High Speed Chases Ending in Death - Whose Fault Is It, Really?

[GWV5903]

Cop spots a guy speeding. He follows him and turns on the red light. The guy does not yield and, in fact, takes off at a high rate of speed. The only offense observed by the officer is speeding. The car is not stolen. No warrants exist for the owner of the car (which the officer can determine by checking the license plate of the guy's car).

The officer gives chase. A high speed chase ensues which ends when the person being pursued runs a red light, broadsides a car and four people in the car are killied in the flaming crash.

Who is responsible for their deaths?

The guy who was running from the police officer, I hear you say? Really. Let's think about that one. The only observed offense was speeding. Why does the officer feel it necessary to initiate a high speed chase? Why doesn't he just get the guy's license number and wait for him to come home? Why not call for the helicopter and follow the guy just long enough for the copter to take over, follow the suspect and have other officers apprehend him when he stops? It has often been said, they may be able to outrun a single police car, but they can never outrun a radio. Why not use the radio to get the guy, thereby avoiding the dangers inherent in high speed chases?

It is one thing to go into a high speed pursuit of someone when there is a life-threatening situation involved. It is quite another to do so when the only offense observed is speeding or violation of some minor traffic violation.

Had the officer chosen to not initiate the chase, the four innocent people at the intersection would not have been killed.

We need legislation to prevent cops from engaging in high speed chases when there is no legitimate reason to do so. All too often, the only real reason for the chase is the ego of the cop on the back end of it. "By God, that son of a bitch isn't going to disobey MY command to stop!" And here we go . . .

I am all for apprehending criminals. But I am also all for not killing innocent civilians when there is no legitimate reason for the chase in the first place.

A bit presumptive don't you think? You have a good point, the speeder is at fault though.....

 

[MikeK]

[...]

And another thing, according to that one site, the cops get a cut of the take! Makes it almost like a business for them. Damned profitable too!

Immie

The drug war is a business.

 

[fyrenza]

Check this scenario out:

A lady goes to the Mall to do some shopping.

As soon as she enters, car thieves snag her car, cruise around and find a young woman that they kidnap.

The car hasn't been reported stolen, and the only thing the cop sees is that it's speeding well over the posted limit.

He decides NOT to pursue ~ hey, I'll get the perp when he gets home ~ and drives to the lady's house. And sits and waits, and waits and sits, and

Oops. Guess THAT idea wouldn't work very well.

Regular folks don't normally slam on the gas, trying to outrun a cop car that is pulling them over, so if someone DOES try this? Odds are, they're doing something ELSE illegal, as well as speeding, and if your daughter was locked in the trunk of that vehicle?

I think you'd have a COMPLETELY different outlook on the Need For Speed, eh?

 

[Douger]

It's the cops fault. Only a complete asshole would become a cop.
Too bad the original story ended badly. I like happy endings.................like where the cop missed the turn and ran off a cliff.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What if the perp start firing shots out of the car window? Do they just ignore that too until he hits someone? I mean shooting back could have consequences.

 

[Immanuel]

Check this scenario out:

A lady goes to the Mall to do some shopping.

As soon as she enters, car thieves snag her car, cruise around and find a young woman that they kidnap.

The car hasn't been reported stolen, and the only thing the cop sees is that it's speeding well over the posted limit.

He decides NOT to pursue ~ hey, I'll get the perp when he gets home ~ and drives to the lady's house. And sits and waits, and waits and sits, and

Oops. Guess THAT idea wouldn't work very well.

Regular folks don't normally slam on the gas, trying to outrun a cop car that is pulling them over, so if someone DOES try this? Odds are, they're doing something ELSE illegal, as well as speeding, and if your daughter was locked in the trunk of that vehicle?

I think you'd have a COMPLETELY different outlook on the Need For Speed, eh?

The police need to and do make instinctive decisions as to whether or not to pursue a suspect. A lot of different factors go into the decision to chase or not to chase. If they know the driver of the car is a dangerous felon who will (should he escape) pose a danger to society, they will more than likely pursue as long as it takes.

If they suspect it is a kid out for a joy ride, they will back off sooner rather than risk innocent people suffering loss or death.

They may not always be right, but they have to make split second decisions in each case, and each case is different.

