Aurora Federal Credit Union Attempts To Hide & Withold Critical Evidence. Evidence Was Tampered With.

I Francisco got subpoenas approved. A court order for Aurora Federal Credit Union to produce and give the court security camera video of the alleged assault incident and of the time frames Francisco was allegedly looking into cars. Security camera video of public areas inside of the building to show where witnesses were located at during the time of the incident. Customers who could be potential witnesses. Contact information of the customers who were on scene around the time of the incident. Credit Union documentation & emails about the incident.

Does that sound unreasonable, burdensome & exposing trade secrets? Apparently it does to the lawyer and the credit union.

My Opinion and belief is that the Aurora Federal Credit Union is hiding evidence. I emailed the credit union with links to the evidence that I uploaded & made youtube videos with. I explained that I was a credit union member going public with my story and that they should give me the security camera video evidence. I did not ask for other evidence as I did in my Subpoena Duces Tecum. I was ghosted and never responded too. They are aware of the videos I post on YouTube. They are scared about their reputation and know it will be ruined if the security camera video is released and made public.

That the manager of the credit union had a weapon and walked off of company property. That the security guard racially profiled a person and made false accusations about him looking into cars. Being on the property since 1:30 pm. Note it was 90 degrees F or more that day. Who the fuck is going to be walking around a parking lot for 1 hour looking into cars. If somebody was why did not anyone call the police?

Here is a verbatim or exact wording of Aurora Federal Credit Unions Lawyer Letter Mailed on October 19, 2026

Start of letter

" Dear Mr Soto Our office represents Aurora Federal Credit Union (the “Credit Union”). We are in receipt of the two subpoenas served upon the Credit Union regarding the above referenced summons. The Credit Union objects to the Subpoenas on the following grounds:

1. The Credit Union objects to the Subpoenas to the extent that it seeks obligations greater than different from the obligations imposed by applicable law.

2. The Credit Union objects to the Subpoenas to the extent that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad, imposes an unreasonable burden and/or expense on the Credit Union to search for, collect, and/or produce, and/ or seeks documents that are neither relevant to any party's claim or defense, material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of the action, nor proportional to the needs of the case.

3. The Credit Union objects to the Subpoenas to the extent that it purports to require the Credit Union to perform anything more than a reasonable and diligent search for documents (including electronic sources) where responsive documents can be reasonably be expected to be found.

4. The Credit Union objects to the Subpoenas to the extent it seeks confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information.

In responding to your Subpoenas, please be advised that the Credit Union hereby reserves, and does not waive, any and all objections to the Subpoenas. Accordingly, the Credit Union respectfully requests that you withdraw the Subpoenas. If your office has not received confirmation of release of the Subpoenas by the end of day October 22, 2026, we may file a motion to quash the Subpoenas or to modify the scope of the Subpoenas.

Sincerely, Holst & Tehrani, LLP

Iman Tehrani

Cc: client"

End of Letter

Below is my Motion "Objection to Aurora Federal Credit Unions Motion to Quash" It is not finished but almost. A motion to quash is basically a formally written refusal to provide evidence. The burden is on the credit union to prove the evidence is unreasonable.

Beginning of Motion

All writings are in reference to evidence provided and NOT testimony.

1. Security Camera Video

It was stated by the security guard (contractor) William who is an alleged victim, That Francisco Soto was on the property since 1:30 pm as stated in body worn camera with file name ending in ....................... That I Francisco was looking into cars. From the evidence obtained this apparently made the other alleged victim Jacob get a weapon from his car (gloves with hardened material on knuckles) then walk up the hill to where Francisco Soto was located. Francisco Soto was off of of the property.

It was also stated by the security guard William that the Manager / victim of the credit union went to his car and got his gloves (which were a weapon) then walked up the hill. The Manager / victim stated on Body Worn Camera that he confronted Francisco in the parking lot then followed him up the hill off of the credit union property. Two conflicting statements by two different victims.

The security camera would show the unbiased truth of what actually occurred.

Was Francisco on the property at 1:30 looking into cars, did the manager confront Francisco in the parking lot or was Francisco off the property when Jacob confronted Francisco.

A witness named Janet who works at the credit union stated that Francisco was looking into cars in the front and back of the building. Was Francisco in the front and back of the building? It was then later stated from Janet that she did not see anything. That she only saw Francisco walking by from a window.

Where were the witnesses at the time of Francisco Soto allegedly looking into cars? From the individual witnesses physically location withing the building would they physically be able to see Francisco Soto looking cars.

For example if one of the witnesses was in the bathroom could they see Francisco looking into cars in the back of the building.

All these questions could be answered with indisputable security camera video evidence. The financial institution and the building it owns has multiple cameras visible on the exterior of the building. Where is the evidence and why was it not submitted to the city attorney through the AXIOM link provided by a police officer to the IT employee at the credit union?

