Introduction
An officer began a routine stop for someone exceeding the speed limit but the driver of the sports car they were trying to pull over speed up instead of slowing down. During the course of this chase the speeds of both the police car and the sports car rose to above 100 miles per hour. At the end of the high speed chase the officer lost control of their cruiser and ran up on a sidewalk hitting a pedestrian, ultimately killing the pedestrian. In the same moment hearing the commotion caused by this accident the sports car driver looked back and proceeded to crash the sports car. Following the impact the sports car driver was killed and now people are looking for a place to distribute the blame for these two deaths. It must be decided if the officer is at fault for these deaths and the best way for the police department to act following these deaths. The legal, ethical and moral aspects of each situation must be evaluated. After this evaluation is made decisions must be made that incorporate and satisfy all of these variables in a manner most favorable to the police department.
Death of Sports Car Driver
Summary of Facts
During a high speed pursuit at speeds of over 100 mph involving an officer and the driver of the sports car the officer lost control and hit and killed a pedestrian on the sidewalk. When this occurred the sports cars driver turned to look back, crashed the sports car and was killed.
Issues Presented
Is the police department liable for the death of the sports car driver? Could the officer have prevented the death of the driver? Does the speed of the chase affect either of these variables?
Arguments by Each Side
There are three sides to this argument. The first side that is presented is...
... middle of paper ...
... addition waiting to punish the officer if the police department chose to do so would be the best course of action because if they do it before the cases are dismissed they may give the lawsuits merit to go to court. This would waste a lot of money and the officer and police department would be win but they could avoid wasting time and money by just delaying the decision on the punishment until after the lawsuits has been taken care of. Legally the officer and police station are not liable but ethically and morally they have a duty and responsibility to help both families in anyway they can without incriminating themselves. The final recommendation would be to get the lawsuits and legal liable dismissed with the Statute mentioned previously and then using good morals and ethics help both families and the officer in any way that can after this traumatic incident.
The chase which initially involved a single police officer turned into a twenty plus police vehicle pursuit of Mr.Deady.
On 01-01-17 at 0023 hours I was monitoring the radio and heard that Officer Harrell #3441 and Officer Thebeau #8402 were involved in a vehicle pursuit in the area of Fair Oaks Avenue and Corson Street. I responded to the above location to assist. They advised responding units that the suspect was involved in a traffic collision on the eastbound 210 Freeway Fair Oaks Avenue off-ramp.
Imagine being a police officer doing your daily routine job. You are in a patrol car on the highway, watching the cars and trucks drive by. You are also looking for speeders to warn them to be more careful and maybe you’ll ticket them. It has been a very boring day for you, since you have only been called on your radio once, and it was for an accident (fender bender). Almost at the end of your shift, a blue car drives by going ninety miles an hour, but you know the speed limit is only fifty-five miles an hour. You pull the patrol car out of the gravel area that you had been sitting in and you start to follow the car. You put your lights on and catch up to them. After a few minutes you pull the person over. You get out of the car and start walking over towards the blue car. You are right about to talk to the driver and he drives off, leaving nothing but dust in your face. Now, the adrenaline is pumping in your body, but what should you do? You could call for backup or follow the blue car. Anything could happen. How far should you actually go? This is the question that will be answered in this paper. I will explain what police pursuit is and some different things officers do during a pursuit. I will also give some statistics about the fatalities that have happened in a police pursuit. I will also illustrate my opinion about how far police pursuits should go.
Over the years, our nation has witnessed countless cases of police brutality. It has developed into a controversial topic between communities. For instance, deindustrialization is the removal or reduction of manufacturing capability or activity can lead to more crimes when people are laid off. Police officers are faced with many threatening situations day-to-day gripping them to make split second decisions; either to expect the worst or hope for the best. The police are given the authority to take any citizen away for their action that can ruin their lives. With that kind of power comes great responsibility, which is one main concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force might or
Police brutality is becoming more and more apparent in the news today because it seems to be occurring more than before. In 2012, the NYPD killed 21 people that year which was an increase by 7 from the previous year (W.A.T.E.R, 1). The numbers are rising in the big cities where more crimes are likely to happen. Toronto isn’t as big as New York City, but it comes to show that police officers are killing more individuals each year. In 2009, in the little city of Cabbagetown near Toronto, two Toronto officers severely beat a man who was allegedly drunk in public. The two police officers were later found guilty of assault causing bodily harm, which shocked much of the public because rarely do police officers get charged after incidents like this. This case ended up bringing up the ethical issue of whether police officers use excessive force on people because they are law enforcements. Police officers seem to usually get away with the actions they do, which sometimes result in death, because they are law enforcements and they’re just looking out for their own safety and of others. I believe that police officers do sometimes use excessive force on people and that they get away with the consequences because they have a free pass because of their job title. To defend this judgment, the arguments that I will use are the statements of both police officers, the test results that proved that the police officers attacked a man who didn’t deserve it, and the decision of the SIU.
As police officers own right to carry out an investigation on the suspect, public arise concerning on negligent investigation. In the Hill v. Hamiton-Wentworth case, Mr. Hill was accused robbery and then was proved innocent. Mr. Hill filled a lawsuit against police officers on the tort of negligent investigation, and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Hill’s appeal. Moreover, a majority of the court recognizes there is a tort of negligent investigation in Canada, but Mr. Hill was investigated under code of care and no tort of negligent investigation during his investigation. While the argument of minority believes the tort of negligent investigation should be recognized in Canada, and the police had been negligent, the argument of minority is more compelling than majority.
