Rose Above: Routine Traffic Stop Turns Into Felony Charges and Years of Court Battles | USCCA

The first time I spoke with Jonathan Rose, he was about to fly to Switzerland for vacation. He needed it, he said. He deserved it, he said. After all, it was barely a year since he had been arrested, charged with multiple felonies and threatened with a long prison sentence.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at
1 Like

The State? This is New York, sadly it would probably be much worse.


There are some states I refuse to even visit. NY and NJ are two of them.


Did I miss something or was not Mr Rose violating the law --regardless of whether he/we like them?

Yes, he was violating the law, though the police had no right to search closely enough to have determined that. Not sure if he was unaware of New York’s laws, hence his insistence that states should have uniform laws, or if he did it intentionally.

While I see his point about unifying the laws, the USA was originally designed to have a relatively insignificant federal government and give the individual states more of the power so their laws could more closely reflect the needs and desires of the individuals in those areas. This obviously has gotten more and more flip-flopped each passing year, but it is the premise.

It makes it difficult to keep everything straight when crossing state lines. Honestly, though, our states are about the size of many countries, so try to consider each state a country, and the US to be similar to the EU, I guess, if that helps you. Sucky, but it’s that way for a reason.

Joe, I have been a strong states rights advocate my whole life. But with different jurisdictions criminalizing so many Constitutional protections, I am beginning to agree with the Supreme Court. They have ruled that these protections also apply to the individual states.

1 Like

Sounds like a 1 sided article filled with blatant lies and misinformation to make Rose look like some innocent victim and to demonize the officer, the police department, and the DA’s office.

Sounds like Rose blatantly lied about his illegal guns, like a typical criminal who was knowingly committing a crime.

Why was Rose in a school zone with two illegal loaded guns and multiple high-capacity magazines, brass knuckles, 7 different knives, multiple ninja throwing stars, and quikclot for plugging bullet wounds?

Was Rose planning on committing a school shooting?

Did this officer stop Rose from murdering dozens of children?

I guess we will never know.

Isn’t it a Federal offense with a 5 year mandatory minimum prison sentence to have illegal handguns within 1000 feet of a school?

What law abiding citizen carries brass knuckles around with him? Let alone two illegal, fully loaded handguns with multiple spare illegal high-cap magazines in a children’s school zone?

This article clearly makes many wild assumptions and accusations.

Rick Sapp clearly did a poor job of researching what actually happened, probably because, as written in a previous article by Rick Sapp, Jonathan Rose is his personal friend.

So was this just a biased puff piece for his buddy or was he just paid off since Rose is a multi-millionaire? Because it sure doesn’t sound like the truth to me.

Where is his evidence that the officer entered the car for the purpose of deleting the cell phone video?

He just accuses the officer of committing a felony offense based on his or Rose’s imagination?

What are the odds that an officer, who is knowingly filming himself with the police car’s dashboard camera, just randomly decides to unlawfully search a vehicle without any legitimate reason to believe that there is anything illegal in the car, and just happens to stumble upon 5 felony and 11 misdemeanor weapons offenses at the state level, not to mention the federal offense of possessing illegal handguns in a school zone?

How often do multi-millionaire white men driving $90,000 cars get their vehicles randomly and illegally searched? And then how often does that turn up multiple felony counts of illegal handguns and high cap magazines along with a variety of other illegal weapons?

This article states “DA chose not to appeal Judge Fufidio’s decision on account of the Rye policemen being found less than truthful” Who at the DA’s office made this statement? Who said that they were not going to appeal the case because the officer lied? Which person at the DA’s office accused the officer of committing the crime of perjury?

Rick Sapp has proven himself to be just another untrustworthy contributor of “fake news” selling lies, baseless accusations, and anti-police propaganda.

Jonathan Rose is clearly a criminal who committed multiple felonious crimes, was clearly guilty of everything he was charged with, and simply rich enough to beat the case. Just another example of how the rich can commit multiple felony offenses and get away with it.

Furthermore you left out the part in the Judge’s decision where he stated that the officer would have had full on probable cause but that the judge decided based on his subjective opinion that the officer was lying. The judge did not present a single fact or evidence based reason as to why he thought that, he simply decided that what the officer was thinking was different than what the officer testified he was thinking. So now judges get to determine what people were thinking and call them liars based on their imagination of another person’s thoughts?

You also left out the part where the Judge still agreed that the officer did in fact have “reasonable and articulable suspicion” that Rose had an illegal handgun in his possession. Judge Fufidio however goes on to say"reasonable and articulable suspicion" that a suspected felon is armed with an illegal handgun does not present any potential for danger, therefore the pat down and check of the vehicle for weapons was not allowed.

Do we really have to go over the copious amounts of case law from high courts which disagree entirely?

Since when would any reasonably minded person agree with such an outlandish conclusion?

Since when do judges of lower courts have the authority to overturn case law from countless cases decided by higher courts?

If a suspected felon, who, according to the judge himself, is reasonably suspected of being in possession of an illegal handgun, does not rise to the level of potential danger adequate enough to perform a pat down under Terry v Ohio, than nothing would. This decision effectively overturns multiple United States Supreme Court decisions.

Since when does Judge Fufidio have a right as a judge of a lower court to overturn case law determined in courts higher than his own at both the state and federal level, not to mention the Supreme Court of the United States itself?

The funny thing is, this particular case actually presents more potential for danger than the circumstances in which Officer McFadden found a gun on John W. Terry (the basis for Terry v Ohio where SCOTUS affirmed that the pat down was constitutional). But according to Judge Fufidio there is nothing potentially dangerous for an officer when he has a suspected felon detained who is armed with an illegal handgun.

Also according to Judge Fufidio, his baseless imagination of what people are thinking is enough call them liars and he has the authority to disregard case law created by the Supreme Court of the United States.

I wonder if the multi-millionaire criminal Jonathon Rose paid Rick Sapp to write this article filled with blatant lies and misinformation or did he just do it as a favor to his personal friend? I wonder if Judge Fufidio was paid off to also write a decision that was factually inaccurate, disregards SCOTUS case law, and outright calls the officer a liar without a single shred of evidence other than his imagination to support such a claim? Or is Judge Fufidio just that incompetent that he can’t keep simple facts of the case straight or even follow clearly established case law?

Just asking questions, that’s all.

@David393 I deleted your duplicate comments for some reason there were three copies of it.