What if the perp start firing shots out of the car window? Do they just ignore that too until he hits someone? I mean shooting back could have consequences.

If that happens then all bets are off! The perp is a dead SOB. They have to pursue because he poses a threat to society.

Immie

 

[Zona]

Except he wouldn't have been driving in a manner that endangers others but for being chaserd ed by the cop in the first instance. Most of the death/injury from high speed chases I know about would clearly never have happend if the cop had not been pursuing.

I once had a case where my client got red lighted for a traffic offense. He had some meth in the car, so he took off. The cop pursued him. My client ended up blowing a red light and broadsiding a car on the driver's side. Driving the car was an 18-year-old girl. He caved in her entire face, that had to be reconstructed surgically. The DA had photos of her before and after. Before the accident, she was very beautiful. Afterwards, not.

All because some macho cop wasn't about to let someone disobey HIS command to stop.

Bull shit.

i agree with you here George....we here in S.Cal,see this type of stuff way to often.....there is ten patrol cars chasing the guy, a helicopter above.....and they got the plates....and so often he ends up going back to his neighborhood....just let the Copter follow the guy keeping the cops on the ground informed of his whereabouts....he has to stop sooner or later.....

I remember once in Mira Mesa....a cop was chasing a young guy who stole something from a department store. The kid pushed it up to very high speeds and the cop chased him. The cop ended up hitting and killing a woman and the kid was charged with murder.

that kid is going to do a lot of time for stealing a toaster. Somehow that is just not right. That cop's ego kicked in because the kid was getting away and he would not stop chasing him. Is this right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The OP sounds a lot like how NYCity was run under David Dinkins and we got a Third World, crime-ridden, filthy Calcutta shithole in return. Rudy came in and said, "we stop all speeders because if they're running they've got other things we should probably know about" and the difference is that NY is a once again a world class city with a murder rate down in double digits.

 

[Harry Dresden]

It's the cops fault. Only a complete asshole would become a cop.
Too bad the original story ended badly. I like happy endings.................like where the cop missed the turn and ran off a cliff.

to bad you dont go off a cliff some where....

 

[Harry Dresden]

What if the perp start firing shots out of the car window? Do they just ignore that too until he hits someone? I mean shooting back could have consequences.

Frank...now you are getting to scenarios way past what this post was about.....and also....how many times has this happened during a high speed chase....i bet its pretty rare....about as rare as a woman in the trunk....

 

[Immanuel]

Except he wouldn't have been driving in a manner that endangers others but for being chaserd ed by the cop in the first instance. Most of the death/injury from high speed chases I know about would clearly never have happend if the cop had not been pursuing.

I once had a case where my client got red lighted for a traffic offense. He had some meth in the car, so he took off. The cop pursued him. My client ended up blowing a red light and broadsiding a car on the driver's side. Driving the car was an 18-year-old girl. He caved in her entire face, that had to be reconstructed surgically. The DA had photos of her before and after. Before the accident, she was very beautiful. Afterwards, not.

All because some macho cop wasn't about to let someone disobey HIS command to stop.

Bull shit.

i agree with you here George....we here in S.Cal,see this type of stuff way to often.....there is ten patrol cars chasing the guy, a helicopter above.....and they got the plates....and so often he ends up going back to his neighborhood....just let the Copter follow the guy keeping the cops on the ground informed of his whereabouts....he has to stop sooner or later.....

I remember once in Mira Mesa....a cop was chasing a young guy who stole something from a department store. The kid pushed it up to very high speeds and the cop chased him. The cop ended up hitting and killing a woman and the kid was charged with murder.

that kid is going to do a lot of time for stealing a toaster. Somehow that is just not right. That cop's ego kicked in because the kid was getting away and he would not stop chasing him. Is this right?

Have to disagree with you here. Yes, it is right. The kid stole a toaster. He was spotted by the police and chose to run. That institutes a new crime. Because of his running, a woman was killed. Now, he is charged (as he should be) with murder. He's not doing time for stealing a toaster. He is doing time for murder.

He stole a toaster, got caught and should have stopped and faced the music for his stupidity BEFORE he killed someone because of his stupidity.

I don't feel sorry for him in the least.