Lewis and Graves v. Thomas are two court rulings related to police pursuits. In both cases, the court ruled that a police officer in pursuit of a fleeing motorist does not intentionally choose to cause harm to a suspect, and resulting injury or death of the suspect is not due to the negligence of the officer and the officer and agency is therefore not liable (Farber, 2007). However, through the multitude of incidents involving police officers in traffic accidents, there is no case law placing liability on a police officer or agency, unless the officer was in violation of departmental policy or grossly negligent, as shown in Haynes v. Hamilton County (Justia.com, 2017). In this case, a sheriff’s deputy pursued a vehicle reaching speeds exceeding 100 miles per hour in dense traffic. The pursuit ended when the suspect vehicle collided with a civilian vehicle, killing three teenagers. The court ruled the failure of the officer to terminate for safety reasons was thereby
24). The action against Garmback for negligence also states that Officer Garmback owed a duty to act in a reasonable manner with regard to Rice’s health and safety and that “failing to properly apprise himself of the scene and scenario upon arriving to the incident, driving directly to the area in which Tamir Rice was seated without positioning the vehicle and officers in an area which provided cover to properly assess and handle the situation; failing to use appropriate levels of force; failure to properly assess levels of threat; failure to properly issue verbal commands; failure to properly identify oneself as an officer; failure to properly supervise Defendant Timothy Loehmann including failure to intervene; B) failing to summons immediate emergency medical care for Plaintiff Tamir Rice as he lay bleeding to death in the snow, and failure to respond to emergency medical needs of Tamir Rice and/or administer resuscitative measures and/or administer first aide;” (Rice Estate
Waterman v. Batton, 393 F 3.d 471, 478. (4th Cir. 2005). One of the defendant officers observed the plaintiff traveling 51 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone and immediately initiated pursuit. The officer in pursuit radioed his fellow officers at a toll plaza ahead of the suspect car, and the officers at the toll plaza prepared “stop sticks” at the tollbooth. Following the communication between the officers, the pursuing car radioed that the plaintiff “tried to run [him] off the road,” and moments later the pursuing car and plaintiff reached the toll area. When the plaintiff approached the officers stationed at the toll plaza, he slowed down and then “lurched” forward. Although none of the officers at the toll area were in the direct way of the plaintiff’s car, the officers perceived the “lurching” as an attempt to injure them and the officers fired into the car as a result of the perceived threat, and continued to do so as the car passed through the toll plaza. The court held that the shots fired as the car approached the toll booth did not constitute excessive violence because the plaintiff did not stop despite the warnings of officers with their guns drawn, and because the an objectively reasonable officer in
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
... is still in the area. The officer should give help to the victim, making sure if only wounded and ambulance is on its way. Investigators must right everything down they can about the scene. After everything has been documented, and the scene is safe, everyone attended to the focus is now on the homicide investigation. The investigators will determine who the victim is; provide the time the death occurred, determine what caused the death and what method was used to get to eradication, and then they will get information that leads them to a suspect (Orthman, Hess, 2013).
This is because violence between police officers and their wives or spouses never really came to mind when I thought of domestic violence until now. It brings to light a new perspective on how difficult it can be for someone who is suffering from domestic violence to find a way out especially when their husbands are the police. The best idea to help prevent this from happening again that comes to mind is to make it mandatory for outside agencies to conduct investigations that directly involve police officers or members of another agency. There is good chance that if the FDLA had taken over the investigation from the beginning Jeremy would have been charged and possibly convicted of murder because this agency would not have been able to look over disturbing evidence just because he is their friend or fellow employee. I also feel that because the initial investigation was so sloppy and mishandled the sheriff or sheriff's department should be held accountable in some way that reflects the severity of their mistakes so they will think twice about being sloppy next
(Pollock, J. 2014. P.33). Reviewing this case using the Deontological system can help to examine the duty of the officer. The driver’s duty is to be aware and alert at all times on the road, but if they are not fulfilling those duties than they are not following this ethical system. Also, the officer’s duty is to protect and serve, which is a specific duty assigned when they pledged an oath. Pledging this oath to protect and serve is a moral duty, because it is a moral obligation to uphold this oath that they pledged. Duties of position are obligations one has to a certain job or career, but moral duties are obligations that relate to right or wrong not legally bound. In this situation, the officer is experiencing both duties of position and moral duties. If we completely forget that the driver is someone of importance, than the officer would have no problem ticketing the irresponsible party. A way to assess actions in Deontology is the categorical imperative. The categorical imperative in Deontology is a way to evaluate moral actions and then formulate moral judgments. So with a clear impartial mind-set, the Deontological system supports the punishment of ticketing the guilty party. The last ethical system that can be used to inspect the case is Utilitarianism
Officers face the risk of injury partially because of the people within the communities in which they serve. I refer not to the accidental injury caused by a clumsy moment, but instead by the actions required of an officer attempting to enforce the law. Foot pursuits are accompanied by high risk because of associated accidental and intentional injuries. Kaminski, DiGiovanni, and Downs (2004) reported that the prevalence of injury during arrest incident to a foot pursuit were higher than a typical arrest. Kaminski (2007) found that most injuries sustained during a foot pursuit were accidental and very few were received from the suspect they were chasing.
Police decisions can affect life, liberty, and property, and as guardians of the interests of the public, police must maintain high standards of integrity. Police discretion concerning how to act in a given situation can often lead to ethical misconduct (Banks 29).