High-Speed Police Chases

Factual Questions
1

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1284/copchase.gif

(For your armchair comfort, the screech, screams, blood and smell of burning rubber have all been sanitized from the above.)

The question of the OP in Cowboy Cops and Their Frequently Completely Innocent Human Roadkill was never answered reasonably. More objective data was requested by responding posters. Right-wing / redneck posters should not be allowed, by the nature of their posts, to force threads into GD. Therefore, I post this, both in GQ, as a new post, and in GD, the latter of which I consider a trash bin for questions. If a new question is required for a new post, let it be the following:

Given the frequency of deaths of innocent bystanders/movers and other parties to high-speed chases (HSC) occurring since about 1995, and considering the extent of evidence that, at least US police, of considerable rank, are not, on a strategic level, of such nature as should set HSC criteria and limitations, and in fact, are increasingly prone to corruption – because politicians and the public make deals to recruit them in quantities far beyond what can be expected to include only persons both capable and honest, in their tricky trade – WHY CAN WE NOT NOW SEVERELY RESTRICT THE PRACTICE OF HSCS? IF WE CANNOT DO SO AT THE PRESENT RATE OF DEATHS AND INJURIES FROM THIS PRACTICE, AT WHAT RATE SHOULD WE RESTRICT IT, AND IN WHAT WAYS TO WHAT EXTENT?

Before I comment further on the reacting posts here / in prior the preceding post on this subject, which continue to show that this issue rests on a very significant rift between ethical outlooks and on what the social function of law and law enforcement should be, rather than a show of fact, citing of law or substitution of technique or technology – I’ll put up here

  1. some NHTSA and other statistics on HSC deaths, and

  2. a few US legal references, mostly decisions or court proceedings in criminal of civil actions, which indicate something on the status of this issue, though this won’t be well organized or really clarificational.

***** HSC STATISTICS

))))) National Highway Traffic Safety Association

Quoted at: http://www.abacon.com/crim/exercise1999a.htm
“. . .more than 250 people are killed each year and another 20,000 are injured as a result of high-speed pursuits by police.”

Stated at NHTSA site: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/search97cgi/s97_cgi.exe

US police HSC fatalities by year:

1993 . . . 307
1994 . . . 347
1995 . . . 386
1996 . . . 390
1997 . . . 306

These are not broken down by role within “accidents”.

Stated in Seattle Times article at: http://seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/altcras_031497.html

State of Washington police HSC fatalities by year: http://seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/altcras_031497.html

1980s (10 yr) . . 46
1990 & 91 (2 yr) . 6

NHTSA is going to fax me the stats for all states by year, I think, for all of the 1990s.

))))) Stats apparently due to Allyn & Bacon’s textbook, “QUICK GUIDE TO THE INTERNET FOR CRIMINOLOGY & CRIMINAL JUSTICE”:
Stated at: http://www.abacon.com/crim/exercise1999a.htm

Dade County, incl. Miami: 488 pursuits 1990-94: Only 35% involved suspected felonies. 45% were initiated for traffic violations. Omaha, same period: 40% involved suspected felonies. Aiken Co., SC: 43% same.

90% of PDs have written pursuit policies. Only one third of PDs regularly collect pursuit statistics. Avg. time of driving training at police academies: <14 hr. In-service training for same: 3 hr. This does not involve decision-making as to when to pursue.

***** INDICATIONS OF STATUS OF LAW AS TO PUBLIC LIABILITY IN HSC, CONSTITUTIONAL AND OTHERWISE

  1. San Diego
    HSC, death, 2/99
    3 SDPD chased, >70 mph, 2 fugitive home robbers (victims bound) in Bronco, leaving scene of crime. W/ lights & siren, 1st ran light & broadsided woman in car. http://www.uniontrib.com/news/utarchives/cgi/idoc.cgi?445165+unix++www.uniontrib.com…80+Union-Tribune+Union-Tribune+Library+Library++%28james
    Trial of fugitives, 11/99
    Both convicted of 1st deg murder, conspiracy to commit crime, felony evasion w/ serious injury or death, 2 counts robbery using gun. One fugitive also convicted of sexual battery. [Obviously wasn’t murder or even manslaughter – the amplified felony evasion covered the flight phase – but SD is an archconservative bastion] Cop who crashed cleared by DA. Then PD Chief said cop should’ve driven more carefully, was primary cause of death. http://www.uniontrib.com/news/utarchives/cgi/idoc.cgi?510344+unix++www.uniontrib.com…80+Union-Tribune+Union-Tribune+Library+Library++%28james
    Suit by husband of deceased expected, per trial article