Immie

 

[Shogun]

in your example here the crime is robbery and not the prolonged, public risk of speeding. Of course a recorded license plate number of a criminal already gone will prompt the cops looking for him in locations up to, and including his home. How, post a link to a single Chase In Progress where the police decided to just say fuckit.


The cop cannot check and find out if the driver is inebriated, or impaired in some other way. Leaving a speeder who refuses to stop on the road is neglecting the public safety entirely. Your argument here is checked by the PLETHORA of circumstances that cannot be verified by a simple call to dispatch.

speeding, and refusing to stop for a cop, is not a mere traffic violation any more than resisting arrest is merely exercise. Your opinion of what should and shouldn't count means two things. I'll let you guess what they are.

and, just so you know, speeding in traffic, despite a cop in pursuit, is not a MINOR offense. The More You Know.

it's not about ego. it's about public safety. You are trying to demonize the cop for doing his job. A job meant to keep the public safe from assholes like speeders who think that the world and it's highways revolve around their risky driving. Sorry, your logic needs a helmet.

Ps, your jaded opinion of cops seems to be the core of your disagreement with policy here. I guess that means I should have just ignored you in the first place. Demonizing all cops, and generalizing YOUR opinion of what YOU think most cops are like, is probably why every post that you've offered thus far is so peewee herman farcical.


seriously.

Do you think the cops are always right?

There is a case from the annals of history where a man had a car that was similar to the ones police routinely use. He decked it out with lights and proceeded to pull over young women and rape them in dark and secluded areas. They eventually found the scumbag responsible for this, but a few people wanted to help make this harder for someone to pull off in the future, so the lobbied the California state legislature to allow anyone who sees red lights their mirror to drive to a lighted, and populated, area in order to be sure the person pulling them over was actually a cop.

Guess who came out strong in opposition to this law? That's right, the CHP opposed it, and actually succeeded it making it a crime to not stop as soon as you see red lights in your mirror. I am sure this made all the potential victims of false cops feel a lot safer.

um, can you show me where I've stated that "cops are always right"? Or, ironically, are you attributing to me a statement which i've never uttered?



talk about straw man.


ps, I'm not interested in some urban legend that you read about on an email once. You made a statement about cops backing off speeders and waiting for them at home so now you should provide evidence of such. end of story.

 

[Shogun]

Do you realize that you are challenging me to defend a position I do not have? Isn't there a word for that?

at 4:36 in the pm you responded "Yet that is exactly what many departments do" to my statement regarding how farcical it is to suggest that a cop disregard a crime in progress and engage them later at their home. This is why I asked you for an example of such. Perhaps you regret the particular choice of words that you used....

Very good. You can actually cite the posts that prove you wrong, look at the parts I highlighted for you and see that I said no such thing. Until the precrime bill actually passes somewhere we can not be arrested for something that might happen.

Here is a list of various police departments that limit pursuits when people might be in danger:

Pursuit Policy Database

The interesting thing is that Orlando, which just might have the most restrictive pursuit policy, has not seen an increase in criminal activity as a result of police not being able to pursue criminals.

Violent Forcible Felonies: For the purpose of this directive, shall be when a suspect has committed or attempted
to commit:
1.
Murder.
2.
Manslaughter.
3.
Armed robbery.
4.
Armed sexual battery.
5.
Arson to a structure reasonably believed to be occupied.
6.
Use of explosive devices to a structure reasonably believed to be occupied.
7.
Kidnapping
8.
Armed carjacking.
9.
Burglary armed with a firearm.
10.
Aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a deadly weapon (firearm, edged weapon). Does not
include a motor vehicle.
11. Aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer resulting in serious injury.
NOTE: The fact that an officer had to move from the path of a fleeing vehicle does not constitute an aggravated
assault, attempted murder, attempted aggravated battery, or attempted manslaughter for the purposes of this policy.

http://www.pursuitwatch.org/pursuit_policies/Orlando_Florida.doc

This actually means that I could commit a crime, have that crime witnessed by a police officer, and that officer would be unable to pursue me if I jumped in a car and sped away.

I see you chose NOT to highlight "Yet that is exactly what many departments do, and the result is no deaths as a result of high speed chases, and no one has ever attributed a death to the lack of a chase either."




how selective!

