Ok, thanks for the clarification. But as to the possible charges, I don’t understand what you mean by “state obstructing” and “ordinance obstructing”. Am I right in thinking that an actual “fleeing” or “evading” offense is far worse than a “failure to pull over in a reasonable time” offense? If so, was this woman ever in danger of being convicted of fleeing or evading?
I don’t dismiss the possibility out of hand, because prosecutors love to charge people with too many, and too serious, charges, just to pressure them into pleading down.
Resisting or obstructing officer is an actual crime (Class A Misdemeanor) punishable by 9 months imprisonment, up to a 10K fine, or both.
Ordinance obstructing is a local or county ordinance that has been adopted from state law. It is not a crime (neither felony nor misdemeanor) and unless one refused to pay the fine if convicted you cannot be sentence to jail for it.
Around here a lot of people plea bargain crimes like this down to ordinance violations to avoid jail and larger fines. Like I mentioned, that woman had changed her story to the DA, basically saying she had heard others tell her if you don’t pull over the police will give up. At the time that was true in high speed cases. So by her own admission she was trying to evade even if at a slow pace.
All of this is information available on the web. I am not an attorney, this is not legal advice.
To the OP, as touched on I believe, officers are usually required to have a name plate, or a number on their badge, or both. And, even uniformed patrolmen are to have an ID card to present. All of these things can be forged, but a lot of impersonators miss these little details. Something to keep in mind if someone in an unmarked car tries to pull you over.
Oh, wow, pkbites! This changes a lot for me. I remember you mentioning that she changed her story in some way, but I didn’t remember her admitting that she was hoping you would just give up.
I don’t mean to speak for Orwell, but I believe he and I were trying to get you to tell us why you were so certain she was evading. I thought you never really answered the question, so I concluded that you just decided she was evading because you were annoyed. If her admission to hoping you’d go away was posted upthread, I just missed it.
That changes a lot for me, and I get why the ADA would pursue evasion charges. Thanks for explaining.
Also remember I’m going off of memory of a case that is a couple years old that I never got called for. It never went to a trial. (Even ordinance violations can go to trial if the defendant so chooses).
Slo-mo’s happen but what usually happens in a pursuit is you attempt to pull over a car (in my first career I was on the road for 18 of my 25 years) and they go blasting down the highway as fast as they can. That agency had a pursuit policy and if we felt secure to do so we’d pursue. A lot of cars (I started my career there in '82 so image the type of vehicles we’d deal with) topped out at 105 due to gas saving 4 bangers. Not that hard to keep up with them. Might have a hold over with a V-8 in it.
After I retired I started a 2nd career with another agency. First we had a full pursuit policy, then we had a policy of no going 20 over the speed limit. A lot of agencies around here have gone to either one of those and the instances of people taking off has skyrocketed.
I can see that it’s frustrating when someone takes off and you can’t pursue. But the important thing regarding public safety is whether or not, and for how long, they drive at extremely high speeds. I would hazard a guess that with no cops in pursuit, the scofflaws don’t drive as far at high speeds, wreck less often, and put fewer people at risk (both cops and bystanders). As I wrote previously, I would think that a good description, plate number and radio might do wonders.
I also had either missed where you said the 8-mile woman had admitted to the DA that she thought you would give up. That’s really a different scenario than drivers looking for a safe place to pull over, but thanks for clarifying.