Why do we need a campaign?

Because the innocent have more than their hands tied
when they are killed, paralyzed, and disfigured 
as a result of police chase crashes.

Supreme Court Rulings

"There's something very wrong when the police response to a crime poses a greater threat to public safety than the crime itself." California Senator Sam Aanestad

Our National Campaign

Our federal law should set a standard to keep the public safe from fleeing driver. The following should be upheld in our courts. Fleeing drivers
a. cannot make bail because they are flight risks,
b. cannot plea-bargain for eluding officers,
c. must serve mandatory prison time for the full sentence, and 
d. must pay a mandatory fine—larger than fines for traffic violations, DUI, or driving without a valid license—before being released from jail/prison.

Monies collected will build state-of-the-art pursuit training tracks for officers.

Limiting vehicular police pursuits to violent felony offenders, when the need to immediately apprehend a suspect is so great as to outweigh the inherent dangers of the pursuit to innocent bystanders and there is no other way to apprehend them.

An independent investigative team (comprised of officers from other agencies, victims' advocates and non-law enforcement professionals) will review police vehicular pursuits ending in death or injury.

Officers must follow their pursuit policy. If you live in California, click here.

Republican California State Senator Sam Aanestad, author of Kristie's Law states, "I introduced Kristie's Law for one simple reason: to save lives. An innocent child in my district was killed in a high-speed police pursuit, and the police weren't even after some violent, dangerous criminal. They were chasing a teenage girl for driving her mother's car without permission. There's something very wrong when the police response to a crime poses a greater threat to public safety than the crime itself."

California senators vote down Kristie's Law in 2005. E
veryone laughed at Florence Nightingale, too!

U.S. Supreme Court Building

In Our Courts

The Supreme Court of the United States

The Court's Slip Opinion Scott v. Harris (pdf), April 30, 2007
NY Times:Court Backs Police in Chase That Hurt Driver
LA TIMES: Justices OK Deadly Force in some Police Pursuits
Brief commentary from the justices, officers, and citizens

Tennessee v. Garner, 1985
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of any fleeing suspected felon unless the suspect poses a “significant threat” to the officer or the community and other means have been exhausted. A 1990 report on police pursuits for the NIJ says: “Under Tennessee v. Garner, it is clear that force must be proportionate to the danger the fleeing person represents.”

California Supreme Court

Irma Ramirez v. City of Gardena
, 2018

August 13, 2018, the LA Times: California's top court rules for police. The publics comments at the end of the story, show no consideration for the innocent bystanders who are killed, on average, at least three times every week.

July 17, 2018, the LA Times: California's top court to decide what officers must do to escape liability in pursuit crashes. The article mentions the Prianos' efforts with the state legislature and the crash that killed Kristie. Candy Priano's primary goal is preventing the tragedy of pursuit from happening to others, especially innocent bystanders.

Lewis v. Sacramento, 1998
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court: The issue in this case is whether a police officer violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of substantive due process by causing death through deliberate or reckless indifference to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed at apprehending a suspected offender. We answer no, and hold that in such circumstances only a purpose to cause harm unrelated to the legitimate object of arrest will satisfy the element of arbitrary conduct shocking to the conscience, necessary for a due process violation.

Kishida v. The State of California, 1991
The California Supreme Court had spelled out that government personnel were not required to show compliance with their pursuit policy to benefit from immunity. More links to Kishida v. The State of California.

In The News

Richmond Times-Dispatch: After deaths of Petersburg couple, more loss: loss of trust
"The idea that the people you trusted were involved in the death of your loved one adds another type of loss: the loss of trust in someone you thought would keep you safe," Candy Priano said. 

The Chronicle-Telegram: Police: Chases looked at by case 
"We do believe fleeing drivers should be caught," Priano said. "But we also don't believe innocent lives should be put at risk.

The Berkeley Daily Planet: Priano family continues fight for chase limits
One of the most active campaigns in both California and the nation to put stricter limits on police pursuits is being conducted by the mother of Kristie Priano, the 15-year-old Chico girl who was killed ....

Often-viewed links on the Kristie's Law website:

Innocent Victims of pursuit (worldwide) and their stories.

Top 10: Nine myths and one fact why police pursuit crashes will kill and injure more innocent people.

The police chases that "weren't" are right here!

Catch & Release!Too many are released back into the streets before officers finish their paperwork.

Los Angeles Community Policing: The Real Tragedy of Police Pursuits

"If it's predictable, it's preventable." More than 40 percent of all reported police chases end in a crash. More Quotes