PDA

View Full Version : Latest Pursuit Case Law Decision



John Hearne
08-15-2014, 12:26 PM
One of the decisions that drives me crazy is the refusal of agencies and departments to actively terminate pursuits by the application of force. We have clear and undeniable permission from the Supreme Court of the United States that this is “OK” but most agencies prefer to cancel pursuits or require extensive supervisory approval before using force. What other level of force requires officers to contact their supervisors before using it?

In an ongoing trend authorizing force against suspects fleeing in vehicles who endanger the public, the Fifth Circuit just found the firing of a rifle into a fleeing vehicle to end a long pursuit to be a reasonable application of force. Article summary: "FIFTH CIRCUIT: FIRING ASSAULT RIFLE DIRECTLY INTO TRUCK DURING DEADLY HIGH SPEED CHASE DID NOT VIOLATE CONSTITUTION AND SHERIFF ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY"

[JLW: I love the fact that THE Sheriff was was the one who fired the rifle. It's a Texas case in case your wondering.]

http://www.fedagent.com/case-law-updates/1296-fifth-circuit-firing-assault-rifle-directly-into-truck-during-deadly-high-speed-chase-did-not-violate-constitution-and-sheriff-entitled-to-qualified-immunity

pablo
08-15-2014, 01:29 PM
I work at one of those agencies. Our policy is limited under the guise of car chases present great risk to the life and safety of the general public, the police and offender (Our deadly force policy says that is when deadly force is justified). If the situation falls within a convoluted chase matrix, officer presence is our only approved force option. It's follow and wait until the suspect gives up, becomes mechanically disabled, abandons the vehicle, or crashes.

Overall the policy has been a failure, because it failed to address why we ended up with a restrictive policy in the first place. There was a major failure of "what I can do vs what I should do" when it came to car chases. We still have the same problem, maybe even worse, since an officer can fail to use that thing between his ears and still be covered in a situation where he should not be chasing.

I'd be happier if the chief would just come out and say, "no chases, we don't want to get sued".

Shellback
08-15-2014, 04:35 PM
Here's the dash cam video of the incident.


http://youtu.be/MmQaIRSqZfs

Chuck Haggard
08-25-2014, 11:58 AM
From what I have seen a high speed pursuit is at least as dangerous as someone doing a drive-by, and most places would allow gunfire as a response to a drive-by shooting.

EM_
08-26-2014, 07:52 PM
John if you want to make your eyes cross with brain-pain, consider this: at my old PD we brought up the 2007 SCOTUS decision. The city attorney told us it didn't apply where we were, because it was a local decision. Again, he claimed the SCOTUS decision was only valid in one area. He was an actual attorney.

We are doomed.

Bigguy
08-27-2014, 09:35 AM
Here's the dash cam video of the incident.


http://youtu.be/MmQaIRSqZfs

Where did the shots come from? Surely not the pursuit vehicle, but I didn't see anybody on the side of the road either.

Shellback
08-27-2014, 09:44 AM
Where did the shots come from? Surely not the pursuit vehicle, but I didn't see anybody on the side of the road either.

According to what I read, the officer was proned out on the side of the road. I don't know exactly where but I would assume he camouflaged himself so he wouldn't be deliberately targeted by the driver.

Ptrlcop
08-27-2014, 09:47 AM
Where did the shots come from? Surely not the pursuit vehicle, but I didn't see anybody on the side of the road either.

From the black helicopter.....

There is a guy on the cross street to the left

Bigguy
08-27-2014, 01:55 PM
From the black helicopter.....
Well duuhh! Shoulda figgured that one out.



There is a guy on the cross street to the left
OK, I see him now. Thanks.

TAZ
08-28-2014, 12:03 PM
In the end no court decision cant FORCE a jurisdiction to DO anything. They can prevent people from doing something and make it somewhat legally safe for them to choose to do something. The choice to use force to end a car chase is a risky proposition. Lots of chases to haywire with perps and officers running intersections getting into accidents, hurting and killing people. Add someone trying to shoot out tires and the risk to bystanders rises exponentially. Heck even just trying to catch up and PIT the guy raises the stakes exponentially some times. Given how risk averse we are as a society I'm not surprised that departments aren't straying from the if the chase goes over x distance or speed stop pursuit and hope an air unit can track to a safer location.