 

[Shogun]

Rationalizing the original crime of speeding, and suggesting the laughable solution of just waiting for the speeder to come home (as if this were mayberry) is just farcical.

Is it? You seem to be ignoring the many, documented cases where, in the name of apprehending someone who has merely broken a traffic law, innocent people have died or been permanently maimed, disfigured and/or injured.

When viewed in that (undeniable) context, how "farcical" does it really seem to you?

You may be willing to make a trade-off like that; I sure am not. But then, like so many conservatives, since you don't see it ever happening to you, it apparently doesn't concern you.

Innocent people die when bank robbers refuse to drop their guns too. I guess the swat team should just catch the perps at home.










watch how you rely on your opinion of "merely" a traffic violation. As if speeding doesn't, itself, put the public at risk. You are a fool.


and... uh.. I'm a CONSERVATIVE now, eh?





yup. you are a FOOL.

 

[Shogun]

No it isn't at all. You would be amazed at the number of robberies I get on the following facts: Robber sticks up the obligatory 7-11, jumps in his car and takes off. 7-11 guy gets his license number. Police are (literally) waiting for the robber when he gets home.

You first argument is a bootstrap - "he's not stopping, I'll chase him, he's speeding faster, I must chase him faster to find out why he's speeing faster." In the usual situation, the cop only knows that the guy committed some type of traffic offense. He can readily check to see if the car is stolen or if there are any outstanding warrants. If negative on both of the latter issues, this leaves only the traffic violation.

Traffic violations, by themselves, should NOT justify initiating a high speed chase if the driver fails to pull over for the red light on the police vehicle.

Unfortunately, the REAL reason cops go in pursuit of relatively minor traffic violators (or ANYONE who refused to stop for them) is all about EGO. Cops go BALLISTIC when someone they feel they should be controlling, refuses to be controlled. Ever notice that? It isn't entirely their fault. That's they way they are trained. When in doubt, yell, bully and frighten the people you are dealing with - that's the only way to get control of a situation.

But a large part of it has to do with the kind of guys who sign up to become cops to begin with. For purposes of this thread (which is not about that narrow issue), let's just say that a large percentage of police officers weren't the kind of guys who were shying away in one corner of the school yard when they were in grammar school. I trust you get the reference here.

It happens quite often. High speed chases are closely monitored by the station. Many times, the officer is called off the chase. Many times he will make that decision himself. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen often enough. It's my position that high speed chases should be against the law except in certain, very limited circumstances.



Did it ever occur to you that if the cop stopped chasing the guy, he would stop speeding? Also, speeding is but one of the many different types of traffic violations that can trigger high speed chases. How do expired registration tags endanger the public? Illegally tinted windows? Object hanging from front rear view mirror?

Your logic in this statement is faulty. Using this line of thought, cops should be able to stop anyone, any time, on the theory that there might be something going on with them that cannot be verified by a call to dispatch.

People run for all kinds of reasons - usually they have a warrant out or they have contraband in the car. None of those reasons should justify a high speed chase, in my opinion.



As I said, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of traffic violations other than speeding. Try not to focus on that one violation as the only type of violation that can trigger a high speed chase when the driver refuses to pull over. Also, there are degrees of speeding. Usually, a speeder is not going all that much over the speed limit - enough to get a ticket, but not enough to be a realistic danger to other drivers or pedestrians.



Here, you show how little you know about police. It is about ego - almost all of it. Sorry you don't recognize this plain truth.

Ps, your jaded opinion of cops seems to be the core of your disagreement with policy here. I guess that means I should have just ignored you in the first place. Demonizing all cops, and generalizing YOUR opinion of what YOU think most cops are like, is probably why every post that you've offered thus far is so peewee herman farcical.


seriously.

My feelings about police are part of the basis for the opinion I have expressed on this thread, but certainly not the entire basis. I deal with police officers on a daily basis - I have for decades. I know cops pretty well, both the good and the bad. Believe me, there is a lot of both.

But the issue here is not so much why cops initiate high speed chases as the fact that they DO initiate them and, more importantly, the consequeces that all to often result from their actions in this regard.

It is a simple fact - klling innocent civilians is not worth apprehending a traffic offender.

1. If either of you fools have an example to cite of cops backing off of speeders and catching them at home, besides laughable non-sequiters, feel free to post it. But, I bet you won't. and, I'm pretty sure we both know why.

