Officer charged after fatal Aug. 30, 2025, traffic stop in Aurora
A grand jury has returned an indictment charging an Aurora police officer with second-degree murder and manslaughter in the death of a 37-year-old man following a traffic stop and crash in Aurora last year, court records unsealed Monday show.
The indictment names Officer Matthew Neely, 54, and lays out a sequence of events from Aug. 30, 2025, when Neely attempted to stop the victim, identified in court records as Rajon Belt‑Stubblefield, 37, for speeding and suspected driving under the influence near East Sixth Avenue and Sable Boulevard.
What prosecutors say happened
According to the indictment, Belt‑Stubblefield did not stop and drove away. Court records say he rear‑ended one car, crossed a median and struck a second vehicle, ultimately crashing at the intersection of East Sixth Avenue and Billings Street. Neely reportedly pulled up to the crash scene, pointed his gun at Belt‑Stubblefield and ordered him not to exit the vehicle.
The indictment says Belt‑Stubblefield did not follow the order and appeared to reach toward the floorboard. When he exited the vehicle, he told the officer,
“Don’t shoot me.”
Prosecutors say Belt‑Stubblefield then threw a gun to the ground nearby. Neely was not aware the man had a weapon until it was thrown into the grass, the indictment states. The officer and Belt‑Stubblefield then “engaged physically.” The officer fell to the ground; Belt‑Stubblefield got up and walked away. Neely stood, pointed his gun and demanded that the man get on the ground, telling him, according to the indictment,
“I’ll shoot you.”
The filing adds that Neely spent seven seconds trying to holster his weapon so he could deploy a less‑lethal option, but did not succeed. The indictment notes Neely was not carrying a Taser; he did have a baton.
Timeline at a glance
| Date | Key event |
|---|---|
| Aug. 30, 2025 | Traffic stop attempt; subsequent crash at Sixth Ave & Billings St |
| Aug. 30, 2025 | Officer points gun; physical engagement; Belt‑Stubblefield throws gun; officer fires |
| Unsealed Monday | Indictment filed charging officer with second‑degree murder and manslaughter |
Questions for Aurora residents and the department
The indictment raises procedural and tactical questions that resonate for Aurora residents: how officers manage traffic stops that turn violent, what less‑lethal options were available and how quickly an officer can safely secure a firearm during a confrontation. The charging document describes a compressed, chaotic encounter in which an officer attempted to switch to a less‑lethal response but did not succeed.
- Use of force: The case centers on the decision to shoot after a physical struggle and a suspect’s attempt to leave the scene.
- Equipment and training: The indictment notes the officer was not carrying a Taser but had a baton, and it details the attempt to holster the firearm.
- Accountability: An indictment signals prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges.
Indictments do not determine guilt; they permit a criminal case to proceed to trial unless resolved earlier by plea or dismissal. The court records unsealed Monday supply prosecutors’ version of the incident, which will be tested against other evidence in upcoming proceedings.
For Aurora residents, the case will likely invite scrutiny of department policies and the broader questions of policing tactics in volatile, split‑second encounters. It also may spur calls for transparency about the agency’s handling of the incident and any subsequent administrative steps.
As the criminal process unfolds, local leaders, civil‑rights groups and community members will be watching for updates from prosecutors, court filings and any statements from the Aurora Police Department or city officials. The indictment marks a significant moment in a case that started as a routine traffic stop and ended with a fatal shooting.
This report is based on court records unsealed Monday. Further developments, including arraignment dates or departmental responses, may add context as the case moves forward.
