"Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:49:56 -0400, "dwight" >
> wrote:
>
>>Let's see if I have this right...
>>
>>Police take off after a black Caddy doing 73mph in a 55mph zone, which
>>leads
>>to a high speed pursuit in the black Georgia night. The 19 year old yahoo
>>behind the wheel of the Caddy is obviously of no mind to pull over. After
>>almost 8 minutes of the chase through light traffic, one police cruiser
>>bumps the Caddy from behind, at which point yahoo loses control of the car
>>and careens off the road into (what appears to be) a telephone pole.
>>
>>Bottom line, the yahoo (who, originally, was guilty of driving at 18mph
>>over
>>the posted speed limit) is now a quadraplegic.
>>
>>Yahoo sues the police officer who "caused the crash" under the terms of
>>the
>>4th Amendment (some weird logic about unlawful seizure?).
>>
>>"In this case, both a lower court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
>>11th
>>Circuit ruled in favor of [the yahoo]. The 11th Circuit said that [the
>>officer's] actions constituted deadly force and that it was unreasonable
>>because the officer had no reason to think [yahoo] had done anything more
>>than violate traffic laws. The police gave chase because they clocked him
>>going 73 mph in a 55-mph zone.
>>
>>'Far from being the cautious and controlled driver the lower court
>>depicts,
>>what we see on the video more closely resembles a Hollywood-style car
>>chase
>>of the most frightening sort, placing police officers and innocent
>>bystanders alike at great risk of serious injury,' wrote Justice Antonin
>>Scalia.
>>Scalia was incredulous that the lower courts had said Harris's case
>>against
>>Scott could proceed."
>>
>>(source: http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/1241449/, among others)
>>
>>Now, I've viewed the video posted on the Supreme Court's website, and I
>>have
>>to say, "What the $*^&$# was that yahoo thinking?!?" The video is about
>>92MB
>>and runs some 15+ minutes, showing what the onboard cameras of the police
>>cruisers saw that night. First, you see the Caddy from the lead pursuit
>>cruiser, then you get the same chase as seen from a second cruiser, the
>>one
>>which ultimately knocks the Caddy into the woods.
>>
>>(video at:
>>http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio..._v_harris.rmvb)
>>
>>Watching the California Patrol in hot pursuit after a white Bronco doing
>>20mph for hours on end is one thing, but the chase in this video is
>>typical
>>of the ones being debated over recent years. At what point do the police
>>engage in pursuit, and when do they just let the evil-doer go, hoping to
>>pick him up later.
>>
>
> From watching this video they clearly should have called off this
> chase long before it ended. The cops were making a bad situation
> worse to catch someone who was barely speeding in the first place.
>
>
>>The original crime here was not armed robbery or carjacking or leaving the
>>scene of an accident, it was doing 73mph in a 55 zone. (Remember: I've
>>said
>>before that 72 is the magic number.) I have no idea why yahoo decided to
>>try
>>to escape, rather than simply pull over and accept the damn ticket.
>>
>>When the police officer is chasing down a speeder with siren and lights
>>on,
>>and the speeder just keeps on going, putting any number of other motorists
>>in danger, the police officer can now use deadly force (i.e.: his front
>>bumper) with a little more authority, thanks to today's Supreme Court
>>ruling.
>>
>
> Which makes us all LESS safe then we were before with no meaningful
> improvement in crime reduction.
>
>
>>I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that yahoo compounded his possible
>>speeding ticket with resisting arrest (always a good generic criminal
>>activity, when everything else fails). But then leading the police on an
>>8-minute chase around any number of other motorists (most of whom had the
>>good sense to pull over to the side of the road) has to be a serious
>>crime.
>>The potential for disaster is all over that video.
>>
>>I would have dismissed this case from the start.
>>
>
> I would have ruled in favor of the yahoo to some extent. This chase
> should have ended after the first minute when they got close enough to
> get the plate.

....then just pull over and wave bye bye? What?!?

No, don't think so. At the very least, the police have to follow this nut to
be on the scene when he slams into something other than a tree.

When someone fails to surrender, you think they should just be let go?

dwight