No claims were made about A) the courts punishing B) people who don’t immediately pull over for unmarked cars. My quoted comment was about how officers and/or prosecutors or judges will often A) interpret your story at various phases of the process (which is several steps away from any kind of decision/verdict let alone sentence/punishment) about B) not pulling over before the officer decides you’re evading or not acting reasonable in his/her judgement, usually under circumstances that you can’t actually tell whether the car is marked or not; eg at night.
There are countless cites of varying quality as to how rare it is for the courts to take the word of a defendant over an LEO if they don’t explain their actions well enough. Shrugging and saying “I thought he was a phoney” seldom cuts it.
In jurisdictions that have no pursuit policies or where judges just don’t like unmarked cars or you’re officially advised to drive to a populated area if you’re unsure, the point becomes moot because you (usually) won’t get pulled over or cited for not doing so because the police will already know not to bother. Just understand that there are many places where this is not the case and if you live in one of them you’ll very quickly learn the hard way that it isn’t done that way there.
That explains a lot. I grew up in MD, where every traffic stop I ever encountered was with an unmarked car on a back road. I moved to Ohio about 6 years ago and no one here knew that was a thing.
I did not mean to misinterpret your assertion about how the system treats people who don’t pull over for unmarked cars, I was just trying to abbreviate it. My point is, you’re claiming that people are imperiled in various ways for doing a particular thing, based on a bias or view of the courts and law enforcement that such a thing should not be treated lightly. I’m asking for a cite on your claim.
To say it another way, what is your evidence that “I thought he was a phoney seldom cuts it.” How do you know this? What cites do you have that such arguments are not believed by courts and so on?
Just as an aside to the topic, NYC uses fake cabs as unmarked cop cars. I have personally seen one of the Nissans go from steath mode to lights a-blasting. Quite the surprise.
I would certainly expect this issue/scenario to be changing, due to the aforementioned public advise to drive to a populated, well-lit area. It seems entirely reasonable for a driver to say he (or especially she) didn’t want to pull over in a dark, desolate area without being certain it was a real cop pulling her over. What bugs me about a few stories I have read is that cops actually get upset when someone does this and overreact.
And note I’m not talking about someone speeding up and trying to outrun the cop. I’m talking about when a driver acknowledges to the following cop by waving or tapping the brakes, and slowing down, but continuing to drive to a safer area. They are clearly not trying to evade a stop if they slow down and don’t try to pull away, but it’s not safe for either the driver or cop to pull over just anywhere. As a related aside, I think many cops are entirely too cavalier about where they pull people over, as when they obstruct travel lanes rather than pulling into a parking lot or someplace with some room.
This illustrates a horrible imbalance of power and credibility in the judicial system. One that I certainly acknowledge, but also abhor. In the end, thank goodness for video evidence in many cases.
Technically, it’s not that it’s illegal in Ohio, it’s that the officer can’t testify if he’s in an unmarked or not-clearly-enough-marked police car and the case goes to trial. Here’s another such case (see paragraphs 10-20): https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/ROD/docs/pdf/98/2003/2003-Ohio-7046.pdf
Can you expand on that a bit. I’ve seen plenty of people pulled over in MKE county (don’t know if it was Deputies, MPD or suburban police) by cars that were not just ‘unmarked’ but cars you wouldn’t even guess were police cars. By that I mean, if I see a Crown Vic (or whatever they drive now, Impalas? Cameros?) with no hubcabs and lightbars in the windows, yeah, I know it’s a cop. And back in the day the giveaway was the star on the license plate.
Anyways, I’ve recently seen cars pulled over plain old Town and Country Minivans with no markings that I can see and other totally unmarked cars.
By saying that judges hate that, are you saying something like a speeding ticket would be overturned in a case like that?
No. Read my entire post. I was speaking in the context about people fleeing when pulled over by an unmarked squad. It’s more difficult to get a conviction for the fleeing than it is when marked squads are used. Not impossible, mind you. The ADA just has more work to do.
I didn’t go back and read every word of every post, pkbites, but I don’t believe anyone was talking about fleeing. In fact, the discussion was about the exact opposite - not fleeing, but driving slowly and safely to a populated, well-lit spot. I would think that the common definition of fleeing would be speeding up and using evasive maneuvers.
There are cases of slow-speed chases. 25-35 mph that go for miles. I haven’t heard of any lately so maybe the police put an end to that nonsense quicker than they used to.
Yes they were. There is a line between fleeing and simply not pulling over until one is in a certain location. A line that has to be determined in each case.
Also, I was talking about fleeing when I said judges around here hate unmarked cars and again when I was explaining what I meant by that.
Why on Earth you found it necessary to take me to task on that is beyond me.
I’ve had this happen while I was in a marked squad. Woman wouldn’t pull over for 6 miles. When she got to where she was going I detained her and she insisted she didn’t know it was her I was trying to pull over.
