| Author |
Message |
    
Bomber
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 12:56 pm: | 
|
Dyna . .. . NOW you tell me!
wehave come to expect so much from our Law Enforcement Officers, I am not certain that any force int eh country is capable of living up to all the expectations we have for them (this, from a guy that was in Chicago in '68! yikes, how things change) . . . .
I think the best we can hope for is a standard policy that applies to 80% of the cases an officer might see (80/20 rule is very handy), and good training to back up the policy . .. . . |
Doughnut
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 01:06 pm: |
|
}that police department can be held liable
That is just about everywhere, The police CAN be found liable, it does not mean that they will be found such.} |
Dullorb
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 02:17 pm: |
|
Shit I got a lot of ground to cover... ah hell with it I'll just hit the interesting points...
we found Saddam hiding in a hole in Iraq I am sure that if we committed as little as $3,000,000,000 and 1,000,000 man hours per child
molestor we could find them all with no loss of life, much less than we spent going after Saddam.
As far as police pursuit goes. Has anyone here stopped to think how criminals feel? It's very stressful knowing you are a social pariah and that at any moment your freedom could be forfiet. We need to let them know there is a 'safe zone', a place where they can relax and let there worries melt away. And that place should be behind the wheel of a car.
This system can be put into place with a few minor changes and in the long run will save everyone money. For starters, police departments won't need cars anymore. Hell, we know cops only have the cars to chase people with cars, (just call your local PD and see if they get there before you could walk to them yourself) so right there we can lower taxes so the right wing is happy, and on the other hand by not pursuing people suspected of crime we eliminate the posibility of an innocent person going to prison, there's the left for you! It's bi-partisan!!!
Remember every second a criminal spends driving is one less second they are molesting your children.
There is no way to be sure you'll ever catch anyone but if you refuse to try you can guarantee you never will.
GUILTY! The innocent do not flee.
Couldn't agree more, there is no reason for an innocent person to flee. In fact in the history of justice there has only ever once been a case in which an innocent person was arraigned on charges and that individual was acquitted in trial. If someone were innocent and fled it is only proof that they are mentally deficient and ought to be locked away for their own protection.
I do think that someone who is injured by a high speed chase should be compensated though. I don't see it a punishment for the police that chased him, rather, I see it as the community helping repair the damage that was caused by the criminal who fled, if the cop gets inured or killed or if his vehicle is damaged the community helps him and he volunteered for the job, why wouldn't they do the same for an innocent victim.
PS-Dyna, the last time a cop shot an unarmed motorist in WI he was editacquittededit of murder. It happened right off my college campus by a campus cop.
Sorry, my error, it was a UW cop.
edited by dullorb on March 23, 2004 |
Dullorb
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 02:27 pm: |
|
Re: Black boxes and self-incrimination, just because you own something doesn't mean that it can't be used against you in a court of law. There may be privacy issues raised but there isn't any more an issue about self incrimination than those morons who tape themselves commiting crimes. |
Mikej
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 02:28 pm: |
|
I thought that was a Shorewood officer and he was acquited of any wrong doing.
|
Charlieboy6649
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 02:48 pm: |
|
I've read every what if scenario this post has mustered. And I know this will offend some, remember, this is my opinion and my view: If you run from the police, in a car, on foot, or other means, I believe they should be authorized to SHOOT YOU! PERIOD! By running, you have already elevated the situation into a deadly one and it only makes sense to stop the pursuit by any means, before tragedy strikes.
"but I have a medical emergency" BULLSHIT- call an ambulance. They're trained to manage the situation en-route, and their drivers are EVOC trained. Emergency Vehicle Operators Course. What if you killed someone hurrying to the hospital???
What if the driver his having a seizure or heart attack? Well if officers are close enough to shoot safely as they are trained, they will recognize these situations and not fire. Don't you think???
Imagine the impact it would have had if the highly publicized OJ chase had ended with a cop car pulling alongside and blowing brain matter out the passenger window. I think fewer people would run...
Or how about this, who would run, after a helicopter had entered the chase, if previously on live television that helicopter had fired a missile at a reckless vehicle fleeing the police, blowing them to bits? I know I wouldn't run! That's for sure! |
Mikej
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:01 pm: |
|
The problem with "absolutes" is that there is never one "always right" response due to an almost infinite number of possible scenarios. Riots, running from an attacker the police officers just arriving on the scene have not seen chasing you yet, corrupt officers or officials no matter how remote of a possibility that may seem, all sorts of issues.
The bottom line is that there is no easy answer. If you do not allow the police to give pursuit over relatively minor offences then that may lead to anarchy. If you allow the police to shoot at anyone fleeing from a minor traffic offence that that too may lead to another form of anarchy.
Aprise the situation at hand, and let prudence be your guide.
I think I'll classify this thread similar to the war thread and now will bow out of it. |
Davefl
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:15 pm: |
|
we found Saddam hiding in a hole in Iraq I am sure that if we committed as little as $3,000,000,000 and 1,000,000 man hours per child
molestor we could find them all with no loss of life, much less than we spent going after Saddam.