2. You can assume what you want about the intent and motive of the speeder but your clairvoyance is about as nil as the cops. It's always easy to dictate from hindsight, isn't it?

3. Speeding, and avoiding the legal demand from a cop to pull over, is not merely a traffic violation regardless of how often you wrap yourself in such goofy nomenclature.

4. Your opinion about cops and their egos, as if your generalized opinion means anything, means two things: jack and shit. true story.

5. The cop in question didn't try to pull over someone arbitrarily; THE SPEEDER WAS BREAKING THE LAW. end of story. Tell me more about faulty logic though.

6. Your opinion of what doesn't justify a legal response from cops doesn't impress me. Time to go get your grass root effort on since the rest of us in this America culture disagrees with you.






ego... yea... you are a fool.

 

[Shogun]

[...]

so work to legalize prostitution or drugs. But, when a criminal tries to flee and kills someone because of HIS decision not to stop for the authority of the police then the repercussions of that choice are on the criminal, not the cops.

The "authority of the police" is a lot more important to the police ego than it is to me. Police authority should not extend to arbitrarily jeopardizing public safety, which clearly defines the majority of high-speed pursuits.

I'm quite sure you would be expressing a different opinion if someone close to you was injured or killed in a high-speed police pursuit. An offender fleeing in a motor vehicle represents an extreme threat to the public at large. Pursuing that offender when there is not substantial reason to do so significantly increases the threat.

Working to "legalize prostitution or drugs" is one way to eliminate a small percentage of high-speed pursuits, but doing so will take time. In the meantime I think it would be productive to simply reassign all narcs and vice cops, who happen to be the scumbags of law enforcement, to more legitimately protective functions, such as patrolling high-crime neighborhoods, public parks and schools.

oh, you mean "jeopardizing public safety" LIKE THE SPEEDER?




seriously, I'm glad I don't live near you fools. You silly bastards would be the first to call 911 if ever in need but here you are crying that the sky is falling because a cop does their job to apprehend a criminal. BRAVO!

 

[Shogun]

But, when a criminal tries to flee and kills someone because of HIS decision not to stop for the authority of the police then the repercussions of that choice are on the criminal, not the cops.

There are TWO decisions involved in a high speed chase - the cop's and the suspect's. Before there can ever be a high speed chase, there has to be a decision by the cop to commence it. Sure, the suspect has to flee, but the cop does not have to chase him. If the cop decides not to chase, the suspect is not going to flee as fast. Once he sees the cop backing off, he will still get out of there, but you won't see him endangering others the same way he would if he were being chased.

Bullshit. The initial choice is by the speeder to break the law by putting the public in danger with his choice to speed dangerously and then avoid pulling over.

the highlighted is just a small fraction of your perspective that conveys just how bat shit crazy your opinion is. You can't predict the behavior of criminals any more than the cop can predict if chasing or not would result in more or less hazards to the public. But, alas, this is why you are a fucking fool...

 

[Shogun]

No. Those of rank of Detective or above get the choice. Most of them will carry at night, but not during the day....

thanks. it's so different from here. here it's all boys with toys.

although i saw what i thought was the most incredibly dangerous thing the other day. cop is crossing the street holding a pizza box with both hands. his gun was holstered but totally unguarded.... it looked to me like someone could sidle up next to him and grab his weapon...

all for a pizza.

most police duty holsters are very difficult to draw the weapon from if you don't know how. something i learned when i went to citizens police academy and yes, i'm that much of a geek. sorry

Duty Holsters at CopsPlus

 

[George Costanza]

Want to have some fun on a conservative Internet message board? Just put up a thread which is critical of police action. Then sit back and watch what happens.

 

[Barb]

Why not use the radio to get the guy, thereby avoiding the dangers inherent in high speed chases?

One of my best friends, in her senior year in high school, died in an accident caused by a high speed chase. The driver was the same age, different school.They were going for pizza after the hour they were supposed to be driving, and ran a radar trap. They left the road and hit a tree, air born. It was a closed casket for both of them. Rotterdam, NY, no longer allowed high speed chases for speeders or other minor traffic infractions. Would have been nice for two beautiful young girls if they had realized the futility of such sooner.