Police Pursuit Policies Gather Dust


California's Fourth Appellate Court ruling, click here.

 

"The law in its current state simply grants a 'get out of liability free card' to public entities [law enforcement agencies, cities and towns] that go through the formality of adopting a policy. The adoption of a policy, which may never be implemented, is cold comfort to innocent victims. We do not know if the policy was followed in this instance, and that is precisely the point: We will never know because defendant [police] did not have to prove [that they] followed the policy. [...] We urge the Legislature to revisit this statute and seriously reconsider the balance between public entity immunity and public safety. The balance appears to have shifted too far toward immunity and left public safety twisting in the wind."
—An Excerpt from a ruling by California's Fourth Appellate Court on a case where a pedestrian was killed during a pursuit in a California high school parking lot, November 2002

Public awareness and pressure paved the way for safer weapon and firearm policies; so eventually, the way officers conduct police vehicular pursuits will change.  If law enforcement does not make the change on its own, the public must turn to its legislators because too many people are being killed, maimed and injured.  And too many of these people are the innocent.

Since the State of California provided complete immunity to police agencies that adopt a four criteria pursuit policy, without requiring that the policy be followed, California has the dubious distinction of leading the nation in police pursuit deaths and the toll promises to continue ever higher until there is statutory intervention, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Association's fatality reports on pursuits.

Unfortunately, the California Highway Patrol has been the greatest advocate of not restricting police pursuits and, not surprisingly, the other California law enforcement agencies have followed that lead to lobby against any legislation that would curtail their "right" to pursue at any price.

However, in recent years some California law enforcement agencies have restrictive policies for high-speed police driving and chases. But that's not good enough.  Policies are useless if they aren't followed.

Kristie's Law is about improving safety, not only for the public's protection but for the officers' as well.  California needs this law to prevent such tragedies from happening again and again.  Let's not wait for another tragic crash to happen before passing a law to prevent it.

Training our officers is also critical.  Good officers evaluate a situation before they even "light up" a vehicle.  In many cases, there is no need for the Split-Second myth.  Officers can get the tags and call them in first before attempting to pull over a person.  This simple procedure gives officers an idea of whom they are dealing with and a heads up as to whether the driver might flee.

In his book "Police Pursuits: What We Know," Dr. Geoffrey Alpert, who conducted the Department of Justice study and chairs the department of criminology and criminal justice at the University of South Carolina, states, "Officers must continually question whether the seriousness of the crime justifies continuing the pursuit.  The immediate apprehension of the violator is never more important than the safety of innocent persons or the officers themselves."

In his book "Police Pursuits: What We Know," Dr. Geoffrey Alpert, who conducted the Department of Justice study and chairs the department of criminology and criminal justice at the University of South Carolina, states, "Officers must continually question whether the seriousness of the crime justifies continuing the pursuit.  The immediate apprehension of the violator is never more important than the safety of innocent persons or the officers themselves."

Many law enforcement officials argue that chasing the bad guys keeps the public safe, but according to Alpert, only 10 percent of all pursuits involve violent felons who put the public in imminent danger, leaving 90 percent for traffic offenses and nonviolent crimes that pose little or no threat to the public unless pursued.  In addition, these suspects are often back on the streets within hours or days.

"Every law enforcement CEO should put public safety above the need to lock up someone," says Chief Steven H. Jones, Orange County Florida Sheriff's Department.  "If their jurisdiction is like Florida, the arrested offender will probably be home before the officer completes his paperwork.  Our local critics said if we quit chasing stolen cars that our numbers would skyrocket.  Guess what?  When we quit chasing stolen vehicles, our arrest and recovery rate went way up because we thought 'out of the box.'  No more chases, no more damaged cars, no more injuries, and no deaths!"

Alpert agrees with Jones and adds, "Research debunks these two popular myths:  There is a dead body in every trunk and restricting pursuits will cause more people to flee."

With a growing number of officers pushing for restrictive pursuit policies, the day will come when law enforcement officials no longer repeat this mantra:  "If we had not chased, the suspect MIGHT have gone on to kill or injure someone else."

Innocent victims of pursuits are the "someone else" the police need to protect and serve.  Retired Washington State Police Chief Donald Van Blaricom puts it in perspective when he says: "There is no reason to believe a greater loss would occur from taking less risk.  These citizens do not volunteer to be rolling roadblocks for police."

Blaricom and other pursuit experts believe a California law giving absolute immunity to police agencies that adopt a four criteria pursuit policy, without requiring that the policy be followed, is why California leads the nation in pursuit-related deaths. NHTSA reports that 52 people were killed in California pursuits in 2001; 24 of these people were not even in a car being pursued, and some — especially the children — in the fleeing cars were just as innocent.

 

?>