  2. Sacramento
    HSC, 1 death, 2 injuries, 3/98
    SPD chased 4 teenagers (probably for erratic driving). Fugitives overturned, crashed into duplex. 1 killed, 2 injured. http://www.sacbee.com/search/
    Search for ’ refugio AND sanchez ', set for 1998
    Trial of driver, 12/98
    Convicted of 2nd-deg murder, evading pursuing officer, driving w/ suspended license, 2 counts DUI. Passengers claimed urged driver to stop when police began chase. Def. atty. claimed driver didn’t know police pursuing him. [Not 2nd-deg murder, vehicular manslaughter at most]
    Online SacBee info retrieved by above search
    Wrongful death & civil rights suit against city, 4/99
    Same search but set for 1999

  3. Seattle area
    HSC, 1 death, 1 injury, 8/96
    Sultan PD chased pickup fleeing at >90 mph from expired-tag stop into Snohomish Co. Sheriff’s vehicle, whereafter pickup ricocheted head-on into car driven by deceased w/ passenger
    Civil suit against City of Sultan & Snohomish Co.
    Settled for $600,000
    Fugitive sentenced to 14 yr on pleading of 2nd-deg murder [Maybe OK, but still, reason for death was cops chasing only on basis of expired tags – hell of a weighing of reason to chase vs. risk of killing innocent driver] http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/high_031898.html

  4. Sacramento area
    HSC, 1 death, 5/90
    Sacramento Co. Sheriff, while parked, seeing motorcycle at high speed, flashed lights and yelled to stop – moved car, trying to pen. Then chased, cycle tipped over, cop couldn’t stop, plowed into passenger.
    US Supreme Court, decision 5/98
    County of Sacramento et al. v. Lewis [96-1337]
    Held: A police officer does not violate substantive due process by causing death through deliberate or reckless indifference to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed at apprehending a suspected offender. [Passenger couldn’t control bike. Decision would seem to say Amend. XIV says state exercises due process of law in disregarding any human life whatsoever, as long as engaged in a chase of a law violator, even just a traffic-law violator. So much for the US Constitution in the hands of a right-wing Supreme Court] http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1337.ZS.html

2

The link, in my previous post, to the CA.US Vehicle Code doesn’t seem to work. It should be:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=16001-17000&file=17000-17004.7

Ray

3

I agree with you about Great Debates. It is the toilet for threads that have turned into pissing contests.

“I had a feeling that in Hell there would be mushrooms.” -The Secret of Monkey Island

4

I have the complete, unambiguous, argument-ending answer to your question/rant.

However, I refuse to post it until you get a handle on how to post urls that don’t turn the message board in to an exercise in panning back and forth that makes me feel like I am watching some kind of cyber-tennis match.

I suggest you read How to Use UBB Code

TT

“Believe those who seek the truth.
Doubt those who find it.” --Andre Gide

5

Lighten up, Nano.

Here’s the deal:

  1. Trying to apprehend suspects is dangerous.

  2. Sometimes electing NOT to apprehend suspects is even more dangerous.

  3. Sometimes the police do #1 and innocent persons get hurt (during the chase).

  4. Sometimes the police do #2 and innocent persons get hurt (at the hands of the unapprehended suspect).

  5. Police, lacking the powers of clairvoyance, can’t always know whether innocent people will be injured if they do #1 or #2, but they exercise the their best judgment.

  6. Whether they do #1 or #2, if an innocent person gets hurt, he or she will sue the police, insisting that the only reasonable course for the police to have pursued was whatever it is they did not do.

  7. The propriety of one course or the other in a variety of situations is a matter of continuous study by police departments, which obviously have no interest in or desire to hurt innocent persons.

  8. However, given the virtually unlimited number of relevant factors that can affect what might be deemed the most appropriate police response (time of day, day of week, degree of traffic congestion, frequency of crosswalks, ability of set up perimeter or establish a roadblock, perceived level of desperation of suspect, etc., etc., etc.), it is not possible to develop a protocol applicable to every conceivable circumstance. Some departments will try to develop general guidelines nonetheless; other departments will resist strict protocols in the belief that any “rules” for appropriate response will be fraught with so many exceptions, that the better course is to allow seasoned and experienced officers to respond to each situation in whatever manner appears most prudent under the circumstances. In either event, it is only a matter of time that someone will get hurt anyway, in which case the injured person will sue and find fault with the poice department for either (1) failing to develop a protocol or (2) devloping a flawed and inadequate protocol.

6

Yes, I thoroughly apologize to the Thufferin’
One, and to all others here, for the
forced-extended-line-length thread I created
here. I wasn’t aware there was a UBB method
for hiding an URL under a link. Has that
facility been listed on the UBB page for some
time? I finally asked, and got the word from
tomndeb as to how to do that with UBB. I
didn’t do it with HTML, because that’s so
time consuming.

I’ll start a continuation of this thread
under the same name, but I can’t myself
repost all of this thread without permission
from the SD. If people want to post to that
thread, quoting from this one, maybe they can
just bring this one up in a separate browser
window.

OK, so let’s go here.

Ray