The police never said he was a child molester. Every thing I have read on this says point to this kids uncle being the "suspected" child molester. When he ran the police did not know who he was or that he was wanted for not showing up for his sentencing for a unnamed drug charge, they did not know that the truck was stolen while he was being chase, all of that info came out after the fact to make this chase look justified. As far as money being spent, how much is your life worth to you? It is worth a lot to me and I don't want to lose it in some mindless chase.
|
Dullorb
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:25 pm: |
|
How would running on foot be deadly?
I can hear the voice of Bob Uecker,"What's this, well there's a streaker on the field and, yup, there they are going after him... gee this guy is quick he shoulda been a sausage, it looks like he's pulling away... That's OK folk they got 'im. That's one more deadly incident waiting to happen, prevented by your friendly local sheriff"
While you may think it's OK to spend the 7 seconds waiting for the ambulance to use the magical teleporter so it will materialize next to you, others may not remember that because they are panicing due to the fact they are having a massive coranary and think it better to shave those precious seconds off in the trip to the emergency room.But I suppose we will weed them from the gene pool by killing them and with any luck the children they have riding in the back seat when the car goes careening out of control... oh wait the driver is dead there's no way anyone else can get hurt now.
Though you are right, cops have been trained to recognize all rapid motions as the actions of a person undergoing a seizure and will automatically not shoot.
Think of the impact it would have had if they had rammed him off the road violated him anally with their batons and doused him in gasoline before setting him on fire. I think that would have dissuaded people even more.
If they manage to get a hostage, well the stupid hostage shouldn't have let himself get captured anyway.
This isn't saying that I would object to cops ever shooting at a fleeing motorist, in fact I think it would be warranted in many situations, but this absolute shoot when they run is ludicrous. |
Dullorb
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:29 pm: |
|
As far as money being spent, how much is your life worth to you? It is worth a lot to me and I don't want to lose it in some mindless chase.
And I don't want to lose mine to someone the cops decided not to chase. But if I had a choice I would rather I die in an accident that allows the cops to get the criminal off the street than getting killed and have the cops watch my killer run away. |
Johncr250
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:40 pm: |
|
How would running on foot be deadly?
Off the top of my head, can think of 5 cops that have been killed in foot pursuits within the last 5 years in NY alone. The last one in Feb of 2004.
You`d be surprised what can happen chasing people, even on foot. |
Doughnut
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:41 pm: |
|
So the police did not know that the truck was stolen, just goes to show that they guy was a bigger criminal then just "petty" drug charges.
Why would someone run from the police. Because they did something wrong. If they did something wrong, the police should take them in, which will require the police to chase them.
|
Davefl
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:20 pm: |
|
Lets say that the chase was called off after the police saw that he could not be brought in safely (I would say that after two roadblocks would be a good place to look for other means). What are the chances that he would have continued at a high rate of speed and killed three people? Is it possible, Yes but not likely? Saying you chased someone for stuff you did not know he did until after you chased him is not an excuse for chasing someone.
The question is not “Do you chase someone?” but “When do you stop chasing someone?”
Do I believe this guy should be charged with a crime? Yes. I am not saying this kid wasn't wrong to run, but it takes two to make it a chase.
I’m done. If new info comes out I will take a look at it and decide,but for now my mind is made up. Both parties are at fault, maybe not to the same extent,but at fault.
|
Coppertop
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:49 pm: |
|
I usually find myself happily lurking around this forum, however I feel obligated to chime in on the subject. Obligated not because I want to change your mind, but to clear up some facts and some misconceptions. I am a former member of the Omaha Police Department.
1. The Omaha Police Department was NOT involved in this pursuit. This chase was initiated by the Carter Lake, IA PD.
This matters because each dept has a different outlook and policy on pursuits.
As mentioned in an above post, police in Nebraska are held liable for any injuries/damages that stem from high speed pursuits.
This is a third party liability law where the government agency involved is financially liable regardless of whether it was a "good" chase or not. Even the criminal running can sue for the injuries they sustain, or better yet the family of the dead criminal can sue the agency. From what I understand this is the only state to have such an extreme stance.
Sen. Ernie Chambers helped enact this law in our unicameral because he felt Omaha police were unfairly pursuing in his legislative district.(Same one where this crash occurred)
The initial result of this law passing was a no pursuit policy in Omaha. This did not last for long because criminals picked up on it a decided to run for everything. Full cars of teenagers taunted cops knowing full well they would not be pursued.
This brought about the current policy in Omaha whereby a pursuit matrix is used to determine if a chase should continue. Officers balance factors such as severity of the crime, time of day, geographical area, speeds traveled, erratic behavior of the suspect, etc.
If the risk is too high the officer bows out or is ordered out by their supervisors. (Before I hear someone say, "But an excited cop would never bow out" let me just say that I have heard many cancel their pursuit. More often than not though the Sergeant will cancel the pursuit before it really gets started.