From reviewing body worn camera During the alleged incident their were customer's present at the credit union. Potential witnesses who may have saw Francisco looking or NOT looking into cars. Who may or may not have seen Jacob go to his car to get a weapon / gloves. Customers who may or may not have seen the alleged assault incident. Customers who may or may not have heard conversations, actions, and injuries by the witnesses and alleged victims.

If the credit union was robbed by armed gunman I doubt that the credit union would withhold evidence due to it being burdensome. But IF the credit union had evidence of the credit union employees lying and profiling people that would be a reputation risk and would have a burdensome reason to provide security camera evidence, etc.

2. Customer, names, address, phone numbers. NOT I repeat NOT banking or financial information.

I am NOT asking for financial information for customers. I am asking for contact information for customers that visited the credit union at the time of the alleged assault incident. At the time that Francisco was allegedly looking into cars which made the Security Guard and Manager of the Credit Union take action.

Note: NO NON emergency calls were placed to the police department regarding a suspicious person looking into cars. The only phone call I have is 1 ONE emergency phone call during the alleged assault.

It would NOT be relevant to find potential witnesses that witnessed the event. Potential witnesses that do NOT work for the credit union. Potential witness who do not have an incentive to lie or conspire with their co-workers to save the reputation of the credit union.

3. Aurora Federal Credit Union Employee's Contact Information, Phone numbers, Address and Emails. Employee's who were not listed as witnesses.

Reason: As seen on body worn camera multiple offices with WINDOWS and employees in them line the west side of the building. Offices with windows facing the WEST. Offices with a view in the direction of the alleged assault incident.

Did those employees see anything like Francisco looking into cars parked 10 feet away from the windows.

Did employees hear the alleged victims & witnesses say anything or do anything. Witnesses who may or may not conspire and / or attempt to tamper with evidence.

One of the employees who I believe has the name Ellen Akeste is the employee who opened my account with Aurora Federal Credit Union. Note: I am a member of the credit union and have submitted a copy of my member card & account information.

4. Security Guard Contract with Credit Union

Reason: The alleged victim / security guard was an employee for a contractor who had a contract with the credit union. If the name of the security company was released and contract. Then a subpoena Duces Tecum could be served on the security company to find out what the policy is on use of force and what can or can not be done by a security guard.

Does the security company require a documented statement by their security guards if an incident occurs involving a physical altercations.

If a written statement from the alleged victim / security guard William then it could be used in court to prove or disprove his statements on body worn camera and testimony in court.

I requested information from Denver Licensing department about the security guards license, etc. Because Denver is very strict on thorough on the amount of force a security guard can use. Security guards licensed with Denver have to submitted a background check, take training, and are told what they can or can not do.

The security guard / alleged victim may have similar use of force policies at the security company that he works at. The security company may have policies and procedures that limits what security guards can and can not do.

5. Documentation and Emails of the alleged incident

It is common practice that companies will document incidents that threaten the harm and safety of employees. I doubt this incident would NOT be documented and/or communicated with higher chain of command. According to my process server and the body worn camera that she was wearing. The manager / victim of the credit union NO longer works at the credit union.

Documentation showing the reason would be useful. Documentation of a statement made by the manager and security guard may or may not disprove their testimony in court and statements to police recorded by body worn camera.

Documentation from other employees such as about the alleged assault incident.

This information would NOT be considered a "TRADE SECRET" as alleged by the credit unions council / attorney. The credit union is a not for profit entity owned by members of the credit union as stated by their most recent social media post on YOU TUBE that was posted on October 19 2026.

URL link below

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/K7wdEXs7qJ8

Emails concerning the alleged assault incident. NOT financial information about customers. I repeat NO financial information. If their is financial information included in an email with information about the assault incident may it be redacted for privacy reasons by the city attorney.

Emails concerning the incident may be critical evidence the may or may not prove the following. If security camera video evidence was tampered with by IT employee. If upper managment prevented security camera video evidence from being submitted to police. By uploading it to the AXIOM link. Which evidence was technically tampered with because it was delayed by not being submitted. According to state statue CRS 18-8-610 Emails from alleged victim/ manager what was stated about the incident. Emails from other employees who are listed as witnesses may have sent emails about the incident.

I Francisco Soto am only asking about emails about the alleged assault incident. NOT financial information about witnesses and / or customers. NO other information.

Emails about the assault incident are not a trade secret, burdensome,

End of Motion

YouTube Video Links

Part 1 Credit Union does not give evidence for subpoena in Criminal Case @aurorafcu Colorado USA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsViIoVsmJs

Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5OCZPaRbng

Part 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFNUibFbZyc

Part 4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQxbMces820

Charlie Watts CEO of Aurora Federal Credit Union & the Aurora Police Association

Youtube Video of Aurora Police Association Board Members With Charlie Watts (link below)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XFydd00bJQ&t=71s

Aurora Police Association Board of Directors with a picture of Charlie Watts ( Link Below)

https://aurorapolicefoundation.org/board-of-directors

Is Aurora Federal Credit Union Above the Law?