funding enforcement, and representing the public, your personal conduct matters, especially when it puts other people at risk. Yeah, that same police body cam footage also showed Andrews handing over his city council badge when officers were asking for his driver's license. So, we asked Andrews and progressives on the city council tonight if he should resign. None of them said yes. >> Okay. Will the clerk please call the role? In his first city council meeting since his arrest, newly elected Aurora City Council member Rob Andrews is rejecting calls to resign. >> Aurora police say he drove 8 miles across town, had a blood alcohol level more than three times the legal limit, handed an officer his city council ID instead of his license, and then asked how to keep it out of the public. >> I'm more concerned about um the public not knowing about it. Why should you still be on the Aurora City Council if you drove across town drunk and possibly endanger a bunch of other people's lives? >> You know, I can't answer that. And I'm off the record. >> Off the record, meaning he was trying to keep us from telling you what he said. He's an elected official at a public meeting. So, he kept asking questions about his attempt to keep the arrest out of the public. >> Why is that transparent and something that should be becoming of a council member? >> Well, what I'm going to do is read my statement and then you should have an answer for it. >> Do you plan to address that? >> Yep. Read my statement. Think about how this would play out for anyone else. A cashier, a restaurant server, a construction worker. Most employers wouldn't wait for a conviction to act. The risk alone would be enough. But in politics, we've normalized something different. A system where public officials often cling to office unless forced out, even when their actions directly contradict the responsibilities of their role. And when resignation calls come, they're framed as unfair pressure instead of reasonable expectations. That disconnect is why stories like this don't fade quietly. >> Andrew's statement to the council did not address that. >> Like every citizen, I have the right to due process, and there are parts of what has been claimed and documented that I don't believe is true, including inconsistencies. >> Andrews was part of a progressive takeover of the council in November, which now has a 6-4 liberal majority. We asked some of those progressives if he should resign now. None said yes, and one tried to deflect by bringing up President Trump. And >> I would say it has to go through the process. I didn't see that myself. I haven't watched any videos. So, at this point, I'm just saying he's afforded his right to a trial. >> People make mistakes. All you got to do is look at the top, right? So, you have a president that's done all these things. >> Yeah. Yeah. But we're in Aurora. We're talking three times legal limit. Head of the public safety committee asked how to keep it out of the public. >> We have standards for that but not for that. >> In his public address tonight, Andrews did not specifically say he's not resigning. He did mention in his speech that he's registering for restorative justice programs and plans to work with mothers against drunk driving. Kim and Kyle, >> I I think you know folks can grasp the whole let the process play out. He's entitled to a legal process. That of course is separate from whether he should be representing the city. When you got that other councilman saying, "Well, yeah, I mean, he drove drunk, but I mean, President President Trump, what that's some weak sauce. Holy cow." >> Yeah. A little bit of what aboutism there. What happened here? Well, did you see what happened over there? A little different stuff. >> Yeah. Rarely a convincing, logical argument. For some reason, politicians love it. All right, Spencer. >> Yes, they do. >> Thank you. >> This isn't an isolated issue. Across the country, we've seen elected officials, judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement figures invoke due process not as a shield for fairness, but as a delay tactic against accountability. The public isn't demanding instant punishment. They're demanding standards. When leadership refuses to recognize the difference between legal survival and ethical responsibility, trust erodess. And once trust is gone, institutions don't get the benefit of the doubt anymore. So, here's the real question. Should elected officials be allowed to stay in office after conduct like this as long as a case is pending? Or should public service come with higher expectations than the bare minimum required to stay out of jail? Drop your thoughts below. If you want more coverage like this focused on accountability, not excuses, hit subscribe. Links are in the description if you want to support the channel or check out the resources. Thin blue lies, baby.