The Omaha PD has a helicopter that helps a bunch with these dipsticks who run because the officers can back way off and let the idiot slow down thinking they got away.
Helicopter was not involved in this incident because Carter Lake PD had'nt had time to request it yet.
Way more stuff on this point but I need to move on.
2. This kid who ran is a bad apple. He had a felony warrant for not showing up for sentencing on a conviction. A drug conviction for 1.3 grams of meth . How did he get pinched with those drugs?? He ran from the Omaha PD in August in a stolen truck. The officers backed off, found the abandoned truck running, and dipstick hiding nearby. This accomplished with the assistance of the helicopter.
During the pursuit on Sat. morning he was barreling towards a more populated part of town at speeds aroung 80 and turned his lights off to evade the pursuing officers.
So, he is a felon who steals vehicles, runs from cops, has history of drug use, and cares nothing for safety of others.
3. The Carter Lake PD were staking out a home to arrest the kids uncle who is suspected of felony sex assault of a child. Felony!
During the whole incident, the po po thought they were pursuing the uncle (suspected felon) not the kid who only has a couple of warrants.
Only after the crash did they realize who they were chasing.
4. No shots were fired at this dipstick while he was running from them. That information was an attempt by the criminals family to maybe justify why their son ran and killed three people. No shots were fired.
So do the loved ones of the three who were murdered deserve such loss and pain? I think not.
Do the officers involved deserve punishment for their actions? I think not.
Do I think those officers would have pursued knowing that dipstick was running and not felon suspect uncle? I think not.
Do I think dipstick should spend the rest of his life in prison? Most certainly.} |
Doughnut
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 05:15 pm: |
|
Wonderfully put Coppertop. |
Johncr250
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 05:57 pm: |
|
Well said! |
Dyna
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 08:07 pm: |
|
S320002 you sir are way off base. I have never said the cops should never pursue, but rather as Davefl has pointed out they should pick & chose their battles more carefully.
Dont want to believe the bike & the squad story? Dont, I really dont care. Its true & not 1 part was made up. The bicyclist took off & the squad hauled ass after him. Hmm trying to aprehend a big bad bicyclist & maybe get a $25 ticket off of him, this cop wrecks a $25K cruiser instead. |
Dyna
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 08:27 pm: |
|
And quantifing the chase by comparing it to the man hours & costs associated with staking this guy out & possibly taking just a bit longer to aprehend him is ludicrous.
Is any cost that the dept may have had to pay out worth the 3 lives that were lost? Is the cost of a stakeout & being a little more diligent going to be more expensive than a massive lawsuit filed by the 3 dead peoples families?
And then it turns out that the cops werent even pursuing the guy they were after. I wonder if the suspected child molestor was ever picked up?
And shooting at people who are running away? Are you frickin serious? This isnt the old west & we have no need to be shooting unarmed citizens. |
Gonen60
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 09:06 pm: |
|
Dyna, I'll say this, your always good for a laugh... |
Seanp
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 10:48 pm: |
|
Thanks, Coppertop, for a definitive, inside look at the circumstances surrounding this incident.
Yes, the helicopter is a good tool, and definitely helps minimize the number of high-speed chases that need to happen. So, all these people that get pissed off about high-speed chases need to hold a bake sale, and gather the funds necessary to buy, maintain, and fuel at least one helicopter per county, as well as having a pilot at a 5 minute recall 24 hours a day, and have at least four pilots so that they can work 8 hour shifts and still get a little time off and get their crew rest. They should be able to raise that money pretty easily. It's only a few million dollars a month...
The only point with which I disagree is that you think the guy should spend life in prison. I don't think the Nebraska taxpayers should pay for this guy's room and board for the rest of his life. I bet the families of the dead motorcyclists would be willing to pull the plug on his life support... |
Charlieboy6649
| | Posted on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:52 am: |
|
Well-put copper!
For those of you who took me seriously, I was being facetious about the brain matter and the rockets (Before I get flamed!).
I do however believe that a cop, acting on sound judgment, with all facts considered, should be able to fire on a vehicle to stop a potentially deadly pursuit without fear of reprise, retribution, or suit brought from the family, the state, or whoever. Good cops need our support! |
Dullorb
| | Posted on Friday, March 26, 2004 - 01:18 pm: |
|
How would running on foot be deadly?
Off the top of my head, can think of 5 cops that have been killed in foot pursuits within the last 5 years in NY alone. The last one in Feb of 2004.
So what created the danger, the flight or the pursuit?
Dyna, it only takes a fraction of a second for some dumbass to take a poor action and kill someone while being pursued. Even lighting up the rollers could fatally distract someone. So the question is should cops ever be allowed to pursue someone? I feel safer because they are allowed to. The fact that traffic laws can be enforced gives me a much greater sense of security than the tiny possibility that I will be killed by a fleeing driver causes me fear. |
|