Hers was the only vehicle on a 2 lane rural highway. :rolleyes:
I’m just a lowly non-LEO, so I know my opinion means crap, but the line between fleeing and not pulling over IMMEDIATELY is not all that fine a line. If I acknowledge to the car behind me, which may or may not be a real cop, by waving or tapping my brake, AND I don’t speed up or use evasive maneuvers, AND I pull over when I get to someplace populated and lighted, then that is not fleeing.
Having said that, I believe you when you say that will ultimately be decided in court, if necessary, and judges overwhelmingly believe the cops. If necessary, that’s where a video of the event would be of great use to the driver.
This is false in that it’s a blanket statement. Each case has to be determined on it’s own factors. I’ve had cases charged that matched the example in your post and they’ve stuck.
Yeah, I was presenting my opinion, and should have stated it that way. Having said that, it’s a travesty of justice if someone is charged, let alone convicted, if the circumstances matched my description. Again, IMO. If the driver testifies that he/she never speeded and never tried to elude, and pulled over when a suitably safe spot was found, it’s unfortunate (though not surprising, necessarily) that there would be a conviction.
In the cases you mention, was there video (taken by either the police or driver) presented as evidence that the driver was fleeing or not? Or was it the cop’s word that the individual did not pull over when the siren and lights were activated?
Ravenman the cites of what I’m talking about are literally coming to you without me even doing anything; read post # 32 - 34. Ask pkbites how likely you’d be to talk your way out of one of his tickets in court if you did enough to compel him to pull you over and charge you with something when he’s following the rules & policies of his district.
Let me give some detail of the last one I had that matched your description. It was approximately 4 years ago.
Fully marked squad car, sitting horizontally in a median strip break of I-94. Passenger window of squad was down because I was running laser. About 1700 hours, clear sunny day.
Vehicle came over the crest, did a visual speed estimation and then clocked it doing 82 in a 55, tolerance was 71. Vehicle passed by me, I pulled out behind it and hit the bar. Vehicle had slowed down to about 52MPH. Advised dispatch of the location I was attempting a stop.
Vehicle did not pull over even though there were many areas to do so safely. After a little over 3/4 mile vehicle did not pull over. Did 2 manual braps of the siren. Female driver begins waving. Turned siren on continuous wail. Vehicle continued east bound on I-94 @ about 52mph.
Used the air horn several times in addition to the siren. Driver keeps waving. Advised dispatch that I have a slo-mo rabbit.
Exactly 8.2 miles after I originally tried to pull vehicle over the driver stopped on Lake Drive. Womans excuse was she wanted to be in an area where there was a lot of people because she was afraid of "make believe officers’ (her words) pulling her over.
Did I mention I was in a fully marked squad? And that it was horizontal in the medium strip so she would have been able to see all the markings on the side?
At that time had she sped up I would have been required to call off the pursuit because we had a no pursuit over 20mph the speed limit policy. But she didn’t speed up, she slowed down.
She ended up pleading to obstructing and some weird parking infraction on the speeding charge.
8.2 miles. At what point would you call it fleeing? 10 miles? 20? 100?
8.2 miles from where you were parked? How long after she passed you did you pull out behind her? A few seconds while you put away the lidar and rolled up the window? She could cover a couple tenths of a mile in 12 or so seconds at her pace. Then it takes you a mile or so to catch up. So really, you followed her for seven minutes of entirely safe, but in your view, unjustified pursuit.
Admit it, pkbites, you cited her for evading because you think 8.2 miles is too far for you to go to pull someone over. Maybe in an unfamiliar area, she thinks a good safe place to pull over and be observed is right around the corner but none come up for seven minutes. You may not agree, but many people feel justifiably safer interacting with police in view of others. She did the best she could. You cited her because she inconvenienced you and because you could.
How about a simple rule that says if her only “evasive” action is failing to stop for a single cruiser a charge needs to be coupled with any other action that could be viewed as evasive, such as speeding, turning without signalling, driving the wrong way down a one way street, or attempting to cross a state border? If you asked any non-cop to describe a person evading police arrest in a car, I think they would mention actions like this. This could either be a policy on your force or, preferably, a statutory change.
I cited her for speeding and gave a d.a. referral for not pulling over in a reasonable amount of time. The d.a. cited her for ordinance (non-criminal) obstructing and plead the speeding to a parking infraction (a weird thing Milwaukee county ada’s have been doing).
How far do you think one should be able to not pull over before it’s an offense? 20 miles? 100? 1000? What if I wasn’t trying to pull her over but was on my way to an emergency. A marked squad with lights/sirens behind her and she doesn’t pull over. That you would defend such people is telling.
I thought you said it was an interstate highway. Had it been an emergency, you had ample opportunity to pass, correct?
As far as whether it was safe to pull over sooner, I really can’t say. It sounds like there might have been a difference of opinion. At least she wasn’t charged with a felony.